Should the Average Rating System be Scrapped?

The following case will seek to put forward why the avearge rating system should be removed and the role that statistics play in FM or not the role as the case may be.

As long as I have played CM/FM since 97/98 the average ratings of players has been part and parcel of the game - and the yard stick of how to measure how a player is performing week in week out. But why should FM/SI/ME give us a rating for the player for each match? Are they doing our job for us? Do real manager such as Wenger or SAF get a sheet at the end of the game that gives an individual rating for each player? No. You may say they watch the game for 90 minutes and thus we are unable to do the same as that would be silly. But during and after the game we have the players individual statistics, something that I myself pay more attention to than the players average rating in recent years and in particualr FM10. The only time I have ever seen an average rating is from the Sunday papers after a big game or champions league mid-week game and the paper the next day has given each player a match rating - but not the manager - it is more a media thing than a footballing aspect IMO.

A lot of people IMO look at the average ratings but not necessarily how the player has come to that rating. They will look at the CB who has 7.5 (he may have scored a goal but also could have missed many tackles and headers and gave the ball away upteen times) and the CF who has a 8.5 and scored two goals (but that CF could have had 10 chances or 2) but they don't look closely enough at what that particualr player has done throughout the game. And so I feel that the computer should not produce these ratings and let us the manager look at the game and see for ourselves via the players stats and player analysis (which is getting improved for FM11) rather than give us a player rating that can be misleading at times - that I feel we should not be able to see as we as the manager should make an informed judgement based on what we can see based on the data.

Another part where people use the average rating system is when looking at other players and a potential transfer. When we look for a player we can't help but notice the players average rating for that season and possibly previous years aswell. But when we look at the on screen player stas - all the outfield players have the same statistical legends, such as; goals and assists - how is that applicapable to defensive minded players and what can we draw from that? Not alot! Dribbling, shot target %, why are these statistics show under a defensive minded player? Surely the statistics should be player position related? The same can be said of attacking players, such as; tackles - that is the only statisic that is defensive minded - so the statistics are far too attackig orientated.

So I suggest that statistics such as tacking % won, the same for headers, interceptions made per game (average) should be shown for defensive minded players and maybe take away the attacking statistics for the defensive players and keep the ststistics the way they are for attacking players but remove tackles per game.

As it seems we are comparing apples and oranges!!!

There could be an option to disaple the avergae ratings - as for begginers to may seem a bit daunting - but for the more experienced user I think it is an unfair tool that we do not need and makes us as the manager a bit lazy!!!!

Also the teams best 11 is a bit pointless as it only gives goals scored - again this is only applicaple to attcking minded players - and they don't even include assists!!! I would love to see some defensive stats - it total goals - why not total headers or tackles for defensive players????

Disagree on Ave ratings. I look through enough numbers as it is and the game takes long enough. It may not be ultra realtistic but newspapers do publish the ratings so its not sci-fi. I think removing average ratings would make the game close to unplayable for most.

Agree with other items - better selection of stats. Could be hard to implement though. Say, a DM/AMC; how would the game know to give the attacking or defensive stats? Most of my players are trained to do two jobs.

Best 11 point is a good one.

A lot of people IMO look at the average ratings but not necessarily how the player has come to that rating. They will look at the CB who has 7.5 (he may have scored a goal but also could have missed many tackles and headers and gave the ball away upteen times) and the CF who has a 8.5 and scored two goals (but that CF could have had 10 chances or 2) but they don't look closely enough at what that particualr player has done throughout the game. And so I feel that the computer should not produce these ratings and let us the manager look at the game and see for ourselves via the players stats and player analysis (which is getting improved for FM11) rather than give us a player rating that can be misleading at times - that I feel we should not be able to see as we as the manager should make an informed judgement based on what we can see based on the data.

Exactly. Ideally a FMer would watch every match in full and decide how a player is playing. The rating are not perfect. A player might be doing exactly what you want him to do, but the game think he is playing bad and rate him lowly. Like the media.

SAF, Mourinho don't care what the papers say because thy don't need it. Similarly a FMer who doesn't need it does not need to look at it.

There could be an option to disaple the avergae ratings - as for begginers to may seem a bit daunting - but for the more experienced user I think it is an unfair tool that we do not need and makes us as the manager a bit lazy!!!!

Oh come on how hard is it to ignore a little bit of text. Can't be harder than SI adding the option.

