Player Development Requires a Strategy.

Someone raised the point in another thread that a lot of FM09 players seem to have difficulty developing youngsters into quality first team players. The training sticky explains how training works, and there is a player development thread by Catafan that explains the underlying mechanics that increase CA, but it is my opinion that the sheer number of youngsters at a club in combination to all these requirements and mechanics demands that the manager develops a strategy for dealing with players.

There is no tactical gameplay coded directly into the game for dealing with young players, but the number of young players and their deficiencies and strengths as well as all first team considerations means that the manager of a club has to come up with strategies for dealing with young players if he wants to get the best out of them. You don't have to play the youth strategy game, and there is no direct gameplay mechanics for youth strategies, but there are plenty of options when it comes to young players and if you can come up with good strategies for dealing with youngsters then you can produce a youth factory and you can stick to a basic system season after season that gets the very best out of all your youngsters.

I have been following a very simple strategy for dealing with youngsters for several seasons now. It is not a complex, mechanic cracking system that maximises every minor detail, it is a simple system for making decisions about players whenever they leave the youth team, and not only does it give every potential star a fair crack of the whip but it helps to improve those low potential players to a level where you can get a fair bit of money when it comes to selling them.

I find that simplifying things always make them easier to understand and deal with. When I have 10 players promoted from the youth academy at the start of the season I used to think "good greif, tedious" and would sack most of them just to make my life easier, although I knew it was a huge waste of money. Now though when I have ten players promoted from the youth academy I have a clear strategy for dealing with them that doesn't waste money. It might not be the perfection of micro management that is possible in the game, but it makes my life easier while making best use of my assets.

Simplifying the process makes it easier to achieve something more than you previously did without devoting the quantities of attention none of us really want to always devote. To simplify the process you need to understand what is going on, what is necessary and how you can make it easier for yourself.

The way I go about it is to find out first of all what young players need.

Young players need match experience and young players need mentoring.

Young players need time to develop their attributes

Young players need to have developed key attributes to a decent level before the age of 20

Then I figure out how they can get what is needed.

Loaning them out gives them match experience

Keeping them lets them be mentored and gives them match experience

Now obviously if you keep lots of players they will all get less match experience, and if they are poor players they wont get much match experience at all. You can loan them out to lesser teams and they will get plenty of match experience but no mentoring.

What is the difference between Match Experience and Mentoring?

Match Experience increases CA which increases Technical, Mental and Physical Attributes

Mentoring increases Determination, Aggression and hidden Mental attributes that make them perform better and increases the rate they gain CA

This may not seem simple, but if we can put all of this together we can make the basis of a strategy.

Young players need match experience and young players need mentoring.

Young players need time to develop their attributes

Young players need to have developed key attributes to a decent level before the age of 20

Loaning them out gives them match experience which increases CA which increases Technical, Mental and Physical Attributes

Keeping them lets them be mentored which increases Determination, Aggression and hidden Mental attributes that make them perform better and increases the rate they gain CA

Keeping poor players will not increase their CA by much as you do not play them, and this makes it harder for them to improve so that you play them

What all of this means is that you should keep the players you need to mentor, and keep the players that are good enough for you to play. Otherwise they should be loaned out. By simplifying your analysis of players into age groups you can produce a clear strategy for dealing with players.

Unless good enough to play for your team 10 starts a season, young players aged 17 should be loaned for one season

If good enough to play for your team 10 starts a season, young players aged 17 should be kept and mentored for one season

Players returning from loan aged 18 should be kept and mentored for one season

Players you kept and mentored and did not break into your team at the age of 18 should be loaned for one season

Players returning from loan aged 19 should be kept and mentored for one season

Players you kept and mentored and did not break into your first team at age 19 should be sold

Players returning from loan at age 20 should be kept one season, and then sold if they do not break into your first team

This seems complicated but I assure you if you can follow my rather rough presentation and understand the principle then it will make life a lot easier, while at the same producing players that either make it into your team or you can sell for top dollar.

Obviously some players will break this mould and either be obviously brilliant or completely inept. Then you keep them, play them and mentor them or sack them outright and waste no more time.

What this strategy does is cycle players between loans and mentorship between the ages of 17 and 20. As new 17 years olds get promoted, so the failing 20 years old get sold. Otherwise they cycle between loans and mentoring, so that others get an equal chance.

It turned out a lot more complicated than I planned, but it is a simple system of 3 year maximum improvement. It is an example of a strategy that you don't need to develop, but will help you get the most out of the game if you decide to develop it. I don't consider it the best strategy, but it works.

Out of interest, how have you derived your theory? I mean, how did you test it out?

sensational post, it must work as it makes complete sense, great work mate!!!!!

Out of interest, how have you derived your theory? I mean, how did you test it out?

I have been following a very simple strategy for dealing with youngsters for several seasons now.

There you go.

I find pretty much all of SFraser's theory comes from practice first.

Out of interest, how have you derived your theory? I mean, how did you test it out?

I derived my theory from knowing I was wasting a lot of talent, and looking for a general strategy that real world managers obviously have for dealing with youth. I tested this theory through playing three seasons of high detail leagues using this strategy. All of my players come back improved, but it is up to yearly wages versus transfer fee to determine whether it was worth the while for those that don't make first team level.

Very interested thred from SFraser, once again, anyway which i ve found very difficult for me is to tailor the best training regimes both for youth and older players, i ve been using Tug's training mostly and when i dare to build a training regime im ending very disapointed,

Lets take an example : Sakho

At begining of my Man U save, i decided to focus on Sakho's physical stats (especially pace and acceleration) Sakho is a brilliant defender for his age and brilliant key stats, aerobic area was set on very heavy as the overall regime as well (no complain from him), i was waiting for an improvement in those area while maintaining the rest of his stats, to my surprise the result over 6 months was very disapointed despite i offered him many first team appearances, dont misunderstand he devlopped well but not as i could expect and especially how i could expect, i feel very easy to devlopp a player but getting the shape you really want is a very hard challenge for me.

Not to mention that if you want the best of all your players not only youth, you ve nearly no choice that create a regime for each individual you ve in your team.

