Can scouts be dreadfully wrong?

I picked up Guilherme Lyra from free transfers from Palmeiras. I am Roma. He has been mediocre at best on the reserves and his scouting report says he is not good enough to be on Roma's team. With nothing to play for in my final two games, I put him in the starting 11 vs Parma. He scored a goal had 2 assists, 8.8 rating and bossed the midfield in a 3-0 win. He is only 17. Is it possible that a scout could be wrong and that I have a real gem on my team, or was this a once in a lifetime match.

Could be both of those outcomes... perhaps he was just in the right place at the right time? Or perhaps he is actually a star.

The same thing happens to me except it's when I move up divisions, I have a class player who can't fit into the team because he isn't good enough for the division, but he'll play a couple of games and perform marvellously. If I was to play him week in, week out though, he would be ordinary. I think that your scout is right to an extent, but I say keep him and see if he develops.

The scout rates players based on their CA and PA. Your player may have low CA overall but high at the most important attributes for his role. And then, of course, everyone has his up and down days.

Oh god yes scouts can be wrong. The situation that really highlighted this for me was a few FMs ago when one said a youth player had the potential to be "a lot better" than Lionel Messi. All my other scouts said he could be a decent premier league player, but that guy kept on saying he was going to make Messi look like a chump. I let him go at the end of his contract.

Can scouts be dreadfully wrong?

Oh, my, yes.

On the other hand, I've seen plenty of examples of the "wonder debut" effect, especially with strikers.

I would say that scouts are quite accurate at telling CA/PA. But they can't predict how a player will perform. This is partly down to hidden attributes. I have some players with 1 1/2 stars that are first teamers and have an avg rating of 7.30, whereas some players with a 3 star-rating only have an avg rating of 6.80. Then again, how close is avg rating to the way you rate your players performances...

happens all the time, especially if ur in top clubs e.g. madrid. every player is like below 3 stars

I've had it happen a few times. I've signed plenty of players who are described as "good" but then end up being "leading" later on - even if I get promoted. I find the best thing to do is to make sure you have at least one scout with very high scouting stats (so 16 or above) and the rest have them at least be above 10 (obviously better is better). If one of the other scouts find an awesome player make sure you have you're good scout also scout them to ensure it's not a bad report.

Of course, that can also not work so it's a good idea to have a look at the stats yourself as well. I find that even though a player doesn't have a good team rating and the scouts say he isn't that good he is able to perform well in the positions I play them in.

Best thing iv found to do is go to the tactics screen click on the player and check the role they are playing. Then add all of the key attributes that have been highlighted, then u will find out how good he is at the moment.

I would add a spreadsheet with some of the player position attributes with formula for adding them but i don't know how to add files to the attachments.

i have had bad scout reports at both ends of the spectrum. signed a left back rated at 4 stars for the future. now hes a 1 star player and not worth keeping. dont think hes ever had a man of the match award. but i also had a right winger rated at 2 stars, only signed him cus he was on a free and hes rated at 3 1/2 stars and plays well more often than not.

perhaps it is best to judge for yourself

Scouts GENERALLY are terrible at deciding players, hot prospects vs.

I only pay them to contribute into world knowledge of the club and determine the price tag of the player I'm interested in. Other than scout advices = trash.

I use the scouts primarily to reveal hidden stats. According to the scouts (all 10/10 and better on ability and potential), every central defender I look at is as thick as two short planks. When I have a look at the mental attributes of the players, though, I've found things like Decisions, Concentration and Anticipation are all quite high (I won't accept anyone below 10s in my own list of key stats) and they've generally turned out OK.

Initially on FM2010, I followed the scouts' advice more rigidly...and ended up with some right dross in the team despite them coming highly recommended.

At the end of the day, you're the boss. Get the info, make your own decision when buying. It's even easier when they're actually your own player - give them a few games and have a look. Anyone can play well once - after all, Andy Saville scored twice on his Walsall debut and looked like a star, yet he turned out to be a less-than-stellar signing in the end.

Yes, they can be wrong and this why I don't go with their advice straight off the bat. I usually get two or three scouts to scout the same player so I have three seperate opinions of the player rather than just the one. All my scouts have a CA rating & PA rating of over 16, so they do know what they are talking about BUT in the end it is up to you as manager. Any player the scout advises you on, look at him closely, look at his personality, how he will fit into your team, if he's injury prone etc. If you're not sure about him stick him on your shortlist and if the team he is playing for has began their season, set a scout to watch him over a series of matches. This way the scout you assign will be able to watch his performances and will make a more accurate report on the player.

I bought a striker, based mainly on my own final decision of course but with help of scouts saying he was good but he has turned out to be guff for my team. He was missing chances in the reserves team and I gave him at least a season in the reserves and the first team, but he couldn't settle and to me he was just no good and now I'm trying to get rid of him.

In real life, scouting takes place over a certain amount of time with scouts watching the players and with managers also looking constantly at the players so it's not really wise to take on the player at first glance.