BTW a skin can do that, I think.

Also the teams best 11 is a bit pointless as it only gives goals scored - again this is only applicaple to attcking minded players - and they don't even include assists!!! I would love to see some defensive stats - it total goals - why not total headers or tackles for defensive players????

Err my best 11 is a complete formation and not at all related to goals scored. Unless I'm missing something.

I agree with you on player position related statistics, it would probably encourage people to consider those statistics rather than ave rating a bit more. However the average rating is a quick and easy guide on how well the player is performing. If there was no ave rating, I think teamtalks would be very difficult if you sit there instead trying to work out how many headers and passes each player missed. Plus it is a good indication of form amongst many thigns when picking players for the next match. Both the detailed stats and an ave rating have their place in the game, I feel.

Or in terms of the player's on screen statistics, like the squad screen which you can alter to fit your own needs. Maybe we could change the players on screen stats?

@ Ishu - yes I take your comments on board - but I do not undersdtand what you say about SAF ignoring how the papers rate his players - did I say anything about how SAF would react to the papers? I don't follow your comment about the best 11?

@ Ishu - yes I take your comments on board - but I do not undersdtand what you say about SAF ignoring how the papers rate his players - did I say anything about how SAF would react to the papers? I don't follow your comment about the best 11?

Do real manager such as Wenger or SAF get a sheet at the end of the game that gives an individual rating for each player? No.

Not really, but lets say SAF looks over player rating in Newspaper, We look over em in the game.

And I didn't get your 11 comment neither so were even lol

Ok right cool. Just in the best 11 for the season and all-time 11 - I feel there should be more statistics not just games, goals and average rating. What about assists, passes, and some defensive statistics for defensive players - as the number of goals a defender scores will not tell us much about him.

Ok right cool. Just in the best 11 for the season and all-time 11 - I feel there should be more statistics not just games, goals and average rating. What about assists, passes, and some defensive statistics for defensive players - as the number of goals a defender scores will not tell us much about him.

Oh I get it now. This is a good suggestion.

Perhaps, we can customize that view too. For FM12 I say.

Yeah - customise!!! That was the word I was loking for! :thup:

I'm not entirely sure what your big gripe with them existing is. Everyone knows they don't tell the whole story which is why you don't solely use them in any decision.

Of course a player that scores gets a good rating and gets noticed, thats as it should, thats how it is in real life. If you then watch the game which as the manager you do you can see what the player did over the whole 90 minutes and make a better evaluation of his performance with regards to what you want him to be doing in your system.

For example a full back might be flying forward and get a couple of assists and look pretty good that way but you saw that he oten neglected his defensive duties and was too easily beaten that way. He would get maybe an 8 rating but knowing the next side has excellent wingers you could use a much more defensively minded player there. The player still did well in some aspects and has his rating to go along with it but might not be right for the team winning the game.

I've been a little lazy in the past, just looking at average rating, to be honest, I wouldn't mind it being taken away but I do think it's needed because not everyone wants to look at various stats.

I certainly will be doing though. Nothing better to do!

nev i agree about what you said at the start about player ratiings it is crap, but i had actually sat and watch a few full matches a number of times for ashford town ( middles**), my right back is my cousin they was giving him poor ratings, so i sat and watch a few games on full and he was playing very good, better then the rest of the defenders, but fm was giving them better ratings, cant stand it now and yes should be taking off!!!!

I agree that the formula of how the game calculates the game rating does need some work, but dont think that there is any need to do away with it alltogether as every manager can choose to look at or ignore the statistics he is presented with.

The formula definitely needs to be looked at. Goals for defenders can really skew ratings. DM used to not get good ratings at all even if they played well and I remember previously a midfielder who would be pumping good crosses into the box and having a striker who kept stuffing the chances meant that the winger got rubbish ratings too. Ratings should not be done away with, but definitely need to be tweaked.

I've always thought of average ratings as the press perception of a player's performance: it's easily influenced by goals (the papers don't seem to understand that a player can take a penalty and score a tap-in without having played a good game); it will undoubtedly influence who gets the big media support at awards time;it can generate buzz round a player and get other clubs taking notice of hi; they can influence international call-ups. But it isn't the be-all and end-all.

