Whats more important

How crucial are indevidual stats compared to high PA and overhall CA

If you take a striker for example, some player have a higher PA and CA than another player with lower stats. but the player with the lower CA actually has better stats for a striker scoring goals. whats going to to be more crucial?

is it just a case of a striker having a high consitancy rating combined with a big Game rating?

I was thinking the same thing. I had a striker with 131 CA and 138 PA, he was 31 and scored 45 goals in the championship. But players with better PA and CA who have strengths in different areas offer very little in terms of goals and assists

If I had a striker with 100 PA and CA with good stats, would they be better than player with 170 PA / CA? There must be something to it, because I cant work out why Billy Sharp, Craig Beattie and Andy Carroll score so many goals in the game

Don't be fooled by looking at CA/PA, look at the players key stats and decide whether they're worth getting. This is more important concerning regens though.

I was thinking the same thing. I had a striker with 131 CA and 138 PA, he was 31 and scored 45 goals in the championship. But players with better PA and CA who have strengths in different areas offer very little in terms of goals and assists

If I had a striker with 100 PA and CA with good stats, would they be better than player with 170 PA / CA? There must be something to it, because I cant work out why Billy Sharp, Craig Beattie and Andy Carroll score so many goals in the game

The best player ever in my game was Andy Carroll... However a Sweed by the name of Fredriksson is looking insanly good (in 2024)! 40 goals in 35 caps, and he's already got more than 120 goals for me at only 23!

So what your saying is, if i want to buy a striker using genie Scout, as long as his stats for a striker are better than a gut with a higher Pa and overall CA he would be a better striker based on his stats? where does Consitancy and important games come into it?

Striker 1 has 18 for finishing and 15 for composure he has 12 for consistancy and importanmt games, CA 125 Pa 135..

Striker 2 has 15 for Finishing and 12 for composure, he has 14 for consistancy and important games, CA 130 PA 160

Whos is the going to be the best striker? one with lower stats but higher Consistancy and important games etc combined with slight higer CA and PA.

Striker 2 would surely end up better. If you have someone with a CA of 200 and compare them to someone with a CA of 100 and you let the game randomly chose their stats, the striker with CA 200 will end up a lot better.

Striker 2 also has better CA which means he is more likely to get better and have better stats.

Wayne\'o: In your example, striker 1 is the better striker at present. His key attributes that you have mentioned are better for a striker then those of striker 2, and although striker 2 has higher consistency, it isn't that much higher that it would make him a better player.

In the long run however, depending on the age of the player, there would be the possibility for striker 2 to become better as due to his higher PA, he has room to become the better striker. That would of course depending on how his attributes were distributed as he improves.

At the end of the day, you're much better off just looking at the attributes of a player rather then using an external tool to look at CA as well IMO. CA just gives the illusion that one player is better at his job then another simply because he has a high CA and doesn't take into account how attributes are distributed. If you simply just look at players attributes, you don't have the problem of being led to believe that one player is better simply because of his CA.

Attributes > CA

I think that looking at PA and CA is a little restrictive. I had a striker who by scouting standards was not good enough to play for my prem team, his CA and PA were pretty low but the distribution of his meagre stats meant that he was capable of banging in forty a season. To this day he is the most successful striker i have ever had.

My advice would be to look at the stats unless it is a youth player you are signing.

Hmm ok,

because iv now been relegated from the prem iv used my genie to look at my players to see how good they are, i think iv became a little bit obsessed with the Consistancy rating along with the Big game stat..

is there any point in buying a player who has better stats than a current player but overall has a lower rating in terms of Consistancy etc.. im using genie scout to try and find soem new players but even using that is hard, Most of my player are around 150 for CA and PA so trying to find better who will transfer to my club is not easy.

Trouble with FM is there seem to be alot ot top players with PA but there stats are below 10 in a crucial poss. are we to just over look this? there doesnt seem to be any nest Gerrard, Messi, Tevez type players coming threw.

Im using a large data base with german, italian and spanish league yet there seem limited amount of players..

