Scouting youth in FM world unrealistic

IRL, when we see a young player like Wilshere do well at 16, we marvel that he might be a superstar one day. Thus we can predicting his PA based on his CA. Of course, it could, although unlikely, that Wilshere never improves beyond today. That's why professional scouts are paid to offer their insights. They might look at the players determination, work ethic and learning abilities. They'll also analysis Wilshere's current skill set and determine whether they can be applied to the next level. Some skills like mental abilities can be taught later on in life while athleticism is pretty much god-given.

However, in the FM world, we can modify a player's PA and their scout reports changes instantly. Their CA, attributes, form and hidden variables all stay the same. How would a scout in real life tell them apart? The scouting in the game is a bit unrealistic in that nature. Any computation should not use PA as a variable.

I propose that future FMs should have a hidden learning rate variable. The learning rate under ideal conditions will indicate how fast a player can achieve their PA. Scouts do not ever have access to player's PA, but could deduce their learning rate with variable success. This way, we can have the following scenarios which would create a more fluid FM world.

Case 1: --Low initial CA, low PA, low learning rate--

Rightfully ignored by scouts, no future in football

Case 2: --Low initial CA, low PA, high learning rate--

This is where some scouts will risk, but ultimately fail. Player is undeveloped but exhibits determination. Unfortunately, his low PA will never see him succeed.

Case 3: --Low initial CA, high PA, low learning rate--

This is a player that has loads of potential, but is undeveloped for his age and does not exhibit the ambition. In real life, he will probably be ignored by coaches/scouts and FM scouts will behave the same. If he decides to continue to play football, he will eventually become good, but wouldn't have attracted attention when he's young.

Case 4: --Low initial CA, high PA, high learning rate--

This player is undeveloped but shows determination. Scouts might make a risky recommendation and succeed. The player will blossom under the right coaching.

Case 5: --High initial CA, low PA, low learning rate--

Great young player, but doesn't show determination. Scouts might still recommend him, but the player won't develop much.

Case 6: --High initial CA, low PA, high learning rate--

This is ultimate trap for scouts. You have a great youth player with tons of determination. Will be highly recommended, but the player fails due to his low PA.

Case 7: --High initial CA, high PA, low learning rate--

Good young player with potential, but develops at a slower rate. Scouts could be turned off by the low learning rate.

Case 8: --High initial CA, high PA, high learning rate--

Perfect scenario. Scout recommended and player delivers.

There might be some hidden variable in FM09 that acts like the learning rate. If we could make scouting only use the learning rate instead of PA, then we can have a much more dynamic and interesting FM world.

Scouting on potential is what scouts also do in real football. You never know how a player improves in a year or two and how he builds up a personality. That's why youths are scouted for months, even years.

To make scouting more realistic it would be better to change the way how scout reports do work. In the first step you would get a report about physical and technical attributes. It needs a lot of time to find out the mentality of a player. Also the learning ratio is something that can only be seen when scouting a player over months at least.

I simply disagree with your cases, determination doesn't mean that the player can actually play football. If he's determined to improve, it doesn't mean he will.

Also, if a player has a high PA and is playing football, his CA improves. Anyone with potential improves quickly and wouldn't have a 'low learning rate' and i believe anyone with potential has a good CA otherwise how would SI know that he has potential??? You can't just look at a 16 year old who is rubbish and say, actually he may be ood one day. It doesn't happen

Scouts, in real life, will never know a player's potential. This is where I think FM is unrealistic since scout reports use the PA value in their calculations.

The game already incorporates a PPA: Perceived Potential Ability.

This is generally the figure scouts/staff use etc. It is often very different from the real PA figure. This means that staff are not always right in correctly predicting PA.

I simply disagree with your cases, determination doesn't mean that the player can actually play football. If he's determined to improve, it doesn't mean he will.

Also, if a player has a high PA and is playing football, his CA improves. Anyone with potential improves quickly and wouldn't have a 'low learning rate' and i believe anyone with potential has a good CA otherwise how would SI know that he has potential??? You can't just look at a 16 year old who is rubbish and say, actually he may be ood one day. It doesn't happen

Which case are you referring to? I think case 2 and case 6 are what you're talking about. The youth is showing great determination and willingness to learn, but won't ever be a good player.

I think there are many players who have great potential, but are lazy. They might take a bit longer to reach their potential or not reach it at all. This would fall into cases 3 and 7.

The game already incorporates a PPA: Perceived Potential Ability.

This is generally the figure scouts/staff use etc. It is often very different from the real PA figure. This means that staff are not always right in correctly predicting PA.

Isn't this PPA derived from the real PA value? In the end, the scout reports use PA as a variable, whether directly or indirectly. You can change a player's PA in an editor and his scout rating will instantly change. Seeing how his CA, attributes and form have not been changed, a scout in real life would have not perceived any PA change.

I agree that some players won't reach their potential, but laziness or lack of determination isn't the reason why. Dimitar Berbatov, for example, is lazy but is playing for Manchester United. And i think that skorp has explained the PA system well, if a coach has a good Judging Player Potential then his guess at a player's PA will be closer to his actual PA. This is like real life, the better the scout, the more accurate the results

Isn't this PPA derived from the real PA value? In the end, the scout reports use PA as a variable, whether directly or indirectly. You can change a player's PA in an editor and his scout rating will instantly change. Seeing how his CA, attributes and form have not been changed, a scout in real life would have not perceived any PA change.

I don't know how the figure is calculated, sorry. It's more a question for one of the devs.

Dimitar Berbatov, for example, is lazy but is playing for Manchester United.

OT, but this is an extremely stupid myth based on ignorance. Berbatov's playing style may look lax and lazy but the man himself has always been known as a good professional where training is concerned. Performances and playing style do not directly reflect a persons attitude to training and improving their game.