I derived my theory from knowing I was wasting a lot of talent, and looking for a general strategy that real world managers obviously have for dealing with youth. I tested this theory through playing three seasons of high detail leagues using this strategy. All of my players come back improved, but it is up to yearly wages versus transfer fee to determine whether it was worth the while for those that don't make first team level.

Fair enough; everything you say makes logical sense, and I'll definitely try implementing this.

it is really interesting post which makes me considering my current way to deal with youngsters ;p I keep my players till 18-19 in reserves/young teams with mentoring, unless they are too good (at least good enough) to play for lesser sides in the lower leaagues. Of course, if they are ready to play for first team - they do play for first team. Then, when they are 18 or 19, I have to decide, they can stay in reserve team to get mentored, they can play for the first team or can be loaned. It's individual for each player, depending on my squad needs and their skills, previous experience. I also use to play them League Cup, which is not very important for me. If a player becomes 20+ and still cant play for my first team, but I think he may do in the future he gets loaned to the lower league. If he is good enough, I just keep him in the first team. If they are useless I just sell them or give out for free. Currently, my first team has about 40 players, apart from 3-4 stars, all of them present similar level and my avarage age is 21. My first team includes 6 players Under 20, 1 of them plays in the first eleven, one of them is a reserve goalkeeper and 4 of them play in case of injury or when the opponent is really weak. The worse thing is that my U21 team includes about 30 players and half of them are U18, they're mostly bought for hilarious money from abroad, because they can be the future of my team and I want them to be home grown. I don't see the point of loaning them out when they are only 16-17 and clubs that could be interested in loaning them have really bad facilities and coaches. You may ask, why the hell did I buy them all - Because they will probably play in my first team in 2-3 seasons and I paid for them much less than I would pay after 2-3 seasons. I did pay 90k euro for 18 y.o. Sparta Praga striker, who is currently in the first team, I would probably have to pay about 1-1,5M euro for this player in the future. How would you solve/improve my style of managing team?;p

I agree with your method of training young talents. But to break it down a bit, i would say that it is as simple as "Dont buy players that you would not play". Everyone seems to want to get all the high PA players, but they get oversized squads and dont have enough playing time for each player, and then they never reach their potential.

I loan out very few players, basically because i loose control over their development when they are away. The only players i loan out is those with very big potential (potentially top players for their position in PL) but who is far away from reaching their potential. An example of such a player is Gai Assulin. The potential is obviously there, and my coach says he can be a leading player, then i loan him out for one season or two. If he doesnt improve by then, i will simply sell him.

Another example is Danny Rose (i play as spurs). He is talented and he can potentially become a good/leading PL player. But he doesnt have the top potential, and he have still got far to go to reach his potential, so i will sell him. You cant use your time to develop players with "medium" potential like Rose, you gotta get the players with extreme potential, and spend your time on them, and not the medium potential players.

How would you solve/improve my style of managing team?;p

This isn't a criticism, but your post shows that, in my opinion, you have a tendency to wait longer than necessary to develop players. I find this to be a common theme throughout the forum and it may simply be because of the variation of the age caps in youth sides throughout the leagues.

I always take the stance that once old enough for a professional contract and old enough to train under a senior schedule, it is time to start dealing with that players development directly.

Ryan Giggs started out young, as did Paolo Maldini. Had their coaches waited untill they were 19 or 20 then both players would have been several years behind their actual development, and several years would have been cut-off from their peak.

I would simply say start younger. You obviously have a plan for dealing with young players, so simply start implimenting that plan at a younger age.

I agree with your method of training young talents. But to break it down a bit, i would say that it is as simple as "Dont buy players that you would not play". Everyone seems to want to get all the high PA players, but they get oversized squads and dont have enough playing time for each player, and then they never reach their potential.

I loan out very few players, basically because i loose control over their development when they are away. The only players i loan out is those with very big potential (potentially top players for their position in PL) but who is far away from reaching their potential. An example of such a player is Gai Assulin. The potential is obviously there, and my coach says he can be a leading player, then i loan him out for one season or two. If he doesnt improve by then, i will simply sell him.

Another example is Danny Rose (i play as spurs). He is talented and he can potentially become a good/leading PL player. But he doesnt have the top potential, and he have still got far to go to reach his potential, so i will sell him. You cant use your time to develop players with "medium" potential like Rose, you gotta get the players with extreme potential, and spend your time on them, and not the medium potential players.

I totally understand where you are coming from. Given your strategy for dealing with youth my only statement would be that giving these youth players a bit more time develop on loan may bring financial rewards, or an apparently low potential player with low PA may surprise you with his Consistency, Determination and Aggression if mentored properly and given a fair chance.

As you say, PA alone does not determine the entire quality, or lack thereof, of a particular player. Many high quality players have exceptionally poor attitudes, and many low quality players make up for their deficiencies by their commitment. Sale value of a player is determined by reputation, iirc, so time and match practice is the essence of value for money as well as improvement. Sometimes attention to quality youth development is a strategy for financial stability and longterm survival as much as uncovering that rough diamond.

SFraser,

Are you sure that tutoring affects aggression? I have never seen this myself and I remember Lyssien wrote up a good test on this - aggression was not one of the influenced attributes he observed.

I have a question about giving youngsters match experience in the first team.

Where/why did you come up with 10 starts from? Is it a tested figure or just one you think seems about right and is a fair amount?

Does the youngster have to actually start the game to 'effectivly' gain the experience or will sub appearences also count towards their experience? I.e is their in effect a calculator that will log any first team minutes a youngster will play and every second he plays adds up and adds up no matter how small the increments are?

I'm extreamly worried about tutoring players due to all the horror stories i hear about players falling out...i think mentoring is important but i havent had time to test it throughly first to allay my fears and thus come up with a comprehensive list of dos and donts...

In your experience is this player falling out a very common thing with mentoring?

Very interesting thread, and I myself am also trying to get the best out of my youngsters, but to mixed results. Playing Arsenal for example, I've tried to give my younsters like Randall, Hoyte, Lansbury, Wilshere, Ramsey and Barazite as much playing time as possible in the first team, at the expense of results at times and of course the best tuitoring available at my disposal. However, what I notice is that while the youngsters have an initial stats bloom between ages 18-20, they tend to stagnate from then onwards, and that's despite me increasing their game time and the coaches saying that there is still potential to be reached.

