Attributes: Traffic Light System

[Nick Toye]

I am working on an effective way to view my players attributes, and see how well they are doing in reflection to the standard I believe they should be at.

http://i700.photobucket.com/albums/w...e/Picture1.png

As you can see I have the Required Attributes for both Senior and Youth of a League One club. It is very static at the moment, meaning that all my Key Attributes are at 12, whereas in reality I may want a better Positioning then Command of Area, but its just a proof of concept at the moment.

Now I have all the ratings for Key and Regular attributes, and a total at the end. The closer my player is to reaching that total the better. If he exceeds it, then great.

Traffic Light System:

Red: Not good enough
Amber: Good enough
Green: Exceeds expectations

I also have thrown in some youth attribute requirements and have based them on the fact they are 4 or 5 years away from regular senior football, and are likely to improve on their stats by 1 point per year/season.

Any opinions are most appreciated, especially as I am still new at this, and I am learning new stuff all the time. So if I am wide of the mark with ratings, I will happily be corrected.

[Nick Toye]

Nobody got an opinion?

[BuryBlade]

Its a nice idea but I think too complicated to implement in the game tbh. Everybody has their own standards for the players they have/want in their team and so a set points tally wouldnt work, more the user would need to choose. However I like your creative thinking because I do think the attributes screen could be improved in future releases

[Nick Toye]

Its a nice idea but I think too complicated to implement in the game tbh. Everybody has their own standards for the players they have/want in their team and so a set points tally wouldnt work, more the user would need to choose. However I like your creative thinking because I do think the attributes screen could be improved in future releases

Oh I think I am misunderstood. Its not something that I wanted implemented in the game, but more of a "at home/notebook" kind of system. From a glance I can see what areas of their game need improving the most.

[BuryBlade]

Oh I think I am misunderstood. Its not something that I wanted implemented in the game, but more of a "at home/notebook" kind of system. From a glance I can see what areas of their game need improving the most.

Oh, sorry mate- my misunderstanding then. Surely it takes you a long time using Excel to imput all the stats you need??? In the game i just look at my players profile and see if they have the desired qualities needed. Say a midfielder needs creativity, passing, crossing etc and do it that way

However, saying that, if it works for you then yeah, who am I to say not to use it. If it helps you become a better manager on FM then I say good work

[Nick Toye]

Oh, sorry mate- my misunderstanding then. Surely it takes you a long time using Excel to imput all the stats you need??? In the game i just look at my players profile and see if they have the desired qualities needed. Say a midfielder needs creativity, passing, crossing etc and do it that way

However, saying that, if it works for you then yeah, who am I to say not to use it. If it helps you become a better manager on FM then I say good work

Well I like to glance at all my players attributes in one go - so I can see if they match my vision. I look at the red cells and if they are dramatically lower than what I require, then I look to offload that player, as they will not fit my plan.

I then look at the youth players and see how well they are doing, and for example I have this guy who has scored pretty highly overall on my required stats, but his Crossing for a fullback is pretty low, as low as 1 - well then he also is going to be looking at a new club pretty soon, because there is no way he is going to improve by say 10 points in the next two seasons, especially as I am Tranmere and don't have the facilities or coaching staff.

[BuryBlade]

Thats quite a good way of looking at things

[Nick Toye]

Thats quite a good way of looking at things

Also I can see at a glance how badly I need that new Right Back, at the moment I have a lot of red cells in the Right Backs, so even though 1 player's total attributes exceeds my requirements, 6 out of 17 attributes (key and general) are red.

Nil Satis Nisi Optimum. If only the real board matched that vision.
(Nothing But The Best is Good Enough).

[Giarc Ronyag]

I think it would be good for seeing how players do in matches definatly, seen as there is no real idea on what is classed as an average performace, most people seem to have different opinions... And i'm sure it's harder for the less experienced managers to see weather or not their players have performed.

[Nick Toye]

I think it would be good for seeing how players do in matches definatly, seen as there is no real idea on what is classed as an average performace, most people seem to have different opinions... And i'm sure it's harder for the less experienced managers to see weather or not their players have performed.

How do you mean? I'm not displaying match stats, its the players attributes that I am looking at.

[Nick Toye]

Update:

I am really getting into the nitty gritty of this, finding out the three levels of attributes, Key, Useful and Other. Obviously the Key attributes are essential, the Useful are err useful, and Other are just nice to have to round off the players ability.

Now my spreadsheet, written in Numbers (iWork), now works out the percentage that the player has for say Key Attributes. If I have a base of 12 attribute rating for Key, and my guy has 12 across the board in the Key Attributes, well then he gets a 100% score. I even have it so the colour of the cell shows up Green for more than 100%, Amber for 100% and Red for less than 100%.

Very useful for me when looking at a glance who I can play in my team. Also its useful for the Academy monitoring.

Unfortunately, as I have written it in Numbers, not sure it would be any use to you PC lovers, but I thought I would mention it anyway.

[iamjerome]

sounds pretty useful and clever, too lazy (ill knowledged) to set it up for open office though..

