Discussion - promising youngsters start off with too low CA

Disclaimer - the following post is quite lengthy, but please do read on as I do believe I have a genuine point to make

By the way, please note that this analysis is based on the 8.0.2 database.

Contention - basically, I believe that there are a lot of promising youngsters in the game (PA of -9), who have been given too low a CA to begin with, and therefore have a minimal chance, if any, of ever getting close to their CA.

I think that we can broadly categorize the -9 PA players into four broad groups, based on age and starting ability.

Group I - Typically 18-20 years of age; starting CA of 120-130 which makes them good enough from the off for a lower/mid Prem side. Given the right training and match experience, they can and should develop into top quality players.

Player examples - Pablo Piatti, Diego Buonanotte, Lubos Kalouda, Ivan Rakitic, Giles Barnes, Federico Fazio, Bogdan Stancu

Group II - these chaps are younger than group I and so have a slightly lower starting CA. Typically 17-18 years at the start with a CA of 90-110. Again, with the right training and match experience, can be moulded into quality players.

Player examples - Jozy Altidore, Bernardo, Rafael Forster, Helder Barbosa, Sergio Mota, Douglas, Fernando Forestieri

Group III - slightly younger again, typically 16-17 at the start. So you'd think their CA should also be slightly lower but unfortunately its not, its much lower, in the 50-60 range. And this makes all the difference. Even at the right club and with the right training, these guys unfortunately very rarely get close to fulfilling their potential.

Player examples - Rodney Schneider, Rik Schouw, David Rochela, David Moreno, Lukman Haruna, Victor Merchan, Nir Mantsur, Kermit Erasmus, Philani Khwela, Edu Valle, Robert Brady

Group IV - similar starting CA to Group III, but a couple of years younger. And those couple of years makes the difference, and give these chaps enough time to fulfill their true potential, of course given the right training, etc.

Player examples - Gerson, Nicolas Millan, Aquino, Martin Galvan, Neymar

Right, so what I believe, is that Group III is where the anomaly lies. I have played a lot of saves through to 2015 odd, and not once have I seen any of the guys mentioned in Group III amount to anything. This is despite them being at clubs with world class training (Schneider and Schouw at Ajax, Moreno and Merchan at R.Madrid, Erasmus and Khwela at Feyenoord). I think the problem lies in their Starting Current Ability. If you look across the groups, then 2-3 years into the game, those who start off in Group III should be as good as Group I players are at the start. However, with a Starting CA of 50-60, there is no way they will get to 120-130 in a couple of years.

The reason why these players are in the -9 category is after all because they have shown a lot of potential, because they are outperforming average footballers in their age group and hence people think they can become quality players. Shouldnt they then be given a starting CA that reflects that, in stead of it just being reflected in their PA?

Either this, or training should be remodeled to allow faster progression of young players with huge CA-PA gaps.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Right, so apologies for the long post. Look forward to hearing what you guys think.

Disclaimer - the following post is quite lengthy, but please do read on as I do believe I have a genuine point to make

By the way, please note that this analysis is based on the 8.0.2 database.

Contention - basically, I believe that there are a lot of promising youngsters in the game (PA of -9), who have been given too low a CA to begin with, and therefore have a minimal chance, if any, of ever getting close to their CA.

I think that we can broadly categorize the -9 PA players into four broad groups, based on age and starting ability.

Group I - Typically 18-20 years of age; starting CA of 120-130 which makes them good enough from the off for a lower/mid Prem side. Given the right training and match experience, they can and should develop into top quality players.

Player examples - Pablo Piatti, Diego Buonanotte, Lubos Kalouda, Ivan Rakitic, Giles Barnes, Federico Fazio, Bogdan Stancu

Group II - these chaps are younger than group I and so have a slightly lower starting CA. Typically 17-18 years at the start with a CA of 90-110. Again, with the right training and match experience, can be moulded into quality players.