Ultimately, I get players who are good, but not quite as good as I would have hoped given their early promise. Does training play a factor in this (I've tried a regime this time round which is very intensive) or perhaps earlier first team exposure has actually curbed their development? Or is it that the game time youngsters get on loan at 17 and earlier have long term repercussions on their future development? It's really disappointing seeing promising projects 'fail' upon hitting around the age of 21 especially after taking the effort to give them regular playing time upon them hitting age 19-20.

One of my pet projects, Gavin Hoyte for example, was at around 2-3 stars out of 5 in terms of CA/PA around age 19. I thus gave him regular playing time for the next 2 seasons in the first team. However, upon hitting age 22, his stats haven't increased dramatically over the 2 years and my coaches say that he is already playing at close to his full potential which has tapered of at 3 stars. The only problem I can imagine is that my training regime is wrong or that I have perhaps given him too much games too early?

SFraser,

Are you sure that tutoring affects aggression? I have never seen this myself and I remember Lyssien wrote up a good test on this - aggression was not one of the influenced attributes he observed.

You may be right on this point. I certainly have not studied tutoring to the same extent as Lyssien.

I have a question about giving youngsters match experience in the first team.

Where/why did you come up with 10 starts from? Is it a tested figure or just one you think seems about right and is a fair amount?

10 starts per season minimum was not an extensively tested figure but is a figure that through playing multiple seasons I personally have come to view as the minimum number required to ensure that loaning to an inferior club was not a better option.

10 starts per season seems high, but again I personally find that a player that only starts ten games per season is not developing quickly enough to start much more than 10 next season, and requires significant playing time next on loan to catch up with his development.

Remember that ultimately you only keep those players that actually break into your team as squad players minimum. 10 starts is a ballpark figure but I think you will find that irrespective of your clubs level and ability, anything less than ten starts will mean a player that requires extreme attention and well considered loaning to have a hope of breaking in. It is the lowest limit I would consider for keeping a player at my club rather than loaning, unless he is in desperate need of tutoring.

Does the youngster have to actually start the game to 'effectivly' gain the experience or will sub appearences also count towards their experience? I.e is their in effect a calculator that will log any first team minutes a youngster will play and every second he plays adds up and adds up no matter how small the increments are?

The answer to that question is that sub appearances count towards "Match Practice" but I do not know how it is calculated exactly. I would assume it is based on minutes rather than seconds and hours, assuming it based on time on the pitch, which seems likely.

A player recovering from injury that comes on as a sub will lose "Severely lacks match practice" and gain "Lacks match practice" etc. so clearly sub appearances count.

I'm extreamly worried about tutoring players due to all the horror stories i hear about players falling out...i think mentoring is important but i havent had time to test it throughly first to allay my fears and thus come up with a comprehensive list of dos and donts...

In your experience is this player falling out a very common thing with mentoring?

An understandable concern.

First of all if you are careful about mentoring players and choosing mentors that will improve personality but are not of a completely different personality you can minimise this issue. Lyssiens thread is of good use here.

Second point is that there is a relatively easy way to counter-act the damage of failure. Players do not dislike each other instantly if they have a conflict of personality. They will start off "upset" or "unhappy" and if the issue is not dealt with it can progress to an active dislike that is a real problem.

The best way to deal with the issue is to take their minds off the issue. It is that simple. You can pretend it did not happen, play both players in the next game, and praise or criticise their performances to make yourself the centre of attention. So long as you do not magnify the issue, and so long as you just carry on normally while at the same time making sure the players are focused on other issues, it will not become a problem.

Very rarely do players instantly hate each other. Your job is to make them forget about the issue as soon as possible.

Very interesting thread, and I myself am also trying to get the best out of my youngsters, but to mixed results. Playing Arsenal for example, I've tried to give my younsters like Randall, Hoyte, Lansbury, Wilshere, Ramsey and Barazite as much playing time as possible in the first team, at the expense of results at times and of course the best tuitoring available at my disposal. However, what I notice is that while the youngsters have an initial stats bloom between ages 18-20, they tend to stagnate from then onwards, and that's despite me increasing their game time and the coaches saying that there is still potential to be reached.

Coaches can be wrong in this area, but the likely and regular issue here is that the players in question are very close to their PA and that while they can improve some more, it is going to require first team games for the majority of the season in combination to regular high performances. Getting close to PA is relatively easy. Maximising PA is not only very difficult, but it does not last very long. If you have a brilliant season you can expect your best players to obtain their maximum PA perhaps twice during that season for a period of 2-3 months maximum. PA represents the absolute peak of a player, and can only be achieved through exceptional performances and consistent, regular football matches. You coaches are saying that your player can still hit his peak, but you should expect this extra improvement to be a "cherry ontop of the cake" so to speak.

Ultimately, I get players who are good, but not quite as good as I would have hoped given their early promise. Does training play a factor in this (I've tried a regime this time round which is very intensive) or perhaps earlier first team exposure has actually curbed their development? Or is it that the game time youngsters get on loan at 17 and earlier have long term repercussions on their future development? It's really disappointing seeing promising projects 'fail' upon hitting around the age of 21 especially after taking the effort to give them regular playing time upon them hitting age 19-20.

There is quite a lot to deal with in this quote so please bare with me.

There are a few attributes that have a profound impact on a players performances. Some of these make a player perform above or below his potential, and some directly affect his potental. It is possible to have high CA players play like Arjen Robben, while low CA players play like Roy Keane. It is also possible to have low CA players look like Wayne Rooney in attributes while high CA players look like Darren Fletcher. I will explain these points.

The first point is weak foot accuracy. Weak foot accuracy is like any other attribute in that it sucks up Ability points as it increases. The problem is that it sucks up a lot of Ability points. I think that maximum weak foot accuracy takes up 30 CA points. This is a lot and it takes 30 points away from the normal attributes. This can have a dramatic effect on the players profile. A player with maximum weak foot accuracy and high CA can look rather mediocre in his profile. A player with minimum weak foot accuracy and high CA looks like a superstar in his profile. Weak foot accuracy has a greater influence on actual performances the further forward you go, with Goalkeepers being crippled by Weak foot accuracy and Wingers or Strikers being extremely dangerous with high Weak Foot Accuracy. It is a quirk of the game, where high weak foot accuracy penalises everyone equally in terms of CA but only benefits offensive players in the match engine.

