Top-notch staff still lack common sense!

No matter how great your Assman and Scouts are, regardless of their JPA/JPP being 20, they'll ALWAYS fail to understand basic concepts like

*Players having peaked already

During backroom meetings your staff will surely urge you to take a look to players aged 28+ to strengthen your squad... And more often than not it's not World Class players, but average guys who're probably 3* material at best.

And unless you set specific age criteria, your top scouts will report about players aged 28-32 as "highly recommended", once more the Vassell-Gerrard ratio is 10:1...

Basically a huge percentage of recommendations don't make sense, nor from a mid-term project standpoint, nor from a "here and now" perspective...

Spending 10M to sign a decent Starting XI/rotation player who has maybe 1 or 2 good seasons in him before declining is just TERRIBLE BUSINESS. And Top-notch staff should know better.

*Home-grown rules

Also, most of the prospect they recommend you are already 18 or 19, thus preventing them from ever becoming HG at your club.

Even disregarding the fact, as per their aforementioned mature counterparts, most of said players aren't worth your time and money, what's the point in signing "prospects" who can't contribute to your HG quota, especially for European Cups?

*Unreachable potential

What about those "good signings" who at age 19 have BSP-level attributes, 2.5 Silver Stars rating, but your scouts will still praise and propose because after all they still seem to have 3* potential?!

I mean... If this guy has been in the game for at least 2 years and he still has single-digits attributes in every area but a couple of 12s, how can you, a Top-quality Scout, not realize he's not going to fulfill his "potential"? If you see he's inconsistent and/or injury prone, what else do you need to know he's not going to make it, not even if God himeslf tutors him from now on...

I just HATE when my scouts fill my inbox with reports about "yellow octagons" with 2*S CA and 2.5* PA... Those are the players you'll always try to SELL when they're part of your youth intake, why should I sign more?

Why does this happen?

I think it's, once more, down to REPUTATION and PA...

Apparently AI will look at those two values, and when both are "good enough", the player is regarded as a good one, regardless of his age and of his actual attributes.

I even suspect a declining 32yo player with 149/155 CA/PA will still be perceived as better than a 24yo with 135/145 CA/PA, while it's obvious which one is the more profitable pick.

Same goes for youngsters... a Balotelli-esque (aka a huge dickhead) 17yo with 80/180 CA/PA will be praised to no end despite his horrible mental traits and his low current ability, while a regular 17yo with 100/130 will probably be snubbed or considered as "meh".

Surely, the latter has no chance to become a world beater, but at least can turn into a decent backup (or into profit), while the former will likely end up on the free agents list when it becomes clear his Potential is way out of reach...

This should be looked into, and possibly solved for FM2012... so we can get competitive AI managers, instead of having them spend plenty of money on useless youngsters and expensive has-beens

I think there might be a perspective issue at stake here.

(Working on the basis that you are talking about top-notch staff, I'm assuming you're at a top-level club)

When you are a club that is doing well in one of the best leagues in the world, there truly are very few 4*+ players. You have to remember that 3* generally means "On a par with what you already have".

Therefore the fact that they're suggesting 3* players cannot be considered bad advice.

As for players reaching their potential? There are probably plenty of examples of exactly what you've described in real life, but I can't be bothered to try and find some right now.

I think there might be a perspective issue at stake here.

(Working on the basis that you are talking about top-notch staff, I'm assuming you're at a top-level club)

When you are a club that is doing well in one of the best leagues in the world, there truly are very few 4*+ players. You have to remember that 3* generally means "On a par with what you already have".

Therefore the fact that they're suggesting 3* players cannot be considered bad advice.

No, the "still" in the thread title was meant to point out the issue is visible at every level, EVEN at top clubs...

I should have used "Even top-notch staff lack common sense"...

I've seen that happen everywhere, from Norwegian Second Division to English Premier League, so I don't think it's a matter of perspective.

The CA/PA Stars are indeed relative, but the pattern is stable: your staff will ALWAYS recommend aging players on the verge of their peak, or on their way down already. Your staff will always recommend plenty of 19yo kids with a bright future as backups; your staff will always recommend a plethora of "hot prospects" with such a long way to go to fulfill their potential they would need to keep on developing well into their 30s...

The level you're playing at doesn't really matter...

If you're Crapton FC, you'll get reports on former League Two "stars", EPL youth clubs' rejects and total no-hopers with 17 Flair and 19 Free Kicks

If you're Man Utd you'll get reports on Pennant, average EPL youth material and various inconsistent prospects.

It's not about the actual CA/PA/attributes, it's about the fact few of those players are worth the money you'd spend on them, because few of the younger ones could be much more than decent rotation players, while the good ones will start to decline six months after you've signed them for 15M... and they weren't that good to begin with.

As for players reaching their potential? There are probably plenty of examples of exactly what you've described in real life, but I can't be bothered to try and find some right now.

Surely there are some, but the list of teen sensations and/or half-promising youngsters who eventually fizzled out (or just fell off the face of the earth) is surely much much longer

That's why you're there as their manager! Scouts and assman only work to tell you how good the player is, not whether to buy him. They're there to give you the options, and you have to make the decision.

That's why you're there as their manager! Scouts and assman only work to tell you how good the player is, not whether to buy him. They're there to give you the options, and you have to make the decision.

The point is, I can look beyond their imperfect report and decide whether the player is "smart business", but the AI managers CAN'T, so they'll buy most of those not-so-great players...

And there's the reason why the game gets easier as years go by.

Also, the scouts sort of FAIL to understand who's good and who's "potentially good but ultimately not worth a try"... They "see" a 17yo with high potential, they automatically assume he can reach it, while human managers can realize the gap between his current skills and the ideal ones is to big to be filled with tutoring and natual improvement.

You would rarely sign a 29yo striker who's just as good as the younger one you already have. AI managers do that all the time.

You would never sign a 17yo keeper with <10 key attributes just because "he has good potential". AI managers do that all the time.

You would never sign a 19yo fullback with barely adequate skills. AI managers....