Player examples - Jozy Altidore, Bernardo, Rafael Forster, Helder Barbosa, Sergio Mota, Douglas, Fernando Forestieri

Group III - slightly younger again, typically 16-17 at the start. So you'd think their CA should also be slightly lower but unfortunately its not, its much lower, in the 50-60 range. And this makes all the difference. Even at the right club and with the right training, these guys unfortunately very rarely get close to fulfilling their potential.

Player examples - Rodney Schneider, Rik Schouw, David Rochela, David Moreno, Lukman Haruna, Victor Merchan, Nir Mantsur, Kermit Erasmus, Philani Khwela, Edu Valle, Robert Brady

Group IV - similar starting CA to Group III, but a couple of years younger. And those couple of years makes the difference, and give these chaps enough time to fulfill their true potential, of course given the right training, etc.

Player examples - Gerson, Nicolas Millan, Aquino, Martin Galvan, Neymar

Right, so what I believe, is that Group III is where the anomaly lies. I have played a lot of saves through to 2015 odd, and not once have I seen any of the guys mentioned in Group III amount to anything. This is despite them being at clubs with world class training (Schneider and Schouw at Ajax, Moreno and Merchan at R.Madrid, Erasmus and Khwela at Feyenoord). I think the problem lies in their Starting Current Ability. If you look across the groups, then 2-3 years into the game, those who start off in Group III should be as good as Group I players are at the start. However, with a Starting CA of 50-60, there is no way they will get to 120-130 in a couple of years.

The reason why these players are in the -9 category is after all because they have shown a lot of potential, because they are outperforming average footballers in their age group and hence people think they can become quality players. Shouldnt they then be given a starting CA that reflects that, in stead of it just being reflected in their PA?

Either this, or training should be remodeled to allow faster progression of young players with huge CA-PA gaps.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Right, so apologies for the long post. Look forward to hearing what you guys think.

There is a very simple reason for them not achieving their PA or remaining in the doldrums and that is games played. Yes they train at clubs like Real Madrid etc but in FM the best way to make a player achieve their PA is through playing games season in, season out.

At the start of my game I was in a bidding war for a highly rated youngster, he eventually signed for Valencia and spent the next 4 seasons in their reserves. His CA never advanced only slighty in that time and as far as I could see he didn't really improve despite his advance in years. His contract came up at the end of the fourth season and I signed him, he played 43 games for me that season (having only completed 16 in the previous 4 years) and by the end of the season was worth £19m.

I don't think the issue is with players CA being too low, it is with players never having the chance to acbhieve their PA because they are bought by big clubs and never played, despite their obvious promise.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nomis07:

There is a very simple reason for them not achieving their PA or remaining in the doldrums and that is games played. Yes they train at clubs like Real Madrid etc but in FM the best way to make a player achieve their PA is through playing games season in, season out.

At the start of my game I was in a bidding war for a highly rated youngster, he eventually signed for Valencia and spent the next 4 seasons in their reserves. His CA never advanced only slighty in that time and as far as I could see he didn't really improve despite his advance in years. His contract came up at the end of the fourth season and I signed him, he played 43 games for me that season (having only completed 16 in the previous 4 years) and by the end of the season was worth £19m.

I don't think the issue is with players CA being too low, it is with players never having the chance to acbhieve their PA because they are bought by big clubs and never played, despite their obvious promise. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You do make a valid point. And that I believe further reinforces mine. If you have a 17 year old with CA of say 55, that is nothing special, and there is no reason for this player to get games because his current ability is very average. Due to him not getting games, he does not grow.

If his CA was say 80 and PA 160, then he would be an above average player for his age (which is why he is a -9) and hence would get more games, and hence his CA would increase and with time perhaps he might get close to his PA.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nomis07:

There is a very simple reason for them not achieving their PA or remaining in the doldrums and that is games played. Yes they train at clubs like Real Madrid etc but in FM the best way to make a player achieve their PA is through playing games season in, season out.