The second point is Determination, Aggression, Consistency and Big Game Performances. These are all specific attributes that do not take up any CA whatsoever but have a profound impact on how well a player performs. A player that is high in these attributes will be a tornado of a player that plays well in every match but plays even better in the big games. A player low in these attributes will rarely play to his maximum ability, and even then may decide to just mess around or switch off when things are tough. This is why tutoring is so important, because tutoring is the only certain and predictable way to make sure you incease these specific attributes. The only other method is to fine a player, but these are small increases that cannot be predicted. To get the most out of a player on the pitch you need to ensure he is high in all these attributes. To get the best players in the world he needs to be high in these attributes and have high PA put in all the right attributes.

The third point is that regular match practice is the only way to increase Consistency and increase CA. Young players usually have inferior physical attributes meaning you can fatigue them easier and get them injured easier. Regular match practice is not a bad thing, it is a good thing and a necessary thing, unless they get injured or they get fatigued which can stunt their growth and give them increased "injury proneness" attribute. You want to play young players as much as possible, but you don't want to tire them or injure them as this starts the recurring injury problem much earlier.

The fourth and final point is that training is vital, but you need to understand why. It is important to put all the CA increases from match practice into the right places through training, and not just put them wherever you feel like. Physical attributes in particular take up a lot of Ability points to increase, so having a player with 20 in all physical attributes will permenantly stunt this players growth in other areas. Likewise you don't want to train a young striker in defending as this does not help him become more efficient as a striker, and this means he gets lower ratings per match, and is less likely to be picked because of his inferiority, leading to further reductions in his CA gain. Ideally you want to train his physical attributes so that he becomes sufficient in coping with games, or improves some key physical attributes for his position. You then want to improve the attributes that are essential for his position, such as finishing, composure, anticipation and off-the-ball. You then want to fill in any weak areas that are beneficial to him, such as Passing and Creativity. What you don't want to do is overload attributes that do not need overloading, such as 20 strength, nor do you want to train him in the irrelevant, such as tackling.

One of my pet projects, Gavin Hoyte for example, was at around 2-3 stars out of 5 in terms of CA/PA around age 19. I thus gave him regular playing time for the next 2 seasons in the first team. However, upon hitting age 22, his stats haven't increased dramatically over the 2 years and my coaches say that he is already playing at close to his full potential which has tapered of at 3 stars. The only problem I can imagine is that my training regime is wrong or that I have perhaps given him too much games too early?

Not at all. What has happened is that you have increased his CA to near his PA and it is hard for him to complete that final stretch. This player is not at his maximum PA but is at his general, average maximum for the majority of his career. All that can be expected from him is a minor future increase in CA after a long period of quality performances, in combination to attribute redistribution through training and natural position attribute bias that does not alter CA, but slowly puts that CA into different attributes.

A rather long post, but I hope it has helped answer some of your questions.

@Sfraser

Thanks so much for the reply. It does really clear up alot of areas I was previously confused about. In the meantime, I did an overhaul of my training program to follow closely the one you posted in the 'A Closer Look at Training' thread and the results have been very satisfactory. Wilshere for example had a stats burst (age 20) and suddenly looks like a player who may actually fulfill his potential. Without doubt, it seems that training plays an important role in development too and game time alone does not seem to necessarily equate to development. Conversely, my players who went on loan had seen better results probably due to the loaning club's training regime being more optimal than mine.

I noticed though that you mentioned that game performance also has an impact on development. Would negative performances than be detrimental to a player's development? Or is the trade-off between game-time and a string of poor individual performances in the favour of providing game time.

Finally, in putting very heavy training programs, I notice that quite a few players become unhappy. Does this result in poorer development or is it a case of persevering with the training?

SFraser,

Are you sure that tutoring affects aggression? I have never seen this myself and I remember Lyssien wrote up a good test on this - aggression was not one of the influenced attributes he observed.

I was just think this myself ... too bad it isnt tutored. I have had so many great youngsters all with Aggression: 2 and Bravery: 5 or something ... terrible. How do I increase that ?

You may be right on this point. I certainly have not studied tutoring to the same extent as Lyssien.

10 starts per season minimum was not an extensively tested figure but is a figure that through playing multiple seasons I personally have come to view as the minimum number required to ensure that loaning to an inferior club was not a better option.

10 starts per season seems high, but again I personally find that a player that only starts ten games per season is not developing quickly enough to start much more than 10 next season, and requires significant playing time next on loan to catch up with his development.

Remember that ultimately you only keep those players that actually break into your team as squad players minimum. 10 starts is a ballpark figure but I think you will find that irrespective of your clubs level and ability, anything less than ten starts will mean a player that requires extreme attention and well considered loaning to have a hope of breaking in. It is the lowest limit I would consider for keeping a player at my club rather than loaning, unless he is in desperate need of tutoring.

The answer to that question is that sub appearances count towards "Match Practice" but I do not know how it is calculated exactly. I would assume it is based on minutes rather than seconds and hours, assuming it based on time on the pitch, which seems likely.

A player recovering from injury that comes on as a sub will lose "Severely lacks match practice" and gain "Lacks match practice" etc. so clearly sub appearances count.

An understandable concern.

First of all if you are careful about mentoring players and choosing mentors that will improve personality but are not of a completely different personality you can minimise this issue. Lyssiens thread is of good use here.

Second point is that there is a relatively easy way to counter-act the damage of failure. Players do not dislike each other instantly if they have a conflict of personality. They will start off "upset" or "unhappy" and if the issue is not dealt with it can progress to an active dislike that is a real problem.

The best way to deal with the issue is to take their minds off the issue. It is that simple. You can pretend it did not happen, play both players in the next game, and praise or criticise their performances to make yourself the centre of attention. So long as you do not magnify the issue, and so long as you just carry on normally while at the same time making sure the players are focused on other issues, it will not become a problem.

Very rarely do players instantly hate each other. Your job is to make them forget about the issue as soon as possible.