[AbsoluteGenius]

I just look at what position they play and ensure they have the necessary attributes. Two things I do ensure is good pace for strikers, defenders and wingers.

[CaptainPlanet]

I think it would be good for seeing how players do in matches definatly, seen as there is no real idea on what is classed as an average performace, most people seem to have different opinions... And i'm sure it's harder for the less experienced managers to see weather or not their players have performed.

Hmm, I'm tempted to do this. Find out my teams average passes/complete distance ran etc. might then see if it can be linked to the player attributes. Would be some interesting analysis.

[Nick Toye]

I just look at what position they play and ensure they have the necessary attributes. Two things I do ensure is good pace for strikers, defenders and wingers.

Do you not think more information is needed?

[AbsoluteGenius]

I try to keep the game as simple as possible. I just make sure they have high attributes for the skills they need for their positions. For example, I couldn't care less if a central defender has poor dribbling, crossing or finishing ability. Conversely, I'm not fussed if a striker has poor tackling, marking etc. In my training schedule I don't let my defenders do any attacking/shooting training and my strikers any defending training.

[Nick Toye]

I just look at what position they play and ensure they have the necessary attributes. Two things I do ensure is good pace for strikers, defenders and wingers.

I try to keep the game as simple as possible. I just make sure they have high attributes for the skills they need for their positions. For example, I couldn't care less if a central defender has poor dribbling, crossing or finishing ability. Conversely, I'm not fussed if a striker has poor tackling, marking etc. In my training schedule I don't let my defenders do any attacking/shooting training and my strikers any defending training.

Yeah but the game isn't simple, otherwise it wouldn't be a good game.

For example, take a look at this for an eye opener:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=61144

I truly believe the game is very close to reality, in terms of skills and attributes and how well they mix with the rest of the team. I'm fairly sure Jose Mourinho didn't just say, "yeah your good, your my left back" Had to be more to it.

Also its not surprise that since Mourinho left Chelsea - they have failed to win a trophy. Mourinho won 6, but none since he left.

[AbsoluteGenius]

Chelsea's problem is more to do with their match tactics than the quality of their players. Scolari is trying to play Brazilian football in an English league. Back to the game, I usually trust my scouts and coaches with regards to my players. If they say they are decent, good or quality then I usually believe them. Also, I tweak my tactics depending on my individual players e.g. pacey strikers are given chance to run with the ball, whereas those with good heading ability are told to do more forward runs.

[Nick Toye]

Ok, well I have a young lad who exceeds all my attributes at his level. Key, Useful and Other - he creams them. He's only 16 and for League One player he is looking like having some potential. Now my Assistant Manager reckons I should offload him as soon as possible.

So do I believe him? Or do I trust my own judgement. From what I have learnt on this site from the likes of Cleon and others like him - my judgement should really be taken over what as assistant says.

But its up to you how you play the game, I just don't think its anywhere near as simple as you make it out - that would be an insult to the programmers of the game.

[AbsoluteGenius]

It's not an insult, it's a compliment. If you can have success with a simple strategy and a complex one then that caters to all people. Maybe I'd do even better with more complex tactical instructions, transfer searches, who knows, but I'm happy that I can still keep it somewhat simple and get good results.

[Nick Toye]

With what team?

[AbsoluteGenius]

On this version I've only played with Barcelona (only started playing this version a couple of weeks ago). Last year I had success with League 2 and Blue Square North teams.

[Nick Toye]

On this version I've only played with Barcelona (only started playing this version a couple of weeks ago). Last year I had success with League 2 and Blue Square North teams.

Ok, and what success? Excuse me if I doubt you.

[CaptainPlanet]

You doubt that anyone can have success with smaller teams?


...

[Nick Toye]

You doubt that anyone can have success with smaller teams?


...

Nope, but I doubt anyone can have any real success with smaller teams and tell me that it is simple.

[CaptainPlanet]

I use a basic 4-4-2 and sign players that my scout or ass man recommends and I've easily managed to get a team from the Blue Square South to League Two.

There are people who have won the premiership and champions league starting with a non-playable club that gets promoted into the football league.

[RT--]

The spreadsheet looks good, Nick.

I set up a similar thing recently, when I started a Middeslbrough game. I grouped the attributes in to the training categories (strength, aerobic, attacking, tactical, etc.) so I could set up individual training regimes for certain players.

I find Genie Scout useful for this, because you can export all the attributes (just the non-hidden ones, in my case!) in to csv format, but I had to write a macro to re-arrange all the attributes.

It can make a career game that little bit more involved, and I quite enjoy doing geeky things like this anyway.

I do think you should be able to do a little bit more with the data, in the game, than you currently can. FM is effectively a big spreadsheet anyway, so it'd be nice to be able to play around with the stats a little bit more.

[Nick Toye]

The spreadsheet looks good, Nick.

I set up a similar thing recently, when I started a Middeslbrough game. I grouped the attributes in to the training categories (strength, aerobic, attacking, tactical, etc.) so I could set up individual training regimes for certain players.