At the start of my game I was in a bidding war for a highly rated youngster, he eventually signed for Valencia and spent the next 4 seasons in their reserves. His CA never advanced only slighty in that time and as far as I could see he didn't really improve despite his advance in years. His contract came up at the end of the fourth season and I signed him, he played 43 games for me that season (having only completed 16 in the previous 4 years) and by the end of the season was worth £19m.

I don't think the issue is with players CA being too low, it is with players never having the chance to acbhieve their PA because they are bought by big clubs and never played, despite their obvious promise. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm hoping this is the case and that regens in general aren't just too poor in quality.

In my experience I have found that the better regens are playing regular football at the age of 19/20, normally at a mid-table club in one of the big leagues.

FM 08 tends to differ from earlier versions in the sense that training alone in this game does not make superstars. As in real life, match experience for youngsters is invaluable.

also the question is how much can CA improve in a year. can a player achieve 50, 60 (from 60-120) points of ability in 3 or 4 years? if he can, then there's no problem. IMO, CA 60 is very low for a very promising 16, 17 year old.

wouldn't life be easier without CA/PA system

Karan316,

Good point, but I still think even players with a lower CA would be loaned out etc IRL, but in game they sit in the reserves for years and make little progression. Take it as CA not being readily available but a manager having a rough idea of the potential ability of a player e.g. Phil Bardsley at Man Utd, it's obvious he isn't up to scratch at the moment but the manager thinks he may one day be good enough so gives him 12/13 games a seasont o see how he improves. In game the managers don't do this, and it also occurs with players like Bueno and Motta, they are of a good enough quality and should be getting a decent run out but in game they are bench warmers at best.

SS03,

Regens is a totally different scenario as IMO they seem to get played ahead of original players, without regard of their CA. Regens are of quite a poor standard and achieving PA seems almost impossible even with matches and good training routines.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

also the question is how much can CA improve in a year. can a player achieve 50, 60 (from 60-120) points of ability in 3 or 4 years? if he can, then there's no problem. IMO, CA 60 is very low for a very promising 16, 17 year old.

wouldn't life be easier without CA/PA system </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The CA/PA argument is a horrible ione to get involved in, but I would suggest that ability to progress CA is rather limited in FM. A real life example would be Ronaldo who 4 years ago IMO would have been a 110 maybe a little higher, in three years he has jumped by maybe 80 points. This does not happen in FM.

IMO CA should also incorporate reputation etc so as to gicve a player a chance to make an amazing impact when it comes time i.e. a playuer with 60CA and 180PA sitting in the reserves could jump to a CA of 100 with only a few games in the first team in a top league, again this doesn't happen in game.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nomis07:

Karan316,

Good point, but I still think even players with a lower CA would be loaned out etc IRL, but in game they sit in the reserves for years and make little progression. Take it as CA not being readily available but a manager having a rough idea of the potential ability of a player e.g. Phil Bardsley at Man Utd, it's obvious he isn't up to scratch at the moment but the manager thinks he may one day be good enough so gives him 12/13 games a seasont o see how he improves. In game the managers don't do this, and it also occurs with players like Bueno and Motta, they are of a good enough quality and should be getting a decent run out but in game they are bench warmers at best.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My only point is that for them to even be considered for first team football or even a place on the bench, their CA has got to be higher.

How do managers recognize potential in real life? Is it not when a youngster is doing well amongst people of his age group? If there's a bunch of 16 year olds playing and hypothetically they all have a CA of say 60, how would you tell which has the amazing potential? Is it not because one of them would say have CA 80 and PA 160 and so he stands out?

For the record, in several games many of the youngsters I have mentioned above have been loaned out to clubs where they get first team football eg. David Moreno, Rochela, Merhcna, Valle. However I have never, in any of my games, seen them come close to fulfilling their PA. Even when I signed them at the start and controlled them from the beginning. The fact is that for a 17 yr old starting with say 60 CA and 170 PA, its just impossible to gain 100 points in CA over the next 6 years or so (by which time his development would more or less come to a halt).

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by karan316:

My only point is that for them to even be considered for first team football or even a place on the bench, their CA has got to be higher.