Personally I quite like it when I have a player who does a valuable but underrated role that generates him no real plaudits, except from me, and it's realistic. Darren Fletcher was a pretty good player for a season or two before anyone in the press noticed; Drogba was labelled a talentless donkey in his first few Chelsea seasons, when he was really a very talented player playing in the donkey role necessitated by Mourinho's Chelsea system; Xabi Alonso was recognised as a good player, but not deemed anywhere near as vital to the set-up as Gerrard/Torres, until he left and the midfield stopped being able to pass.

Any fan of any club can probably give a few more examples of a player they think is great and deserves more recognition.

So I like it how it is: player ratings don't do your job for you entirely, but they do give a rough idea if that's what you want. And you can see the stats if you need to have a more in-depth study, and maybe understand a little more about what makes your team work (especially now that they're putting in the heat maps, and all those other chalkboard features). Those who want to only judge based on Av. rating are free to, will get a decent idea of things, but won't have the same insight - that's their choice.

As for your other points: what determines whether a player is defensive-minded or attack-minded? How about a CB/DM/MC - what stats should show? How's the game to know whether I want to use him defensively or offensively?

Even a SW/CB I might want to use as a Libero; a CB/RB I might want for wing back duties. A ST or AM I might want to use in a defensive role - man-marking a deep-lying playmaker or closing down FBs.

Why have the game arbitrarily limit our field of (statistical) view?

sure mistakes, assists and goals influence a players rating. but then so does everything else they do in a game. passes, missed passes, interceptions, tackles, missed tackles. it all evens itself out.

im not sure your argument stands

I see the point about goals affecting a player's rating in a game, so it's hard to take a one-off 8.5 as a good thing unless you work out how he got it.

But a player with a high average rating at the end of the season must surely have earned that by consistently performing. Even if it means a player scored 30 tap-ins in a season and did nothing else, at least you know he is a fantastic poacher and will get you plenty of goals, regardless of whether he does anything else.

When judging a player I always look at appearances, goals and assists at the same time as I look at average rating because they are on the same screen, so you can see straight away if someone rating has been increased by these factors.

I completely agree that ratings should be scrapped, have them moved into a more in depth media section with the papers giving scores by all means, but who is it that is awarding the scores at the moment? The game itself and for a realistic sim that makes no sense imo. It's the same for player transfer values, they don't mean anything, clubs wont accept the figure listed in the player search screen, so what't the point of it? Again let the media speculate on value and your scouts advise you etc. I personally like the game to be as realistic as possible so I don't want the game intervening with meaningless values, and to an extent, meaningless ratings.

Couldn't disagree more with the whole thread.

I completely agree that ratings should be scrapped, have them moved into a more in depth media section with the papers giving scores by all means, but who is it that is awarding the scores at the moment? The game itself and for a realistic sim that makes no sense imo. It's the same for player transfer values, they don't mean anything, clubs wont accept the figure listed in the player search screen, so what't the point of it? Again let the media speculate on value and your scouts advise you etc. I personally like the game to be as realistic as possible so I don't want the game intervening with meaningless values, and to an extent, meaningless ratings.

Might as well get rid of player attributes as well then .

Might as well get rid of player attributes as well then .

Exactly what I was thinking. People forget that it still is a game.

Couldn't disagree more with the whole thread.

Might as well get rid of player attributes as well then .

Once again Crouchy says exactly what I'm thinking. Is it great minds thinking alike, or fools seldom differing though?

Removing them would certainly make the game more realistic and make it a little bit more challenging for some of us managers.

But thinking about it, if this was to be removed and others which aren't realistic attributes, players star ratings and transfer value would all be scrapped which would probably make the game unplayable.

It's an interesting suggestion though.

Not to get rid of the player ave rating; but I know for a fact, playing 4-1-2-1-2 as I do; the player in the deeper DMC role is going to get a crap ave rating on my game. Doesn't make him any less vital than my fullbacks and strikers who get 'overrated' (imvho) ave rating for the season.

i.e. one lucky assist or goal distorts the match rating for that player too much.

i.e. player on 5.5 all match pops up with a goal or assist and he's all of a sudden 7.5

But surely attribute ratings in the player profile reflect your level of knowledge about the player, if they are famous or on your team you know their ability, strengths, weaknesses etc the attributes ratings are just the games way of representing this knowledge on the screen.