Scouts, in real life, will never know a player's potential. This is where I think FM is unrealistic since scout reports use the PA value in their calculations.

Of course they do, that's why they are scouts. Potential is nothing else than talent. You can see talent, when you know how to look and where to look. You can only guess if someone will make something out of his talent, but good scouts (not only in football) can guess the potential/talent of a youth.

Scouts, in real life, will never know a player's potential. This is where I think FM is unrealistic since scout reports use the PA value in their calculations.

But then how are you going to be able to tell if they will develop into good players? In my opinion there is nothing wrong with the current system.

Of course they do, that's why they are scouts. Potential is nothing else than talent. You can see talent, when you know how to look and where to look. You can only guess if someone will make something out of his talent, but good scouts (not only in football) can guess the potential/talent of a youth.

Potential is different from talent. Talent is what you see right now, which is CA. Take Wilshere for example, you see he is talented for a 16 year old. But how do you know he will improve upon his current talent. Moreover, will he be a superstar, a bench player or a reserve player? Quite frankly, no one really knows. Real scouts look into factors like determination, ability to learn and other intangibles to estimate potential. However, FM's potential is actually based off the PA value which is something impossible in the real world.

But then how are you going to be able to tell if they will develop into good players? In my opinion there is nothing wrong with the current system.

That's why scouting youth in real life is so unreliable. It's almost impossible to reliably predict how good a player will be. Most scouts can tell whether a player is good for his age (which is CA) and his work ethic (learning rate). I think FM scouts should be the same and not base it off the PA value.

Potential is different from talent. Talent is what you see right now, which is CA. Take Wilshere for example, you see he is talented for a 16 year old. But how do you know he will improve upon his current talent. Moreover, will he be a superstar, a bench player or a reserve player? Quite frankly, no one really knows. Real scouts look into factors like determination, ability to learn and other intangibles to estimate potential. However, FM's potential is actually based off the PA value which is something impossible in the real world.

That's why scouting youth in real life is so unreliable. It's almost impossible to reliably predict how good a player will be. Most scouts can tell whether a player is good for his age (which is CA) and his work ethic (learning rate). I think FM scouts should be the same and not base it off the PA value.

However, what we see as "potential" is what we see as "ability". Wilshire is "promising" because he's very, very good for his age. Wilshire would not be "promising" if his first touch was as good as a mass murderer.

What we see as potential is based mostly on what we see at the moment - in some ways, potential is a function of current ability.

That's why scouting youth in real life is so unreliable. It's almost impossible to reliably predict how good a player will be. Most scouts can tell whether a player is good for his age (which is CA) and his work ethic (learning rate). I think FM scouts should be the same and not base it off the PA value.

i completely disagree this time! If it was imposible to predict how good a player will be, you would never have any clubs picking up youngsters. Premier league clubs IRL depend on their youth and scouting system (notably Arsenal and Middlesbrough) so they must have a good idea of how good these players will be.

i completely disagree this time! If it was imposible to predict how good a player will be, you would never have any clubs picking up youngsters. Premier league clubs IRL depend on their youth and scouting system (notably Arsenal and Middlesbrough) so they must have a good idea of how good these players will be.

At least 90% of youth players at Premier League clubs end up playing lower level football. if scouts were able to predict potential as accurately as they do in FM it would be pretty much the other way around.

However, what we see as "potential" is what we see as "ability". Wilshire is "promising" because he's very, very good for his age. Wilshire would not be "promising" if his first touch was as good as a mass murderer.

What we see as potential is based mostly on what we see at the moment - in some ways, potential is a function of current ability.

True. That's why Potential Ability as it is in FM is a nonsensical concept. Everything a scout is able to see should be portrayed in attributes, visible or hidden. If an artificial cap such as PA is used then it should be directly tied to other attributes. Researchers are supposed to apply this logic when assigning PA values anyway, it's regens where all logic is lost at times. A player with appalling attributes, unprofessional, low determination, yet has a high PA. How does that make any sense whatsoever?

However, what we see as "potential" is what we see as "ability". Wilshire is "promising" because he's very, very good for his age. Wilshire would not be "promising" if his first touch was as good as a mass murderer.

What we see as potential is based mostly on what we see at the moment - in some ways, potential is a function of current ability.

Yes, we tend to exaggerate the "potential" of youth players who are talented for their age. That's why there are so many hyped youngsters who never make it to the next level. A really talented scout tries to piece together the intangibles so estimate the PA value. So they would look at Wilshere and see high CA level for his age. They would also look into his ability to learn and work ethic in order to predict a PA value or some star rating. In the FM world, scouts actually use the PA value as a variable for their star ratings. This is very unrealistic and makes FM scouts far too accurate.

Just think about it. Let's have player A and B be the same age, same skill set, same performance on pitch and same mental attributes. But player A has high PA and player B has low PA. FM scout would recommend player A, but a real life scout would treat them the same.

unfortunately, FM is a simulation and therefore needs numerical solutions to intangible qualities. There is also this 'PPA' so i think the system works well, no need to change it

Maybe some random factor should be introduced? There are some (rare) talents not spotted by any scouts in real football, making there way from a non league club into a pro when they are 20 or older. And there are some world class talents, which retire at the age of 24, because they did never show on the pitch what they really could.

Maybe some random factor should be introduced? There are some (rare) talents not spotted by any scouts in real football, making there way from a non league club into a pro when they are 20 or older. And there are some world class talents, which retire at the age of 24, because they did never show on the pitch what they really could.

That would be the players with low CA and high PA and SI said that they introduced different learning curves in FM09 so this should be possible now