Stars in Scout/Coach Reports

What would be a good amount of stars for a player in the coach/scout report? And how much would you trust them, if the person rating them was over 15 for both Judging Player Ability and Judging Player Potential?

I use my scout reports a lot. I think the stars are in relation to your leageu target, so personally I try and get 3.5 star or higher. I will occasionally go for below 3 stars, if it's a short-term deal.

Keep in mind it's all relative to:

1) the players already at your club

2) the reputation/goal/standard of your team and league

Also, for some odd reason, 3.5/4* reports seem to be very few and far between, with most of the players being given a rather "plain" 3*.

But considering you'll probably have a 4.5* player in your squad, a 3* player is probably good enough for being a first team regular.

From my experience I'd use this guidelines (assuming you have an ok squad already... otherwise any shmuck will get 4 stars or more...)

<1* = not good enough for First Team

1.5*= fringe player, keep around for injury crisis only

2* = decent backup for First Team [go for utility players, cheap deals or players with ok key attributes]

2.5*= ok rotation player

3* = your average-to-good Starting XI player

3.5*= good Starting XI, the one you want to spare before important matches

>4* = Key Player

So in the end, anyone above 2* can be good enough to play, also depending on the role and attributes.

I try not to sign below 3*; I also make sure that I've gotten a player scouted by a 20/20 scout, though, or there's too much discrepancy between the player's actual rating and the rating the scout was able to give. Same thing goes for self scouting; make sure there's a coach (for me, it's always my assman) with 20/20 (or as close as possible) scouting if you want to really rely on using the star systems.

I tend to think of it like this: a 3* guy is probably better overall than a 2* guy, but the 2* guy can still fill a role on the team. For example, I have an aging DL who's only rated at 2* who's keeping a 3* guy out of my side by consistently turning in 7.3-7.4 performances; he was the fan's player of the year last year, and I didn't even notice he was rated low until I checked the reports. It mostly has to do with how I use him; he's good at getting forward, passing, and crossing, and I ask him to do a lot of that.

Admittedly, I normally wouldn't even have given him the time of day on a scout report...but he's not showing any signs of letting up, so I'm continuing to use him as a key player. Don't let the stars rule everything.

think of it this way: they call decent players the ones with 2 stars. which is like borderline. 2.5 is the minimum u should accept, 3 is good so sign them if affordable, 3.5 is a starting eleven player, 4 is a must, 4.5 spend all your money, 5 stars he will never come anyway!

for me, 2.5 & 3 & 3.5 star guys fill the bulk of the team. a few 4 star guys as my studs, a few 2 star guys that may not shine but they dont play all that bad either, and I keep a couple 1 star guys that have potential for getting up to 3 or so

the 2 star and 1 star players can fill a role, if they are low wages and have at least some decent statistics in areas they can be useful for

i prefer having an overachieving team under wage budget rather than a bunch of overpaid underachievers

I've found scouts to be quite unreliable if their 'judging player potential' rating is any bit less than 19. I've received quite a few negative, at most two star reports concerning youngsters of whom I knéw they had a PA of -8 or >140. They still come in handy for revealing hidden attributes, though:).

the truth is that theit scouting must not work properly. i conducted a test and a player that was getting 3 stars from a scout with 20 in scouting potential AND current ability, got 2.5 from a scout with 8 in both attributes!