Players' potential in scout reports

I'm a little confused about how to judge a scout's comment on a player's potential after getting a scout report on him. What I want to know is which comments are better than others, e.g. 'isn't far from having the required potential to be better than xxxx' OR 'has the potential to play at a similar level to xxxx'.

The reason for this is I would have presumed that 'isn't far from having the required potential to be better than xxxx' would mean he has more potential than 'to play at a similar level'..... however the second comment about being a 'leading player' in the division as opposed to a 'decent player', contradicts this.

So if someone could explain to me which of these comments is better, or rank the scout's potential comments in some way, it would be very much appreciated.

Cheers

in my opinion, has the potential to play at a similar level is lesser than isnt far from having, because the second one will put him closer to the players ability whereas the first simply says hell be good in the division.

that's what I would have as well. Only the isn't far from having..... comment always comes with the decent league player, whereas similar level comment says he will be a leading league player. This is why i'm unsure about it.

Are your scouted players being compared to the same player?

Scout reports have always seemed a bit of a dice roll to me. I've had ones with 20 JPP that say players will turn out to be decent, but have something like 196 PA, and end up world class. Then ones they say will be quality will only end up as a decent substitute. I pretty much go with my gut.

While we are at this, could somebody help me with this.

Which statement is the best?

This player is a definite buy, this player is a fantastic buy, and this player is an excellent buy. I'm talking about the comments the assman gives when we offer a contract to a new player. I think excellent ranks the lowest but am not sure about definite and fantastic.

Definite would surely be the highest.

Scout reports have always seemed a bit of a dice roll to me. I've had ones with 20 JPP that say players will turn out to be decent, but have something like 196 PA, and end up world class. Then ones they say will be quality will only end up as a decent substitute. I pretty much go with my gut.

Why scout players if you know their PA anyway?

Are your scouted players being compared to the same player?

yeh they are the same player..

yeh they are the same player..

And for the same position as well? By the same scout?

And for the same position as well? By the same scout?

yeh, making it even more confusing

yeh, making it even more confusing

That is confusing. Could you post some screenshots?

Here you go!

Paiva isn't far from... and would only be a 'good' serie A player.

Muniain has potential to play similar level... and would be a 'leading' serie A player.

Both from same scout and both compared to Quagliarella!

I'd say the scout has managed a more accurate report on the second viewing. He has uncovered some extra information about Strengths/Weakness as well. At least I've always assumed that the more times the scout watches a player the more accurate the reports become.

I pay most attention to the decent/good/leading line of the scout report rather than the comparison to a player or the stars.

Also various factors affect the scout report - a scout never see's a players true CA/PA, they see what they think a players CA/PA is with their judging attributes affecting how accurate they are.

The potential a scout reports back also seems to be more based on what he reckons the player will reach rather than the max he can reach (so a player may have PA190 but he may think he'll only ever reach 130 so doesn't claim he has the potential to be a leading player) - your facilities, players age and CA all seem to affect this.

From the screenshots it looks like your Scout is saying Muniain has the potential to be as good as your current striker, but whilst Paiva may have the Potential to be better than your current Striker he doesn't think he'll get to it. I'm not sure what the ages of the two players are but Muniain looks like he has a higher CA than Paiva so if you rescout them in a years time your scout may change his opinion if Paiva develops at a better rate than Muniain

I'm going to say this is a section that could use a look for FM11. Tweak it, make it a little more intuitive. Just small changes might freshen it up and make it easier to use.

"'Isn't far from having the required potential to be better than xxxx" is such a weird way to say it.