Scout Reports - how reliable ?

Spotted a 17 yr old Spanish kid with pretty good stats for his age (playing Solihull Moors and just got to the Championship so it's all relative...). Thing was both my 20/20 JPA/JPP scouts gave him a 3 star current and 3.5 star potential rating, saying he may play at the same lvl as some guy I already have someday.

It seemed a bit off, so I made an exception and fired up FMRTE to take a look at his actual CA/PA and found 103/138 vs 110/114 of the guy they were talking about.

So, my question is : would you consider the scouts to be right in their assessment ? And, if not, was the poor assessment of his potential because they know my training facilities suck ? Or because they haven't seen him play ? Or because they're just both wrong ?

I rely on my 20/20 scouts quite heavily for their opinion so an understanding of what's going on here will help me a lot

i do rely on my scouts reports big time,but sometimes if i spot someone who could do a job for my team and the scout says he's not as good as my star striker etc.. i would still take a gamble and it does pay of most of the time

Yeah Ok cool, as I understand it CA doesn't specifically relate to attribute distribution, which is more important in terms of performance, but in this case the kid was loaded with stats all over the place

It's good for highlighting things like injury proneness or mental weakness (i.e. unambitious) and a guide price and whether he's even interested in joining you. Or scouting regions/competitions where they might bring...say...1 in 10 worth looking at further that you'd never normally find.

Other than that; I have learned to know what I want, not that I get it right every time at all, but after all....I'm the manager!!

So to me; useful, but not the be all and end all of finding a little gem.

Spotted a 17 yr old Spanish kid with pretty good stats for his age (playing Solihull Moors and just got to the Championship so it's all relative...). Thing was both my 20/20 JPA/JPP scouts gave him a 3 star current and 3.5 star potential rating, saying he may play at the same lvl as some guy I already have someday.

It seemed a bit off, so I made an exception and fired up FMRTE to take a look at his actual CA/PA and found 103/138 vs 110/114 of the guy they were talking about.

So, my question is : would you consider the scouts to be right in their assessment ? And, if not, was the poor assessment of his potential because they know my training facilities suck ? Or because they haven't seen him play ? Or because they're just both wrong ?

I rely on my 20/20 scouts quite heavily for their opinion so an understanding of what's going on here will help me a lot

this is exactly why I use FMRTE. Scouts are useless and so is my own judgement. As you say, you see a player loaded with attributes and it turns out he's crap anyway. Also ive just made a thread about whether or not CA/PA is important compared to Actual Position Rating and Potential Rating.

If you have any knowledge on it i'd like to hear your thoughts

1) judging player ability and potential are NOT the only attributes you should look in a scout

2) you won't see more than half a star difference in scouting between ANY two scouts

I've always relied on scout reports and I've make some awesome squads. The only thing you can complain about is that scouts are maybe a bit too precise.

i can't say that fm10 scouts are very good

there is always some degree of randomness - which makes the game exciting. I believe even 20/20 scouts can see wrongly (as in reality).

For me, esp for regens, I rely on scouts esp if they recommend that they will be a leading star...i will do all to snap them up. I rather not find out via the editor. its meant to be a simulation - hence it shld be as close to reality.

Even Ferguson has signed some crap players.

I find they're generally useful for revealing the full attributes of the player, and any potential dealbreakers (bad personality, crappy important matches/consistency stats).

Other than that, if they're young and have good attributes for their age, I'll snap them up even if my scout gives a one and a half star rating.

Once or twice a year, I'll fire up a search and filter for players under 17 and look for any attacking players with a technique of higher than 12, and defenders with an anticipation and/or marking higher than 12. I've built up a pretty decent scouting network so that method usually nets me 3 to 4 good players that are still relatively cheap to buy.

Well I bought him anyway. No doubt he'll enjoy the benefits of my Basic training facilities and turn into the next Fabregas. Or maybe not. But at least it'll give me an indication for the future on me thinking a player looks good vs the scouts.

To be fair, I think my position is a slightly tricky one for the scouts to handle in that I can't afford any of the players my scouts are really recommending because I'm way out of my league in terms of my team rep/finances. Now that we have a brand new 13,000 seater stadium (which I'm proud of even if it isn't the San Siro) I'm hoping the finances will at least start to catch up with the league position. Maybe then I can think about affording the 5k per week wages for that amazing Inter reserve team player...

I dont trust my scout reports at all...A striker with PA of 160 in my game is stated as "can play at a similar level to Wayne Rooney"...Oh really......