Coaches can be wrong in this area, but the likely and regular issue here is that the players in question are very close to their PA and that while they can improve some more, it is going to require first team games for the majority of the season in combination to regular high performances. Getting close to PA is relatively easy. Maximising PA is not only very difficult, but it does not last very long. If you have a brilliant season you can expect your best players to obtain their maximum PA perhaps twice during that season for a period of 2-3 months maximum. PA represents the absolute peak of a player, and can only be achieved through exceptional performances and consistent, regular football matches. You coaches are saying that your player can still hit his peak, but you should expect this extra improvement to be a "cherry ontop of the cake" so to speak.

There is quite a lot to deal with in this quote so please bare with me.

There are a few attributes that have a profound impact on a players performances. Some of these make a player perform above or below his potential, and some directly affect his potental. It is possible to have high CA players play like Arjen Robben, while low CA players play like Roy Keane. It is also possible to have low CA players look like Wayne Rooney in attributes while high CA players look like Darren Fletcher. I will explain these points.

The first point is weak foot accuracy. Weak foot accuracy is like any other attribute in that it sucks up Ability points as it increases. The problem is that it sucks up a lot of Ability points. I think that maximum weak foot accuracy takes up 30 CA points. This is a lot and it takes 30 points away from the normal attributes. This can have a dramatic effect on the players profile. A player with maximum weak foot accuracy and high CA can look rather mediocre in his profile. A player with minimum weak foot accuracy and high CA looks like a superstar in his profile. Weak foot accuracy has a greater influence on actual performances the further forward you go, with Goalkeepers being crippled by Weak foot accuracy and Wingers or Strikers being extremely dangerous with high Weak Foot Accuracy. It is a quirk of the game, where high weak foot accuracy penalises everyone equally in terms of CA but only benefits offensive players in the match engine.

The second point is Determination, Aggression, Consistency and Big Game Performances. These are all specific attributes that do not take up any CA whatsoever but have a profound impact on how well a player performs. A player that is high in these attributes will be a tornado of a player that plays well in every match but plays even better in the big games. A player low in these attributes will rarely play to his maximum ability, and even then may decide to just mess around or switch off when things are tough. This is why tutoring is so important, because tutoring is the only certain and predictable way to make sure you incease these specific attributes. The only other method is to fine a player, but these are small increases that cannot be predicted. To get the most out of a player on the pitch you need to ensure he is high in all these attributes. To get the best players in the world he needs to be high in these attributes and have high PA put in all the right attributes.

The third point is that regular match practice is the only way to increase Consistency and increase CA. Young players usually have inferior physical attributes meaning you can fatigue them easier and get them injured easier. Regular match practice is not a bad thing, it is a good thing and a necessary thing, unless they get injured or they get fatigued which can stunt their growth and give them increased "injury proneness" attribute. You want to play young players as much as possible, but you don't want to tire them or injure them as this starts the recurring injury problem much earlier.

The fourth and final point is that training is vital, but you need to understand why. It is important to put all the CA increases from match practice into the right places through training, and not just put them wherever you feel like. Physical attributes in particular take up a lot of Ability points to increase, so having a player with 20 in all physical attributes will permenantly stunt this players growth in other areas. Likewise you don't want to train a young striker in defending as this does not help him become more efficient as a striker, and this means he gets lower ratings per match, and is less likely to be picked because of his inferiority, leading to further reductions in his CA gain. Ideally you want to train his physical attributes so that he becomes sufficient in coping with games, or improves some key physical attributes for his position. You then want to improve the attributes that are essential for his position, such as finishing, composure, anticipation and off-the-ball. You then want to fill in any weak areas that are beneficial to him, such as Passing and Creativity. What you don't want to do is overload attributes that do not need overloading, such as 20 strength, nor do you want to train him in the irrelevant, such as tackling.

Not at all. What has happened is that you have increased his CA to near his PA and it is hard for him to complete that final stretch. This player is not at his maximum PA but is at his general, average maximum for the majority of his career. All that can be expected from him is a minor future increase in CA after a long period of quality performances, in combination to attribute redistribution through training and natural position attribute bias that does not alter CA, but slowly puts that CA into different attributes.

A rather long post, but I hope it has helped answer some of your questions.

Many thanks for your insights on the subject

Another good post, SFraser.

How long does tutoring generally take? We know that professionalism and a few other mental/personality attributes help a player move towards his PA more quickly, so would it be worth tutoring even those players who won't get much first team action *before* you send them off on loan? Or do you think they're better getting match experience first, and developing those personality attributes a bit later on?

I have a youth team player at the moment who's been tutored by a first-teamer, and has now got similarly high stats in aggression, bravery, determination, work rate and teamwork to his mentor. The only problem is, I can't remember which of those attributes were already high, and which seemed to have been boosted by the tutoring!

I noticed though that you mentioned that game performance also has an impact on development. Would negative performances than be detrimental to a player's development? Or is the trade-off between game-time and a string of poor individual performances in the favour of providing game time.

The performance impact on development is an unproven assumption on my part. Certainly the fastest rates of growth for a youngster appear to come when he is playing regularly AND playing well. Conversely attribute decline or CA drop in players near or at their PA appears to occur when a run of form hits a slump.

The further away a player is from his PA, the greater the impact of match experience and natural CA development, and the faster he will gain CA. As a player nears his PA it becomes harder to increase CA and a player will tend to level-off just outside of his PA limit. It is at this stage that previously minor factors play a large role in all subsequent gains and losses of CA.

That is my theory anyway.

Finally, in putting very heavy training programs, I notice that quite a few players become unhappy. Does this result in poorer development or is it a case of persevering with the training?

What I have noticed is that players will never have Personal Profile Concerns regarding training, but that at intensive levels of training a players Morale will slowly decrease in between matches. It makes sense then to view Training Unhappiness is a negative modifier on Morale that alone is no big deal, if you can keep increasing Morale through Man Management and good results.

If Morale decreases too much and other concerns start popping up like Unhappiness over Lack of First Team games etc. then it is wise to lower training so that the combination of negative Morale modifiers does not become a serious problem. Likewise if you have just taken over a new team, or a player has just joined your club from another country etc. then it is wise to start off with lower intensity schedules untill everyone is happy and settled.

How long does tutoring generally take?

It can take anywhere from a month to a year, but the average is about half a season. It must depend on how closely matched the players personalities are, as to how fast a mentored player learns all he can from his mentor.

