Leading Prem Star... Does it Actually Matter ???

Usually when looking at a scout report or coach report the first thing i look at is the ability of the player and potential, and i only buy players if any of these are "Leading Premiership Star...." but i was just wondering if these actually matter. surely if a player has the attributes to play in a certain position it doesn't really matter of the player is a "leading premiership star" or not, or does it matter ?

do you guys buy players based on the attributes or whether u scout says the player will be a good or leading premiership star ?

I just go off the "star rating" usually. But if I had the choice of two similarly rated players - perhaps I'll go with the one with the higher Premership rating, like you say.

I generally take the scout advice on board, but on many occasions I've gone against them and its turned out to be great. For example, my scouts told me Flamini was only a "decent" player, but I signed him for Real for 5m and he's turned out to be a world class DM.

Attributes only, I only have one scout and I use him to unmask attributes then I make my own decision. I've had loads of players that have turned out to be good, but the scouts said I should look to offload, I never listen to the scouts.

Originally posted by Nomis07:

Attributes only, I only have one scout and I use him to unmask attributes then I make my own decision.

Couldn't agree more here. I seldom take a player solely on the recommendation of a scouts comments of future ability.

You could get the following scenario...

Player A - C.A 10 | P.A 199

Player B - C.A 120 | P.A 150

Now, player A will be rated higher by your scouts, but he will never ever reach his full potential, where as player B, rated lower, has a much better chance of fulfilling his potential, and making a great career for himself.

I have a strong feeling that all scout reports are entire based on hidden attitude CA and PA.

I.e. if a player have high CA, no matter now dose his CA being distributed, he is still count as a leading star.

(I could be wrong on this, had anyone actually experiment this ?)

In general, attributes are the best guide to an established player, but potential ratings are a much better guide to youngsters.

A 16 year old with poorly distributed stats, average CA for his age and the potential to be a leading Premiership star represents a sound investment for a low-end Premiership club. A 16 year old with very well distributed stats, high CA for his age and the potential to be a leading star in League 1 is a waste of money, unless the scouts are completely wrong.

There might be the odd exception - you might overlook a defender with massive potential (unless, of course, you reckon he could be trained to play in midfield) and you might sign a player with only "decent potential" for a leading club if he appears to have the lightning pace to make an effective player.

Scout ratings (both "leading star" predictions and star ratings) are based entirely on perceived current and potential abilities which are a weighted sum of the scout's judging abilities, actual CA/PA, reputation and age.

sometimes my coaches give me the message , fred bloggs has been with the team a reasonable time and shows no sign of developing or whatever it says. though the following season sometimes they start to improve a bit so its hard to work out what to do. i suspect many coach reports are invalid because the coach isnt good enough.