Players with crap stats that play well.

Players with crap stats that play well.

anyone have any I seem to have this lot,

This also comes to my next point, is that in real life is that there is a believed skill of player and actual skill of player,

In lower leagues there may players who have the skill of premiership player but as the players has never showed this or in team which he is in does not give the chance to show this no one knows his actual skill thus goes unnoticed. this also to lesser extent works the other way around.

my idea is to have believed skills of the player and have actual skills hidden. sometimes the coaches may believe a players finishing has got better when in fact its has got worse.

It kind of happens like that already. Along with the visible 'believed' attributes, there are the hidden 'personality' attributes that affect a player's performance a lot. His visible atts might look great but with a low 'consistency' hidden attribute he will rarely play well.

I think that it also comes back to tactics and motivation.

There are managers that are infamous to create their tactics around the players they have in the squad in the way that they will get maximum result out of every single player, giving them roles and positions in the team where the players are most useful.

Also there are managers that can take somehow mediocre player with 1 or 2 good skills, who is not so wanted by other managers, to make him a dangerous weapon in his unique gameplan.

We've seen it a lot in IRL. Also in very high level. After Euro 2004 a lot of Greek players were wanted by big clubs although they were strong as a team, not so much as individuals.

This is about tactics. About motivation - I'm sure you agree that player with mediocre skills can become a match-winner, if he's very determined and motivated and will give his 100% (or 110%) whereas others on the pitch will put just 80-90% effort. But let's imagine that there is a manager (you, in FM) who is so good at motivating and man-management, that he's able to push this player to the maximum limit almost in every game (or at least 2/3 of the games).

By the way, I've noted in FM, that it's often enough to have just couple of players who are fired up in the team, so that even when 9-10 players will give their regular for the team, then 2 highly motivated players will be enough to win. And those 2 doesn't have to be the same every game.

I think that it also comes back to tactics and motivation.

There are managers that are infamous to create their tactics around the players they have in the squad in the way that they will get maximum result out of every single player, giving them roles and positions in the team where the players are most useful.

Also there are managers that can take somehow mediocre player with 1 or 2 good skills, who is not so wanted by other managers, to make him a dangerous weapon in his unique gameplan.

That is why Martin O'Neill is an awesome manager.

Its the sort of thing I try to achieve in FM. I often find myself not buying 'star' players (either RL stars, or FM stars) and instead try to do well with lesser known players.

That is why Martin O'Neill is an awesome manager.

Its the sort of thing I try to achieve in FM. I often find myself not buying 'star' players (either RL stars, or FM stars) and instead try to do well with lesser known players.

Same.

I also tend to favour players with lower technical ability IF they work much harder than a more technically gifted player.

A perfect example of this is Lee Cattermole.

I am Sunderland in the 1st season and have both Lorik Cana and Fernando Gago who can play in his position and are better than him in theory, BUT because he never stops working I tend to play Cattermole as my DM and he outperforms both Cana and Gago easily.

So far this season he has averaged something like 10 miles per match compared to 8 for the other two.

For me it's hard to prefer mental stats to technical ones. Of course, when buying a player I always look his determination, teamwork and workrate as 3 most important mental attributes, but very often it's excellent long shot or free kick that gives the edge in the game and helps to score winning goal.

But physical stats without technical/mental skills are pretty useless. There's no point to have good pace if you can't dribble while running. Acceleration is useless when your off the ball rating is poor and you constantly fail to break offside trap etc. etc.

Jonas at newcastle

Same.

I also tend to favour players with lower technical ability IF they work much harder than a more technically gifted player.

A perfect example of this is Lee Cattermole.

I am Sunderland in the 1st season and have both Lorik Cana and Fernando Gago who can play in his position and are better than him in theory, BUT because he never stops working I tend to play Cattermole as my DM and he outperforms both Cana and Gago easily.

So far this season he has averaged something like 10 miles per match compared to 8 for the other two.

Cattermole is awesome. Was an integral part of my England team in the World Cup, as Hargreaves was injured(now there's a shock), Carrick was pants, and Barry was pushed up the pitch a little. He did a great job, and I blame the conceding of the match winning goal on the fact that Cattermole got injured 2 minutes before it.

For me it's hard to prefer mental stats to technical ones. Of course, when buying a player I always look his determination, teamwork and workrate as 3 most important mental attributes, but very often it's excellent long shot or free kick that gives the edge in the game and helps to score winning goal.

You could argue that at the top level, technical quality makes the difference. However, at lower levels where technical ability is modest, I'd say mental attributes are more important. Of the three categories, they are my priority for the kind of team I like to put together.

But physical stats without technical/mental skills are pretty useless. There's no point to have good pace if you can't dribble while running. Acceleration is useless when your off the ball rating is poor and you constantly fail to break offside trap etc. etc.

In a word, 'Walcott'. It used to be the case in earlier FMs that speed and physical atts generally were over-rated. But they've been tweaked and are well-balanced now. In the lower leagues I've got a good stable of old warhorses who are slow on their feet but quick in their mind. They're doing a sterling job for me.