I find Genie Scout useful for this, because you can export all the attributes (just the non-hidden ones, in my case!) in to csv format, but I had to write a macro to re-arrange all the attributes.

It can make a career game that little bit more involved, and I quite enjoy doing geeky things like this anyway.

I do think you should be able to do a little bit more with the data, in the game, than you currently can. FM is effectively a big spreadsheet anyway, so it'd be nice to be able to play around with the stats a little bit more.

Thanks mate, appreciate it.

I don't use Genie Scout because i'm on a Mac so not sure its available. I haven't grouped my attributes like you have because I look at it as Key attributes across the board, rather than all physical etc. But thats just personal taste.

I have also set it up to change the colour of the cell in comparison to a rating. Like this:

12 is my base for League One players.

12 = Amber
12+ = Green
8-12 = Light Red
Less than 8 = Major Red Alert colour

And then I drop down a point for the Useful ratings, and 1 more for Other ratings.

For my youth attributes, I start at 9 for Key base.

I have all kinds of comparisons like percentage ratings on the base, if they have less than 80% and have Major Red Alerts, then its maybe time to move this guy on.

[CaptainPlanet]

Attributes really aren't everything with regards to how useful a player is though.

Top scorer in my game at the moment has 5 finishing and 8 composure. You could be ignoring promising players or players who are playing well because they don't have attributes that you want.

[Nick Toye]

Attributes really aren't everything with regards to how useful a player is though.

Top scorer in my game at the moment has 5 finishing and 8 composure. You could be ignoring promising players or players who are playing well because they don't have attributes that you want.

Give me an example of how? I have three levels of attributes that are Key, Useful and Nice to have for that particular position.

I may have a young DMC who has Composure of 18, but if his Tackling and Positioning is less than 5 each, then he is not good enough.

[CaptainPlanet]

I gave an example regarding the top scorer in my league.

Attributes are a good indication of which players are likely to be good in different departments, but solely judging a players potential on them is only looking at one aspect.

Better attributes does not guarantee you a better player.

[Nick Toye]

Ok, so what does?

[ham_aka_stam]

Well there are hidden attributes such as consistency and big matches, a player may have 20 for finishing and composure but 1 for consistency and big matches.

This would mean he will only play to his potential in 1/20 matches (for example) and the rest of the time be far lower. AND in the big games he'll disappear. I always look for players who scouts say love big games or are very consistent. You can look at their previous performances for this aswell.

I like the idea of linking it to training, but I disagree with selling players who don't fit your template. Eg. Gary Neville and Rafael are completely different FBs, GN has high positioning, marking, tackling, determination and crossing, but poor pace, and dribbling. Your method would more than likely suggest that he needs getting rid of. Rafael has good pace, dribbling, crossing and flair, but lacks in positioning, marking and tackling. He too would be earmarked for transfer in your method.

However if both played to their strengths they can both perform fantastically well. Afterall it is very rare for a player to have no weak points in skills which are usually associated with being neccessary. Eg, rooney's finishing, henry's aerial ability, berbatov's workrate, yet they are all world class and merely need their instructions altered to suit them.

[Nick Toye]

Well there are hidden attributes such as consistency and big matches, a player may have 20 for finishing and composure but 1 for consistency and big matches.

This would mean he will only play to his potential in 1/20 matches (for example) and the rest of the time be far lower. AND in the big games he'll disappear. I always look for players who scouts say love big games or are very consistent. You can look at their previous performances for this aswell.

I like the idea of linking it to training, but I disagree with selling players who don't fit your template. Eg. Gary Neville and Rafael are completely different FBs, GN has high positioning, marking, tackling, determination and crossing, but poor pace, and dribbling. Your method would more than likely suggest that he needs getting rid of. Rafael has good pace, dribbling, crossing and flair, but lacks in positioning, marking and tackling. He too would be earmarked for transfer in your method.

However if both played to their strengths they can both perform fantastically well. Afterall it is very rare for a player to have no weak points in skills which are usually associated with being neccessary. Eg, rooney's finishing, henry's aerial ability, berbatov's workrate, yet they are all world class and merely need their instructions altered to suit them.

Hey first of all may I say its a tough world, and if you can't the mustard in the style I require than, tough!

Second of all, you have used Gary Neville as an example with pace, the man is in his mid 30s - so I would obviously take that into consideration. And if his pace was shockingly low than I would be looking to replace him - as will Sir Alex, I may add.

Thirdly, I am looking at picking the best players for my tactics. So if I am looking to defend deep and have good positioning I will not be picking defenders who have poor positioning.

And also finally, any decisions that I do make will also take into consideration, coach and scout reports.

[Nick Toye]

For those who are interested.

http://www.nicktoye.co.uk/fm09/lights.numbers.zip

[Danielos]

I think a traffic-light system for the attributes would make it much easier to see strengths/weaknesses in a player:

How about?

Dark Red (0-1)
Red (2-4)
Light Red (5-6)
Dark Orange (7-8)
Orange (9-10)
Light Orange (11-12)
Yellow (13-14)
Light Green (15-16)
Green (17-18)
Dark Green (19-20)

It´s intuitive and easier to see...