Bugged Regen or Superstar?

Well is this a bugged regen or a superstar?

My scout that was scouting that area thinks he's 2.5* CA 3* PA now sending out my 20/20 scout.

I need a left winger this might be him

Scout report from Hans Gillhaus (13/17)

Scout report from Bryan Robson (20/20)

Surely they must be idiots

Definitely won't be cheap!

Long Throws are a bit too low for my liking.

Shame he isn't faster

3 stars means average for your team, so assuming your team is full of superstars, then he will be just fine, considering he has the potential to be a leading left winger. Its annoying and SI needs to fix the scouting system.

Shame he isn't faster

DOn't think he needs to be if he plays right behind the striker(s).

Might sign him and see how he goes

He's only 19. His pace and acceleration will increase. Resolute, relishes big matches, and has high determination. Can't find any weakness. He can play as a winger, behind the striker, or as an inside forward. I would sign him.

Well is this a bugged regen or a superstar?

My scout that was scouting that area thinks he's 2.5* CA 3* PA now sending out my 20/20 scout.

I need a left winger this might be him

Looks a fair decent player.

Think he's a bit weak on the physical side though. One footed too...

But that's surely made up for with his mental and technical side.

Sign him up!

Appealing the Work Permit decision

Got him! For 15million pounds. About to play my first match

Got him! For 15million pounds. About to play my first match

15?

Not bad I was expecting double that.

Have you ever been able to make a regen that good at 19?

got a 7.5 in the first match against Hull.

Nah bardock. I haven't got 1 through my academy yet that's as good as him

Heres my awesome regen I got. Also only had 1 good regen from my academy in about 8 years.

Don't see where the bug is (if any) :confused:

I would worry about the star ratings, if you currently have a world class player in his position then 3 stars means he could be just as good as him. I haven't seen a rating above 3 stars for a youngster in my game for some years, in fact there are very few with 3.

Despite his average physical attributes, he looks like a great signing. The second scout report looks spot on, and suggests that he has room for improvement, which is scary.

Don't see where the bug is (if any) :confused:

I'm guessing that he didn't understand the socuting star system, perhaps thinking that 3 stars meant he would be an average player.

Hes absolutely quality mate. Only thing which could be considered important is that hes lacking is strength and jumping however he beats Messi in them departments in the game(mine anyways)

Check his contract, might have decent release clause.

And top find

Playing well in Left wing as of end of September so all is well

Playing well in Left wing as of end of September so all is well

Have you tried him in the AMC position?

To me, it looks like that is is best position. Less running, which is handy since he isn't the fastest.

Well, "X has the potential to play at a similar level of Gourcuff" isn't exactly a bad scout report...

Still, I think the Star Rating is a tad too confusing.

2.5* means more or less "he's ok for first-team rotation", but the "pentagon" and the attributes (sans the slightly weak physical side) hint of a totally different story.

An AM with such high technical skills can't possibly be "just another player", unless he has weak hidden attributes [something the scouts didn't notice].

So, despite how talented the rest of the OP might be, a 2.5* rating for such a player sounds a bit weird. Not a bug, but still unconvincing

Well, "X has the potential to play at a similar level of Gourcuff" isn't exactly a bad scout report...

Still, I think the Star Rating is a tad too confusing.

2.5* means more or less "he's ok for first-team rotation", but the "pentagon" and the attributes (sans the slightly weak physical side) hint of a totally different story.

An AM with such high technical skills can't possibly be "just another player", unless he has weak hidden attributes [something the scouts didn't notice].

So, despite how talented the rest of the OP might be, a 2.5* rating for such a player sounds a bit weird. Not a bug, but still unconvincing

If his squad is anything like mine, 2.5 stars for a player usually means wonderkid status. The fact that his potential is higher (3) means he is likely to improve, so to me that scout reports tells me he is a class act.

I bet that by the time he reaches 22, the coaches will rave about him and rate him as 3.5 or 4 stars.

But...

your squad is 2.5* compared to WHAT??

The way I understand it, the Rating System is worked out on a Quality-for-Expectation.

So if your minimum goal is to win the league, a 3* player is "good enough" to achieve that goal, a 4* will be a leading star, and a 5* a guy who'll do the job almost by himself.