I don't see how this ties in any way to the validity of the original point about match ratings. The ratings have no counterpart in reality, every opinion is subjective, yet the game presents it as fact, an issue which could be resolved by moving the ratings to the media's domain. At the moment where do these ratings come from, who is giving them? There is no equivalent in real life.

As for transfer values listed in the game, unless they've recently been transferred, they are completely meaningless and have near enough no use in the game and again, where does the value come from? There is no real life objective arbiter of an under contract player's value.

As far as possible imo every feature in the game that has no real life counterpart should be removed. But of course, it being a game you need some kind of graphical representation of the knowledge you would have irl, so imo there is no problem with player attributes remaining.

I think nev makes some good points and certainly as I've progressed as a FMer I've learnt to take ave ratings with a pinch of salt and look more at the actual stats. However to do away with them completely would probably alienate newer Fmer's at a time when the game is already getting very complex and involving. It is sometimes difficult to remember that some of us have grown up with this game and that some of the evolution of features we take for granted and can adapt to easiliy because we know the 'core' very well. For someone taking their first steps on the Fm ladder (remembering that the majority of these may be kids) somethign as simple sounding as removing average ratings could leave them bewildered.

As people have mentioned the papers print ratings and I would happily back the move to have the ratings shown as the 'papers' rating. Seeing as Miles and the Mirror seem to be getting cosy maybe they could sponsor that bit?

Moving ratings to the media section could work.

Harry makes a good point, who is giving these ratings? Is it the ass man, media, commentators or no-one. Who knows?

I think the ratings are like all the numbers in the game, you have to know how to interpret them and how they go with all the other numbers.

They're a blunt tool but as a rough guide, very useful.

Harry #24....that's the key for me. Just knowing what works with your team or players, so the ave rating is an aid....but not key.

Ishu I agree with as well...it's a game. Whatever floats your boat.

Moving ratings to the media section could work.

Harry makes a good point, who is giving these ratings? Is it the ass man, media, commentators or no-one. Who knows?

The problem with this is how do you get a half time/full time rating to help you with team talks?

I watch the game on Key or Extened highlights, as i only main play FM at night after work and i don't have enough time to watch all the Matches in full.

Also i think i would get bored if i watched every game for 90 minutes long (real time), and you can't really judge how a player is playing if your only watching the Key/Extended highlight's.

So the Players average ratings are very useful to me.

The problem with this is how do you get a half time/full time rating to help you with team talks?

Yes that would be a problem for newbies. Well maybe the assisstant manager in his report could say how each player is doing in the match, that'd be more realistic than a rating.

I think the best solution might be to make a customisable rating system, in a similar way to training schedules you could create a rating template to your fullbacks, DCs etc. You could then add weight to whichever aspect of a players performance you value.

As the same rating systems would have to be used globaly there could still a be default but you could apply your own system to player searches / shortlists etc.

Well I think the argument of getting rid of the ratings is realism, it not very realistic as you wouldn't get ratings at half time in a real match. Your idea is pretty unrealistic too although it would be useful to some

Once again Crouchy says exactly what I'm thinking. Is it great minds thinking alike, or fools seldom differing though?

Great minds, for sure.

Don't see the problem with ratings personally. I don't look at just the ratings - I look how they have performed through other statistics, but the ratings are a very useful gauge. It's also way, way, way more important for newcomers to the game - who will inevitably discover that ratings aren't the entire answer to everything too. In addition the average rating over an entire season is incredibly useful as a measure of how good a player is.

Don't see the problem with ratings personally. I don't look at just the ratings - I look how they have performed through other statistics, but the ratings are a very useful gauge. It's also way, way, way more important for newcomers to the game - who will inevitably discover that ratings aren't the entire answer to everything too. In addition the average rating over an entire season is incredibly useful as a measure of how good a player is.

Unless they are a defensive midfielder or centre mid with defensive role.

Unless they are a defensive midfielder or centre mid with defensive role.

This doesn't mean ratings are bad - it means that ratings for defensive midfielders need tinkering. For just about every other role, it's very good.

Well I think the argument of getting rid of the ratings is realism, it not very realistic as you wouldn't get ratings at half time in a real match. Your idea is pretty unrealistic too although it would be useful to some

The whole concept of the game is not realistic. I don't have to stand in a field freezing cold for hours as the game progresses at real time, trying to convince real footballers to do what I want them to. There's a line between realism and common sense, and I don't think it's hard to see which side of the line this idea is on.