We know that professionalism and a few other mental/personality attributes help a player move towards his PA more quickly, so would it be worth tutoring even those players who won't get much first team action *before* you send them off on loan? Or do you think they're better getting match experience first, and developing those personality attributes a bit later on?

That is a situation you will have to determine for each player on their own merit, within the context of your squad and game.

Ideally you want a player to have high hidden mental stats ASAP so he can gain CA at the maximum possible rate, but the other side of the coin is that unless he has decent stats he wont play much football while being mentored.

This is where it helps to have a range of feeder clubs, so you can loan a low CA, poor personality out to a club where he will gain sufficient games to improve his CA, then take him back and mentor him while giving him a few first team games, then loan him out to a much better feeder club for that final massive push towards quality development. This is why the younger you start the better, as you have more leeway for making errors of judgement and for getting enough games and mentoring periods under his belt before he gets too old.

Also if you start off at a young age with lots of youth players, you can switch them back and forth between loans and mentoring and have anywhere between 2/3 to 3/4 of your youngsters on loan at any one time, while still mentoring every single one them atleast once between the ages of 17 and 21. If you can get into the mindset of viewing youth development for players that have left the youth team as a 3 to 5 year process you will find yourself with a lot more freedom, and a lot easier to handle situation, but you need to start early and finish around the age of 20, rather than wait untill 19-20 to start.

For example: Imagine you have 20 players outside the youth-team but too underdeveloped for first team action at any one time, as new players get promoted so older ones get sold. If you give yourself two years to develop them all you have to mentor atleast 10 of them this season. If you give yourself 4 years to develop them all you have to mentor 5 of them this season. This gives you far more options, both for using the best mentors and for freeing up other mentors for any muck-ups or mistakes or conflicts of personality, but it means you have to deal with them as soon as they leave the youth team, even if its only a season on loan 3 divisions lower.

Sfraser - I think your advice make real sense. I have a problem in my crystal palace squad. I have victor moses, sean scannel and lee hills. They are all 21yrs old but they haven't yet broken into my squad and i've been tempted to sell them because of it. But i think i should keep them because they are versitile and they are good back-up players. But by the advice you give, it seems to tell me that they have reached the age that they should of broken into the team but they haven't so maybe i should sell them. Advice on this would really help. Thanks in advance.

I use a similar tactic in young development, sometimes i think it is like a "breeding" game

1. Assign suitable tutor in key positions. (Professional, Resolute players in GK, DR, DL, DMC, AMC, ST etc....)

2. Signed age, established international players as tutors in position your team lack of. (eg. famous but old international at the end of season for free)

3. Mentor promising youngster right from age 15, until they become Professional and Resolute. (In general this can be done in 2 years, so it will be age 17)

4. Buy in talent youngster at age 17, so you get time to mentor out them by age 19.

5. Loan out players while their mentoring is done, so they will be getting maximum from match experience by better rate. (good mental attributes)

6. Sooner or later you will notice you team will get a full "breed" of professional or resolute players. (A mentor B, C, D --> Then B, C, and D become new tutors etc...)

The trick in my strategy is trying to maximize the time of benefit in match experience CA gains, which means, you have to minimize the time you mentor out your youngster.

Therefore, i dont think a rotation of loan and mentor is necessary, instead, what you have to do is mentor out the youngster as quickily as possible, so he will enjoy the quicker rate as much as possible before mature.

Sfraser - When you say 'break into the first team' do you mean when they become first team regulars or backup players?

rickooko - when the players are being mentored and you send them out on loan, does the mentoring carry on or not?

You've missed out a few crucial things here, SFraser. For one, what about the quality of the football when they are loaned out? I did a big experiment on this a while back (on FM07).

It concluded that first team football at League 2 level or below wasn't worth it for players playing at a club with a very good training schedule and facilities of 17 or more (i.e. the CA development was affected, and key attributes were lower). Also, regular Championship football obviously does more good than League 1 football.

ron- deciding whether you want a player or not is down to you. If a player is a good back up at 20, personally I wouldn't sell him unless I got a good offer. At 20, you've still got 4 years left to develop a lot. However, if you would rather sell him and get more oppurtunities for youngsters, you're welcome.

Sfraser - When you say 'break into the first team' do you mean when they become first team regulars or backup players?

rickooko - when the players are being mentored and you send them out on loan, does the mentoring carry on or not?

Logically when you loan out a player the mentoring end as they are physically in 2 different team. But i remember there is glitch that if the tutor retired or released on free, the mentor will somehow still in effect.

Out of interest SFraser, what do you suggest for 16 year olds? I am going to hazzard a guess here and say that you just leave them in the youth team due to the lack of potential mentors if they are mostly involved with the 17 yo+.

LAM

Some good advice there but what about young goalkeepers? Do you follow the same principles as generally it's harder for goalkeepers to break in to the first team until they're a bit older? I don't know of many young goalkeepers that play regularly for the first team at a high level.

Jesus this is zomg complicated...

So basically I have heard here and there that 2footedness is overrated too highly in this game. So pretty much when I want to sign a player I should consider if he is two footed or not above his key attributes?

I usually dont look at stats or anything I usually sign players who are recommeneded in here or my scout says is better than my current player etc... Is this the best way to sign players young or old?

Cheers,

ReeNah

Footynut, I'd assume that Keepers need less experience when they start as they generally tend to have longer careers than other players, you can probably get a keeper to play 5-10 games if you use them in cup competitions but I arrange a couple of friendlies each season for the reserves as I think this counts towards match time for youngsters.

Jesus this is zomg complicated...

So basically I have heard here and there that 2footedness is overrated too highly in this game. So pretty much when I want to sign a player I should consider if he is two footed or not above his key attributes?

I usually dont look at stats or anything I usually sign players who are recommeneded in here or my scout says is better than my current player etc... Is this the best way to sign players young or old?

Cheers,

ReeNah

No, two footness is just another attribute. Basically, if he can use both feet, he can do everything with both feet, an admirable quality. If he can only use one, then he's at a disadvantage.

It's worth considering footedness, but again, it's personal opinion.