However, that works well at a lower level, where there actually are 4/5* players [eg Rooney or Messi at a mid-table club]

But when you're Chelsea or ManU and the squad is literally filled with talent, why is everyone suddenly "demoted" to a "just average" level?

On the other hand, I remember a save I had a with a LL club I created from scratch, and every single player I signed from Free Transfer [really awful guys, where the Star Player had maybe one or two double-digits attributes] was rated 4/5*

I mean: relative rating is a great idea, but I feel it has become TOO relative now, and if we don't have a univocal term of comparison, it all becomes relative and almost meaningless.

For the average user I can see why this is confusing and agree with RBKalle

Also if you are sending out a scout looking for youth players a 3 star review isnt going to send you out shockwaves to go and check is profile.

I mean: relative rating is a great idea, but I feel it has become TOO relative now, and if we don't have a univocal term of comparison, it all becomes relative and almost meaningless.

Precisely. Another problem with such system is that it makes it extremely difficult to pick out potential superstars from scout reports without having to manually go through each and every one of them.

The system should not judge players on the relative strength of your squad, instead it should be based on the league your team is playing in. Ideally it would then make use of the whole scale as well.

I think the stars seem to be on the low side for younger players, as the opinions from the scouts seem to rise as the players get older and better. This seems fine to me as potential judgement should not be something that should be perfectly accurate from a young age. Some of the youngsters I've signed at a young age have been 3 stars, but have risen to 3.5 or 4 with age.

My Squad

This team is currently dominating most competitions, so it is a great squad. Based on my stars, 2.5 = squad player, 3 = meets the general standard of the team, 3.5 = superstar, 4 = world class.

My Scout Reports for thousands of youngsters, sorted by PA

You can see here, that for me, a 3 star player at a young age is a rarity and should be made a priority target.

You cant blindly trust your assistent/scouts ... what I always look at is:

- Example: A youngster got 1 star CA and 3 stars PA. After a while his stats go through the roof, but still PA 3 and CA still 1 ... that means, there's still a lot of potential, keep him and try to reach the 3 stars, which basicly he'll hit around 24-26 of age...

So, dont follow your staff blindly, you're the manager, make decissions yourself...

Sell him to me please!!

You cant blindly trust your assistent/scouts ... what I always look at is:

- Example: A youngster got 1 star CA and 3 stars PA. After a while his stats go through the roof, but still PA 3 and CA still 1 ... that means, there's still a lot of potential, keep him and try to reach the 3 stars, which basicly he'll hit around 24-26 of age...

So, dont follow your staff blindly, you're the manager, make decissions yourself...

That's what I do.

A young player with great attributes and a difference between his CA and PA stars (like in the OP) is basically the jackpot.

That's what I do.

A young player with great attributes and a difference between his CA and PA stars (like in the OP) is basically the jackpot.

Exactly. Even though sometimes my assistent says: "He's cr*p"... i keep him and guide him with an older player. Give him a few matches in the first team.... vlabam! Great talent. I've noticed they've increased the speed of gaining points compared to FM09, great! Finally youngsters increase 3-4 points a skill/per season...

That regen looks very weak physically, so I'd use him in a role where he won't be too stretched. Trequartista?

TBH, I'd get much more excited if I saw a regen with high physical attributes, as technical and mental attributes are a lot easier to improve.

On the subject of physically weak players:

I took a gamble on this lad: Javier

In his prime at my club: Javier

This is how it turned out: Javier (£40m of that was based on goals scored)

Don't dismiss the weaklings

Neither of those players, Mathebula or Javier, are that weak physically. Sure they don't have lightning pace, but the game isn't completely about fast strikers. If all of those physical stats were under 10 I'd be worried, but they have good enough stats for certain roles, Mathebula AMC in the hole, Javier is good target man.

My biggest concern is nearly always stamina when I'm looking at regens with lower physical stats. If they can't run for 90 minutes I'm not that interested no matter how fast they are.

3 stars means average for your team, so assuming your team is full of superstars, then he will be just fine, considering he has the potential to be a leading left winger. Its annoying and SI needs to fix the scouting system.

agree with this. it never makes much sense in my head to base him on what you already have. perhaps change it from division to division, but i want to know how a player compares to other in that position not other in my team.