A Question on CA and Attributes

[Batu7]

Is CA a better way to determine the quality of a player rather than his attributes? In a network game me and my friend have in FM 08, there is a winger with great attributes(Dribbling 19, Crossing 18, Pace 18, etc.) but with a CA of 160. I say he's better than another winger in my squad who has lower attributes compared to the first one(Dribbling 17, Crossing 17, Pace 17, etc.) but with a CA of 180. My friend says that because of his higher CA, the second player is better. Does anybody have information on this?

(We used an in game editor to check the CA's)

[SCIAG]

Attributes are better. CA on its own is useless.

However, CA places a sort of limit on the attributes. A player with a higher CA will be a better all round player, but lower CA players can be better at a specific role.

[Roo]

Well, the 180 CA player must be more rounded, i.e. have better stats in other areas, or maybe he's better with his weaker foot (being two-footed takes up CA as well). Who's best depends on what you use them for. The 180 CA will probably be better in a variety of roles, but if you play them towards those exact attributes mentioned the 160 CA player will be better, like the attributes state.

[phnompenhandy]

Attributes all the way. Many of the CA points might be wasted, or less useful. For example, your winger with higher CA might have points for positioning or tackling, whereas one with lesser CA might have more points concentrated in important attributes such as dribbling or stamina.

[Roo]

Attributes all the way. Many of the CA points might be wasted, or less useful. For example, your winger with higher CA might have points for positioning or tackling, whereas one with lesser CA might have more points concentrated in important attributes such as dribbling or stamina.

True, but for a winger, positioning and tackling wouldn't take up many CA points, whereas dribbling certainly would. It will all boil down to how you play him