This doesn't mean ratings are bad - it means that ratings for defensive midfielders need tinkering. For just about every other role, it's very good.

Agreed. And I suppose when comparing those types of midfielders its ok but trying to compare them performance wise vs other positions is currently impossible.

i dont think they should, but if they are going, they need to be replaced, i think a sentence on the players last performance would be great... although, match ratings would be a bit pointless if you had no average? but written feedback on what they did well on etc would be good.

We still need ratings, just not in numbers, but in terms of wording and stars; just like CA/PA, team report. 5 star - genius/fantastic, 4 star- very good, 3 - good, 2 - poor, 1 - nightmare. We dont hear sir alex saying he is happy with x player, he got a 8.0 rating, do we? He will more likely say, he's tremendous, fantastic or some sort.

Neither do we hear managers saying x player avg rating is 7.8 so far this season. It's more likely they will say, he's been phenomenal, pure genious. So in game that will make us see 5 star for his avg. Rating. The 7.8 will not be visible.

We still need ratings, just not in numbers, but in terms of wording and stars; just like CA/PA, team report. 5 star - genius/fantastic, 4 star- very good, 3 - good, 2 - poor, 1 - nightmare. We dont hear sir alex saying he is happy with x player, he got a 8.0 rating, do we? He will more likely say, he's tremendous, fantastic or some sort.

Neither do we hear managers saying x player avg rating is 7.8 so far this season. It's more likely they will say, he's been phenomenal, pure genious. So in game that will make us see 5 star for his avg. Rating. The 7.8 will not be visible.

And I want to feel the cold when I'm playing in norway.

The whole concept of the game is not realistic. I don't have to stand in a field freezing cold for hours as the game progresses at real time, trying to convince real footballers to do what I want them to. There's a line between realism and common sense, and I don't think it's hard to see which side of the line this idea is on.

Well SI always talk about the game being a football management simulation so shouldn't they be trying to make the game as realistic as possible, without taking all the fun out of the game of course.

Well SI always talk about the game being a football management simulation so shouldn't they be trying to make the game as realistic as possible, without taking all the fun out of the game of course.

Its all about that fine balance and I stand by what I said that removing the ratings would make it less accessible for new players.

I agree, it's about finding a balance between realism and fun. I also agree that maybe taking the ratings out may make the game harder for newbies but I think that a more realistic idea would be in having your ass man give a mini report on each players performance. This is more realistic and helpful than a rating.

Let's not forget at the end of the day it's still a GAME. Most people do not have time or will to go through all the passing/tackling etc etc percentage statistics of every single player after every single game. Often I just skim through match ratings at the end of a game and only bother looking at detailed statistics of players who have a noticeably better or worse match rating than average. Not 100% realistic but neither is watching highlights instead of a full match. Removing the ratings would be neither realistic or fun IMO.

Why don´t make it an option just as attribute masking? "No average ratings" in a tickable box in Preferences and everyone can get FM as hard and easy as they want...

Only an idiot would judge a player based on his average rating. It is realistic to have them because the press give players equally inaccurate ratings in real life.

Removing them would make team talks impossible because a player's opinion of how well he's playing is based entirely on his match rating even if it is completely inaccurate.

I personally think that the Average Rating system needs a bit on tinkering, the ideas above say it all with more emphasis needed on defensive players. But I wouldn't want it scrapped completely as I'm a very casual gamer in comparison to most on here and I use the Average Rating to help make a lot of decisions as I play this game for fun and therefore I like to have these little handy pieces of information.

An example would be a 21 year old regen that I seen in one of my saves with some incredible attributes but in 35 games he averaged 6.6 or so. I then looked at the ratings for the rest of that players team and he seemed to have lower average ratings than most of the rest of the squad, so I stopped pursuing him. If there were no average rating I would not have known that he isn't as good of a player that his stats make him out to be, I don't trust scouts as they are terribly inconsistent from personal experience.

That's just my opinion on it

importance is not to get too wrapped up in ratings - for example. I have just started second season with Arsenal - now I have selected Fabianski over Almunia for start of new season because despite almunia rating higher, conceding less per game, more clean sheets etc, I simply looked at fabianski and know he is a better shot stopper, and quicker sweeping off his line, and have based the decision on that alone - and am in general reaping rewards for it.