I dont trust my scout reports at all...A striker with PA of 160 in my game is stated as "can play at a similar level to Wayne Rooney"...Oh really......

But as I understand it that's kind of true.

If he's fairly young and his CA is still fairly low, isn't the idea that through training you can help the skill point distribution into the key attributes so that those core striking attributes could be on a comparable level to Rooney, even if his overall attributes are not? Sure, probably lower, but close enough for that comparison.

Or am I completely misunderstanding this ?

I really look into scout reports. If i find a player with 3 or more stars and no major weakness, i snap them up.

I tend to use my best scout to check players I'm seriously trying to buy and I pretty much always trust them.

But as I understand it that's kind of true.

If he's fairly young and his CA is still fairly low, isn't the idea that through training you can help the skill point distribution into the key attributes so that those core striking attributes could be on a comparable level to Rooney, even if his overall attributes are not? Sure, probably lower, but close enough for that comparison.

Or am I completely misunderstanding this ?

If the report states that he is "some way off Rooney's ability" then I'll gladly accept it, but "similar level to Rooney" just doesnt cut it for me..And it's coming from a scout with both 19 for judging player ability and potential..

Ok, well I'm 2 seasons on so I thought I'd report back on this kid's progress.

I got promoted to the Prem after 2 years in the Championship, so he's 19 now and in the Spain U21 squad. He was a key reason for promotion in the first place and his av rating in the Prem has been 7.45 with 20 Apps, 2 Goals, 12 Assists. In short, he was a phenomenal buy.

According to FMRTE he's now 125/138 CA/PA and my assistant is still rating him as 3 star current, 3.5 star potential.

The frustrating thing is that I'm not entirely sure whether the scouts were 'wrong'. The star system only allows for 10 potential rankings so even if they give you 100% spot-on information, it's only going to be fairly broad in terms of how accurate it can be. Personally, I think they were totally wrong and give them an 'in your face' gesture each time he lays on another match winning goal, but that's another matter...

So my philosphy is now as follows : If a player looks good to me, and a scout says that he has the potential to be better, especially if he has a track record of performance stats already, then I'll consider the buy. I do trust their ability to determine if the player still has the potential to grow (not the same thing as just identifying a difference between CA and PA, I'm referring to whether they actually CAN get better) and the ability to settle, injury proneness, big match etc they uncover are pretty critical.

I've bought players the scouts rated and I didn't and they ended up being awful. Which is how it should be really.

I will say though that whilst it seems the game allows a 20/20 scout to be 'wrong' about a player, which is cool, it shouldn't make ALL the scouts wrong. Which is kind of what happens at the moment. There should be a value in a second opinion, and scout reports should conflict with eachother in those cases.

I rely on my scouts when looking at youngsters. I play as liverpool but really concentrate on youth. I buy in a lot of youth players on the recommendation of my scouts and I have some really great players and a lot of dross as well - you win some you loss some.

When buying any player it is a hugh gamble. Liverpool have had plenty of them I can tell you.

I look at things like xxxx can play at a similar level as xxx or is not far of from playing at a similar level as xxxxx. I will then try and buy them. when my scout tells me he is no where near as good as xxxx, then I do not bother.

End of the day, scouts have been programmed to have flaws

After-all, in the real world, even the best scouts still get it wrong

Scouts are there to advise you and bring your attention to players you might not know have potential, as well as "unlocking" further information about the player

If you have a scout that quite often gives good advise, stick too it. But accept that, sometimes, it won't be 100% (Which to me is a good thing)

Scouts are good only for checking work permit chances, despiting they have 20 and 20 on judging and they are continental ones.

I generally only use my scouts as a guideline. Who i sign is ultimately my own decision.

scout reports are nothing more than a rough guide, scoted marco verratti first season, and he was potentially a 2 star. then in the third season i sign him for madrid and he is a 3 and a half and i know that he will rise to a four star. and his stats speak for themselves. so scout reports in general shouldnt be heavily relied on

I generally only use my scouts as a guideline. Who i sign is ultimately my own decision.

And that's exactly the point of scouts.

I have 13 scouts scouting the under 19's in various counties, such as the USA, Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Spain, Italy, Germany, England, France, Carribean, old soviet bloc, Asia, and the last one I have trotting the globe for gems. My other 9 scouts do my opposition, my feeder clubs, my league, and the competitions.

1) judging player ability and potential are NOT the only attributes you should look in a scout

2) you won't see more than half a star difference in scouting between ANY two scouts

1) How do you know those two things?

2) What other attributes are there to look for in a scout?