Having observed the training yields in a few games, I feel that before a player is 18, the most important thing is to give him good mentoring in order to raise his determination and mental stats to a suitable level. This is because at this point, the player is usually not ready stat-wise to be playing games at the top level anyway. But good mentoring provides a good foundation which is crucial in later years of development.

At 18, if the foundation is in place, getting a handful of games can yield exponentially positive stats gain results. This will then justify the player getting more games which will again yield more results. Going like this, a player can bloom between 18 to 20 years of age into a top player. And by ensuring he already has the necessary mental stats, it means he will also be a good tutor to future players.

Loaning out a player too early too much however means he may not get the mental shaping desired even though his stats may increase due to match experience. This does not mean he will not become a good player, but he will become what I view as a flawed player, unable to provide any value add beyond his own playing career. Therefore, I only reserve loans for players who have already been tutored successfully and need the games to help bump their stats up slightly or who have no tutoring options.

Agree with AoV, getting the determination, professionalism, ambition up is top priority in developing young players. Once their reputation goes up with first team games they may not be able to find suitable mentors. I didn't sign many promising young players simply because they cannot be mentored.

Its damn frustrating to train a young player with low prof. They whine about their training all the time and once they get injured they return everything back to the coaches.

i agree as well. I never loan out a player before he has been at least 1 full season on a senior schedule at my club.

I never loan out a 17 year old as a ground rule, no matter what. Maybe it´s just the principle of the thing here, but it works for me.

So basically I have heard here and there that 2footedness is overrated too highly in this game. So pretty much when I want to sign a player I should consider if he is two footed or not above his key attributes?

The big deal with Footedness is that Weak Foot 20 takes up something like 30 CA which is a huge quantity of lost attributes, but two footedness is a huge bonus for attacking players. Or perhaps more accurately being totally one footed is a huge hindrence to Wingers and Strikers. The CA drawback of having a good Weak Foot is the same for each player but the benefit from having a good Weak Foot is only noticeable in attacking players.

Two Footed Strikers with good key attributes around the box are particularly lethal. Two Footed Goalkeepers get no benefit and are therefore simply punished for having two good feet.

Out of interest SFraser, what do you suggest for 16 year olds? I am going to hazzard a guess here and say that you just leave them in the youth team due to the lack of potential mentors if they are mostly involved with the 17 yo+.

LAM

16 year olds and younger are a priority group for mentoring in my club. I try and get all First Team members mentoring a youth player at all times. There is not a lot you can do with them apart from mentor them and maybe give them a few First Team matches occasionally. I don't think it is worthwhile to promote them to the First Team properly and lose out on the Youth Games.

Having observed the training yields in a few games, I feel that before a player is 18, the most important thing is to give him good mentoring in order to raise his determination and mental stats to a suitable level. This is because at this point, the player is usually not ready stat-wise to be playing games at the top level anyway. But good mentoring provides a good foundation which is crucial in later years of development.

At 18, if the foundation is in place, getting a handful of games can yield exponentially positive stats gain results. This will then justify the player getting more games which will again yield more results. Going like this, a player can bloom between 18 to 20 years of age into a top player. And by ensuring he already has the necessary mental stats, it means he will also be a good tutor to future players.

Loaning out a player too early too much however means he may not get the mental shaping desired even though his stats may increase due to match experience. This does not mean he will not become a good player, but he will become what I view as a flawed player, unable to provide any value add beyond his own playing career. Therefore, I only reserve loans for players who have already been tutored successfully and need the games to help bump their stats up slightly or who have no tutoring options.

This is all very accurate but it only reinforces the point of starting as early as possible. I only tend to sign 17 or 18 year old players if they are really top top prospects and then it is basically a race against time to get the mentoring done without stunting their Attribute growth through lack of match experience. If I buy a 17 year old or 18 year old then he spends the first season at my club minimum in the First Team under my direct control and I try to play him as often as possible.

Let me show you a current project of mine:

I signed this guy four months ago at the start of the season and he was 18 then. I only spotted him near the end of the previous season banging in goals in Spain. I snapped him up for £6.5 million straight away as he is quite obviously already a peach of an 18 year old Forward and has the Potential to be as good as Ronaldo and is totally one footed. In terms of attributes this guy could possibly become the best Striker in the game, far better than Ronaldo in terms of attributes, but look at the state of his personality and Determination. I have been really struggling to develop this guy because he has poor attitude in a match but has the CA to only really develop further in a big league and I need to keep him at my club to mentor him.

Then add to that circumstance the fact that a few of my top Midfielders and First Choice Goalkeeper have been injured recently and I have had to battle and graft and fight for every single point in the last month or so and cannot just stick him in the team even against "lesser" clubs. My "big guns" return from injury and so he now gets a game a week and is on fire, but he is going to be 19 in 3 months and he isn't improving very fast in the key areas of personality and Determination.

Simply put, unless you are buying a guy as potentially good as this one for your own club it is just not worth the effort buying 18 year olds. If I got this guy even one year or two years ago there would be no question mark over him fulfilling his potential with a World Class personality and high Determination. Right now there are big question marks, not over his potential or the awsome initial shape of his attributes but whether or not he is going to have a World Class mindset to go with World Class attribute distribution and World Class PA.

Stick say another 2-3 points onto his Physical Attributes and say 4-5 onto his Mental and Technical and it is pretty obvious why this guy is worth the effort, but at this age it really is a race against time.

The big deal with Footedness is that Weak Foot 20 takes up something like 30 CA which is a huge quantity of lost attributes, but two footedness is a huge bonus for attacking players. Or perhaps more accurately being totally one footed is a huge hindrence to Wingers and Strikers. The CA drawback of having a good Weak Foot is the same for each player but the benefit from having a good Weak Foot is only noticeable in attacking players.

Two Footed Strikers with good key attributes around the box are particularly lethal. Two Footed Goalkeepers get no benefit and are therefore simply punished for having two good feet.

I believe SI commented that while this was true for FM08, it was modified for FM09 so that the CA points taken up by "two-footedness" is dependent on position. I'd point you in the direction of that thread but the issue pops up so often that they all blend together.

There's got to be a way to test this while playing around with the editor but after a day of staring at a computer screen my thoughts all seem to blend together too!