I have an abundance in decent young players, so signing soem one at 17 who may turn out to be really goos wont help my team at the currant time..

the other thin gto mention is. i have a good scout yet i cnat find a striker above a 4 star unless i scout the ronney's of this world which isnt worth ir because i dont have the money

so what stats are considerd good in prem and championship division. i know 20 is the best but whats acceptable.

15-16 I would imagine.

I've had some amazing regen players come through!

Silva at the moment, he's just 22 now and he's been the best attacking midfielder on the planet since he was 21 and one of the best since he was 19. Hart, who's now been my captain for 4 season and is now 27, I got for £14.5 million at the age of 21 and since has been my best defender consistantly. A kid, Kevin Cros is now becoming one of my best midfielders at the age of 19, actually just turned 20. Pereda, a right winger, is now breaking his way into the first team at the age of 20, though he's still not good enough to displace McShane, who himself displaced Italian Captain Costanzo at 22 after battling for it since the age of 20. Not to mention Angel who appeared for the club (in the FA cup final) at 16 and scored an equaliser. He destroyed every team in both the reserves and the U18s. I constantly got things about him scoring 4 or 5 goals for them. At 17 I sent him on loan and he returned as a proper first team player at 19 where he finally held down a position, though the guy I mentioned, Silva has since taken it from him. Then there is Fredriksson, 67 in 64 apps last season, 40 goals in 35 for Sweden and he's just turned 24. Scored 55 in 60 at the age of 22.

Though Regens do have some serious flaws (penalty taking ability, nearly every good winger can't win a single header, and a few other things), but they aren't really that bad. In truth I think people are just expecting too many Messis and Fabregases. 20 year old world class players are rare beasts indeed, but I've seen probably the right number in this version. Nearly all players though do peak [stop developing] at around 23 though. Angel was around 21 and I think, Silva (the guy that took his place) though is getting better every day, I think he might actually be the best player I've had yet.

So after 23 they start to become lessor players?

So after 23 they start to become lessor players?

...no... worded that badly I think...

At 23 is when players reach what is basically their peak... They will get more consistant and a little better' date=' but that's normally about it. I've seen player still developing [b']rapidly[/b] up to about 27 before though, very rare though. On the flip side I had a player reach roughly his peak at about 18, but I sold him as I had better players for his position.

Players get worse from about 30 onwards. Some start at 29 and some at 33 or 34. I'd say 31 is where it starts for most.

is there any reason for a player reaching his peak early or never reaching it?

is there any reason for a player reaching his peak early or never reaching it?

From what I've found, if a player is given plenty of first team football (which you have to make sure of) then they normally reach their potential. I try to get players as young as possible so I can get the best results out of them, normally if you sign players at 21 or 22 thinking "They'll be a good prospect for the future" then you will be disapointed most of the time. Then again the same can be said going after players who look like young stars. Very few are actually as good as they seem. I've had plenty that looked good enough and just ended up as utter crap and were promptly offloaded to the stupidest club I could find, mostly Steven Gerrards Man City... However they always perform against me! At 20, if a player isn't capable of being a first team player (not being your best player for the position, but I mean having them on isn't a liability), then they probably aren't worth it.

So yeah... Now with players I might just explain this again. For your average regen player:

15-18: Youth team, just leave them there unless they are something truly special (I've only had 1 in 15 years or so)

18-21: Fast developement, loan them for first team football, and make sure they get it!

21-23: Developing at a decent pace, they need a good amount of first team football though

23-26: They get better slightly, but basically the best they will become

26-30: The best the player will ever be

30-33: They will be on the decline, keep them in the first team as long as they aren't either a liability or keeping a promising youngster out. The moment the first team football dries up, they're gone... Just don't panic about seeing your player having lots of attribute drops and drop them, because if you do it will be pretty much it.

33+: If they've gotten plenty of first team football they will still be okay (hopefully), but you'll see them rapidly turn to ****.

I should also add, sometimes football manager is just a whore, and that's why some don't reach their potential.