How do managers recognize potential in real life? Is it not when a youngster is doing well amongst people of his age group? If there's a bunch of 16 year olds playing and hypothetically they all have a CA of say 60, how would you tell which has the amazing potential? Is it not because one of them would say have CA 80 and PA 160 and so he stands out?

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think we are going a bit astray here, i'm agreeing with you and i'm laying the blame on the limitations of CA.

CA should not be assigned number, it should be for the player to jude themselves and should surely depend from game to game. Fluxuation of CA rarely happens in FM, whereas it is common occurance IRL. E.g. a youngster IRL may have a hypothetical CA, then have a 12 game run of being in blistering form, his CA would immediately increase dramatically in most peoples eyes. In FM terms his CA would probabaly remain the same.

There is an obvious need for PA so as to determine the level at which a player can play at their highest level. However, CA should be determinable on a match to match basis and should have adequate scope to increase dramatically in 4 months rather than 4 years.

Essentially i'm in agreement with you, but i'm taking it slightly further and questioning the need for CA at all.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">For the record, in several games many of the youngsters I have mentioned above have been loaned out to clubs where they get first team football eg. David Moreno, Rochela, Merhcna, Valle. However I have never, in any of my games, seen them come close to fulfilling their PA. Even when I signed them at the start and controlled them from the beginning. The fact is that for a 17 yr old starting with say 60 CA and 170 PA, its just impossible to gain 100 points in CA over the next 6 years or so (by which time his development would more or less come to a halt). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think inability to reach PA is more realisitc than we think, very few players ever reach the maximum potential we all thought they one day would, perhaps Rooney is an example whereas Ronaldo is the opposite.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nomis07:

I think we are going a bit astray here, i'm agreeing with you and i'm laying the blame on the limitations of CA.

CA should not be assigned number, it should be for the player to jude themselves and should surely depend from game to game. Fluxuation of CA rarely happens in FM, whereas it is common occurance IRL. E.g. a youngster IRL may have a hypothetical CA, then have a 12 game run of being in blistering form, his CA would immediately increase dramatically in most peoples eyes. In FM terms his CA would probabaly remain the same.

There is an obvious need for PA so as to determine the level at which a player can play at their highest level. However, CA should be determinable on a match to match basis and should have adequate scope to increase dramatically in 4 months rather than 4 years.

Essentially i'm in agreement with you, but i'm taking it slightly further and questioning the need for CA at all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think they should implement a "blooming" periode for youngsters, that is recognizable by the assistant manager, or on the coach report.

Let's say all players can have different blooming periodes, like an early bloomer(16-17 yo), medium bloomer(18-19 yo) or late bloomers(20-21 yo), and in that "blooming" periode they can get a dramatic increase to their CA if they get some first team matches, either in your own team, or are loaned out to a decent club where they get first team football.

I think what Nomis wants to say is very important. the most important thing in young players' development is playing 1st team football. if he plays some 10 matches in a row, IRE, he would increase his ability hugely, especially his mental stats. examples are Cesc, Bojan, Robinho and Diego (at Santos)...

also if player has the potential he should be able to improve more, even after the age of 24.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

also if player has the potential he should be able to improve more, even after the age of 24. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think this is a major issue and i've discussed it before on a previous thread. Players have the ability to improve no matter what their age is. IMO Teddy Sheringham improved when he went to Man Utd and similarly Peter Crouch has improved when he joined Liverpool. This has a lot to do with facilities, European football and the type of player you're playing with.

As I see it FM limits ability to progress as a player when a they reach a certain age and this doesn't happen IRL. Players peak at a certain age e.g. 28ish but, what if a defender playing for Bolton hits peak form at 28 and then moves to Arsenal when he turns 30, as far as I see it the game wouldn't have his CA change as much as I beleive it would IRL.

Some good points in the original post and on refection you may well have come across a genuine bone of contention. It is true that a very small % of young stars with high PAs start with a CA level that gives them any chance of reaching their PA.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FrazT:

Some good points in the original post and on refection you may well have come across a genuine bone of contention. It is true that a very small % of young stars with high PAs start with a CA level that gives them any chance of reaching their PA. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly, thats my whole point. Even players like Neymar who is only 15 at the start dont usually get anywhere close to reaching their PA, with the right training, match experience, and everything.