Scouts can be really wrong yeh BUT the ultimate decision in wether we pick the player is down to us as managers and remember - scouts do only ADVISE us on potential signings. It's not a guaranteed cert that the player(s) they advise us on will be any good for our team.

However, scouts determination of the CA/PA is pretty accurate. I usually only buy players my 20/20 scouts say will be a 'leading' player at his position. Then I will try my best to develop him. I have undercovered 4 wonderkids in like 4 seasons or so. One of my defensive midfielder is so-so, my ST plays pretty decently, averaging 20 league goals a season, left back is pretty class and my playmaker turns out to be world player of the year.

Probably because of the way I play, my centre backs always have crap stats and ratings. I had this newgen CB who was supposed to be leading. But he ended up performing so badly for me I couldn't stand it and had to sell him. Most of my CB turn out to be bad purchases I think.

But then again, after they develop and they don't work out, you can pretty much offload them at the price you paid or for a higher price. The computer AI will pay lots for them if their CA/PA is good.

in this version of fm

the answer is yes and most of the time it seems for me!

Yes Scouts (and Coaches/AssMan) can get it wrong.

Scouting a player several times reduces the overall trend on incorrect reports.

Watching him 5 times with 5 different scouts can still leave you with bad advice

Watching him 5 times with 1 scout generally means a much more accurate report

I don't really understand scouts a lot.

"Pat Rice is of the belief Cairney has the potential to play at a similar level to Andrey Arshavin.

Pat thinks that Cairney's potential could lead him to becoming a leading Coca-cola championship left midfielder in the future"

Pat Rice has 16 JPP, even I could work out that Arshavin is no where near Championship standard

And I have had many scouts with 20 JPP, JPA be wrong about a youngster and end up having me waste a good sum of money for some player who turns into a decent league 1 player at full potential

I don't really understand scouts a lot.

"Pat Rice is of the belief Cairney has the potential to play at a similar level to Andrey Arshavin.

Pat thinks that Cairney's potential could lead him to becoming a leading Coca-cola championship left midfielder in the future"

Pat Rice has 16 JPP, even I could work out that Arshavin is no where near Championship standard

And I have had many scouts with 20 JPP, JPA be wrong about a youngster and end up having me waste a good sum of money for some player who turns into a decent league 1 player at full potential

I think I've seen this a few times before but with young players so many things can come into effect - how determined they are, their type of personality, if they will fit into the squad, how well they train and how good the training they recieve is, if they can be injury prone or even if they can they handle the limelight and pressure of coming up from a lower league to a higher one. Young players can be very adaptable BUT depending on different traits and personality attributes they have can influence just how good or bad they will be. How many youngsters have we seen in the real life game come along as a very promised talent and then they just seem to drop out of the lime-light?

I have very good scouts that are part of my Celtic team and I'm thinking that if they recommend a youngster I think that no matter how good or bad the attributes of the scout, it's generally on a kind of "first look basis". One of my coaches has a 20 on CA, 20 with PA and 20 in Working With Youngsters and I even get his recommendation a lot of the time as well as the scouts. I've went after a couple of players (one was only 21 and the other was 31, both strikers) that my scouts had recommended but they turned out to be not too good. The 21 one year old was crap (as mentioned in my earlier post), couldn't settle etc so wasn't playing well. I'm now, after a year of sticking with him, trying to sell him on as he's not worked out for my team. The 31 year old I took on a year long loan and even though he turned out to be better, he was just very inconsisent so I never took him on after the loan. Point is, the scouts said they were very good players etc but it never worked out that way and I only had the scouts initial report cards to go by. They may well be good players but they might not fit into your team set-up.

When you first scout a player, as I say, initially it's on a first look basis, so it's usually best to try and scout the player over a course of time (as I have found out). Get the report card then maybe have a scout look at him over the course of 3 matches or so then see how it goes from there. The scout is saying that on HIS belief, player X has got the potential to play at the same level as player Y, but like I say this is usually on a first time look. I wouldn't base it on a first time look only and if I'm interested in a player, I'll have a look at him over time, I'll look at the player's personality, if he's injury prone etc and then I'll take it from there.

Of your own team, have a look at the youngsters and go through their different coach reports and I'll bet on some of the youngsters some coaches will say he has got potential to play to whatever level and that he is decent while other coaches will say he's not good enough for the squad and these are on players that are already WITH the squad. A coach/scout may well say that player X has got the potential to play to a certain level, is a decent player and is very promising but after all's said and done do YOU, as manager, believe it?

Scouts can get it wrong in the game just like they do in real life.

The scout rates players based on their CA and PA. Your player may have low CA overall but high at the most important attributes for his role. And then, of course, everyone has his up and down days.

Not quite, the scouts will know the CA, it's just a matter of maths. But they estimate the PA based on a couple of factors (and I'm not exactly sure if what follows is complete or 100% correct), such as their CA, determination, workrate, some of their hidden stats, and the distribution of their stats.