I believe SI commented that while this was true for FM08, it was modified for FM09 so that the CA points taken up by "two-footedness" is dependent on position. I'd point you in the direction of that thread but the issue pops up so often that they all blend together.

I though they were looking at that for FM10, but either way it does seem like a good solution to the problem, given the significant impact of footedness on attacking players in-game performances.

There's got to be a way to test this while playing around with the editor but after a day of staring at a computer screen my thoughts all seem to blend together too!

I know what you mean. There comes a point where knowing enough about attributes makes the game really enjoyable and knowing any more is just mind numbing tedium that can never be practically used.

I had some good results with my usual scheme: I tutor my youngsters right at the beginning of the season. Then, by the winter window transfer, their tutoring is over and I send them to my feeder teams for the remaining 6 months. The next season I either do the same thing or loan them for the whole year.

The second point is Determination, Aggression, Consistency and Big Game Performances. These are all specific attributes that do not take up any CA whatsoever but have a profound impact on how well a player performs. A player that is high in these attributes will be a tornado of a player that plays well in every match but plays even better in the big games. A player low in these attributes will rarely play to his maximum ability, and even then may decide to just mess around or switch off when things are tough. This is why tutoring is so important, because tutoring is the only certain and predictable way to make sure you incease these specific attributes. The only other method is to fine a player, but these are small increases that cannot be predicted. To get the most out of a player on the pitch you need to ensure he is high in all these attributes. To get the best players in the world he needs to be high in these attributes and have high PA put in all the right attributes.

The third point is that regular match practice is the only way to increase Consistency and increase CA. Young players usually have inferior physical attributes meaning you can fatigue them easier and get them injured easier. Regular match practice is not a bad thing, it is a good thing and a necessary thing, unless they get injured or they get fatigued which can stunt their growth and give them increased "injury proneness" attribute. You want to play young players as much as possible, but you don't want to tire them or injure them as this starts the recurring injury problem much earlier.

Quality post as always.

Now, we know tutoring affects Determination and other hidden mental stats. But how do you increase Aggression, Bravery, Influence, and Natural Fitness?

Its interesting you say that regular match practice would increase "Consistency". Does this also apply to "Important Matches"? My previous understanding is that neither can be increased at all?

Any response from anyone would be appreciated as I have tried searching everwhere but cannot find a definite answer.

Consistency can increase, but usually only by 3 or 4 at most, and Important Matches doesn't improve at all. Natural Fitness is also static, but Bravery, Aggression and Influence do go up, although not usually by much and I'm not sure what causes the increases either.

A really basic point to add for those managing clubs in England. The Reserve leagues suck, there aren't enough fixtures to keep an average reserve team of say 18-20 players match fit. If you leave it to your Assistant you really should be arranging friendlies throughout the season to make sure there are matches. It is not uncommon for there to be periods of 4-6 weeks with no fixtures and also good youngsters will sometimes go away on international duty and not play which exacerbates the problem.

in italy u dont have reserve leauges. just u20

Consistency can increase, but usually only by 3 or 4 at most, and Important Matches doesn't improve at all. Natural Fitness is also static, but Bravery, Aggression and Influence do go up, although not usually by much and I'm not sure what causes the increases either.

thanks

A really basic point to add for those managing clubs in England. The Reserve leagues suck, there aren't enough fixtures to keep an average reserve team of say 18-20 players match fit. If you leave it to your Assistant you really should be arranging friendlies throughout the season to make sure there are matches. It is not uncommon for there to be periods of 4-6 weeks with no fixtures and also good youngsters will sometimes go away on international duty and not play which exacerbates the problem.

what i do is set up friendlies

Probablyremotely linked to player development: The average PA of youngsters - does it depend on Youth facilities level only, or are club and/or league reputation taken into consideration? Does the latter change depending on co-efficents or is it fixed?

I'm fairly sure that league reputation is the main factor on how good your youth team regens are - check out all the quality South American regens that come from clubs with poor facilities and low reputations. League rep is fixed, but club rep can be raised through success and things like signing superstars and building a new stadium.

I'm fairly sure that league reputation is the main factor on how good your youth team regens are - check out all the quality South American regens that come from clubs with poor facilities and low reputations.

You might be on to something there. If that is really true that's something which will have to be looked into for FM11. Under the current system the Premier League would bring out the very best youngsters while in reality it's probably the worst of the Big 5 in Europe.

I'll probably have to bring the league rep to equal values although I would want to see France a bit off, or just swap Spain with England in the reputation and bring Germany on par.

All good stuff here.

One thing id like to know is when is it best to train players in new positions? When theyre young or over 21? Does is lower their stat development?

Can i ask what if most of the first team are between the ages of 20-24 are the players over 21 experienced enough to mentor?

I've taken my save from 2025, filtered out players younger than 22 and older than 32 and did made some correlations between the 5500 players left and the connection between certain attributes and the difference of PA minus CA.

The only two significant attributes came from Ambition and Professionalism. I have my doubts however about the former. As I was ranking CPU controlled players, I have a feeling Ambition does not directly influence CA gain and is misleading. I think the correlation (-.40) is because Ambition is the volatility of the player related to amount of games played. Players with low Ambition are less likely to be upset over lack of games while high Ambition will be transfer listed and sent to a league equal in reputation where they will play games and therefore more likely to reach PA.

Work Rate (-.13) and Determination (-.12) may seem to have an effect but I think it comes down to something different. Players with higher attributes are more likely to be good (reach their PA) as these attributes affect CA. Hence the slight negative correlation with PA-CA. You seem the same correlation with Concentration (-.18).

Injury proneness has a slight positive correlation (.16) which is lower than I'd imagine. It makes sense however, injured players play less but my assumption is that younger players do not get injured for as long or as much and therefore bounce back faster and play "enough" games.

Other attributes show basically 0 correlation between the failed growth rate. Also unfortunately I couldn't find any correlation with other attributes that links with hidden attributes.

All of this doesn't really matter, I took a look at all the outliers (20 Professionalism, huge PA-CA difference, etc) and by far the most important thing is to give your youth games.

So one tutors a player for 25% of his potential for CA growth (assuming it goes from basically 16-20) for a 4-5 boost in an attribute like Professionalism (the average player has 12.5 Professionalism). Is that better than loaning out the player to a league where he plays at his level for 40+ games?