Of the -9 PAs, the best ones are honestly those that already start off as established first team players like Kalouda and Piatti.

If CA was done away with but PA kept, you could have the following method -

Players (including regens) would be given random attributes at the start, some higher than others. Nothing to do with CA, just random figures. So you could get top-class youngster regens like in real life (and as you do at the start of the game). And then the PA assigned to them would mean that their attributes would just go up from then on till they hit the limit.

A program could "read" the attributes' total score and assign a higher PA to players with a high score, and a lower PA for those with a low score.

The "Ambition" attribute is totally unecessary imo, because that should already be part of PA. Players show high potential because they show ambition amongst other things. Whereas what happens in FM at the moment, is that you can have a player with PA of 185, but with an ambition of 5, who will therefore never reach his PA, and that creates less and less quality players as the game progresses. The game determines there will be say 20 regens this season, who will have PA -10, but half of them'll never get there because of this.

In my game though Moreno and Haruna turn out pretty solid playing for Bolton first team in the Prem. Not fully reached their potential though even at 25 or so. I'm kind of in 2 minds about this. I am having trouble with regens not getting better though.

Very interesting thread. I have had some really fast increases in ca. One one game I got keeper Jourdren (21 yo) to Leeds and had him play first team football for 3 straight season, including consecutive promotions. He started at around 95-99 and early season 4 he is on ca 155. Sure, he might not make it all the way to his 177 pa, but I think that going from mediocre League One ability to above average Premier League ability in 3 years is fast enough development.

But you mentioned even lower starting ca, and there I guess you have a point. Where would a 60 ca player get his first team football exposure? He'd have to go play in the Uzbekistan second league or something.

Has anyone tried giving the ca 50-60 kids first team football and still got no top quality?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by skogmantore:

Has anyone tried giving the ca 50-60 kids first team football and still got no top quality? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I try and use one youth player in every match, i'm Bayern Munich so i'm happy enough that the 10 players around them are good enough to make up for their current lack of ability. Most of them have either became first team regulars within two seasons or moved on to a fellow Bundesliga team and so have obtained a relatively high standard.

MSCCG, makes a good point about about solid performances despite not reaching potential ability. Too much emphasis is placed on PA and I think we can suffer because of it, I have a Spanish striker with a PA of 194 and a CA of 178, he hasn't played this season because my 31 year old German striker with CA 145 and PA 157 is keepeing him out of the team.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Shamrandk:

I think they should implement a "blooming" periode for youngsters, that is recognizable by the assistant manager, or on the coach report.

Let's say all players can have different blooming periodes, like an early bloomer(16-17 yo), medium bloomer(18-19 yo) or late bloomers(20-21 yo), and in that "blooming" periode they can get a dramatic increase to their CA if they get some first team matches, either in your own team, or are loaned out to a decent club where they get first team football. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very good suggestion IMO.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by indie85:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Shamrandk:

I think they should implement a "blooming" periode for youngsters, that is recognizable by the assistant manager, or on the coach report.

Let's say all players can have different blooming periodes, like an early bloomer(16-17 yo), medium bloomer(18-19 yo) or late bloomers(20-21 yo), and in that "blooming" periode they can get a dramatic increase to their CA if they get some first team matches, either in your own team, or are loaned out to a decent club where they get first team football. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very good suggestion IMO. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

a player will 'bloom' anyway if you play them in your fuirst team or loan them out to a good loanee dont they?

I'm not sure about the blooming suggestion, it would suggest that us managers would have to try and second guess when we are going to get the best out of a player. The need for first team football or good training within this "blooming" stage would be taken out of our hands. What if I see a player who looks pretty good, he's 19 and has a PA of 180, but he's an early bloomer and as yet hasn't played a first team game? I will have lost the chance to maximise his ability as quickly as possible.