Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

FM10 Potential Ability Thread (v10.1.2) including shortlist **SPOILERS**

arsenal_2111

By arsenal_2111,
in Good Player & Team Guide

Recommended Posts

the--dud

the--dud

Posted
Posted

Don't want to moan, but only ONE single (Nordtveit) player with Scandinavian nationality plus one other player based in Scandinavia (Celso Borges) has -9... A bit surprising, but I suppose the rating of the leagues/country matters with these things.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 319
  • Created
  • Last Reply
SSJ3-BROLLY

SSJ3-BROLLY

Posted
Posted
Cheers mate. :)

Look up the meaning of the word "potential" and you'll understand! ;)

If you want to go down that root, there are better candidates to be included in that category than Wilshere & Walcott, Kakuta would be one of those (imo). SI did the right thing, Arsenal players have always been overrated. Out of topic : I saw someone complain about Iniesta & Xavi being better than Fabregas attribute-wise, i personally won't have fab ahead of those two just like in the Spanish team (not for now anyways).... i want to applaud SI for sorting it out yet again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
AcidBurn

AcidBurn

Posted
Posted

I agree with Hulk Wilshere deserves a -10 he should have had it on the last patch of FM09.

Plus everyone knows that Jordan Henderson should get a -9 he has made quite a few first team appearances for Sunderland has looked pretty impressive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
tomtuck01

tomtuck01

Posted
Posted
Plus everyone knows that Jordan Henderson should get a -9 he has made quite a few first team appearances for Sunderland has looked pretty impressive.

I agree about Jordan Henderson, and in some respects, thinks he deserves a better PA than Wilshere.

Henderson has played a few games now in the Premier League, and as you Sunderland fans will know a he has been starting games, not just making cameo sub appearances, and has shown that he can cope at this level.

*waits for uproar from people who dont's read second part*

Link to post
Share on other sites
SiN8

SiN8

Posted
Posted
Well that has absolutely no relevance.

What then would be your litmus test for giving a 17 year old -10 PA then? Or are you suggesting that no 17 year old should receive -10 PA?

I agree about Jordan Henderson, and in some respects, thinks he deserves a better PA than Wilshere.

Henderson has played a few games now in the Premier League, and as you Sunderland fans will know a he has been starting games, not just making cameo sub appearances, and has shown that he can cope at this level.

*waits for uproar from people who dont's read second part*

Jordan is also two years older than Wilshere. I'm pretty sure Wilshere will also have started games by FM2012.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Purefun

Purefun

Posted
Posted
Surely he'll have a fixed PA by now?

Having said that, in the FM10 thread over in OTF I did see someone complaining about the state of the Frech research.

He is correct.

I count 4. Use ctrl+f and look for Lyon.

My mistake, but still.

He has a PA of 186, if that makes you happy.

It does, thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
tomtuck01

tomtuck01

Posted
Posted
What then would be your litmus test for giving a 17 year old -10 PA then? Or are you suggesting that no 17 year old should receive -10 PA?

Players such as Wayne Rooney and Cesc Fabregas, who at 17 had a played a fair amount of first team games, are the type of players who should be getting -10's, not players who have impressed in preseason friendlies.

Jordan is also two years older than Wilshere. I'm pretty sure Wilshere will also have started games by FM2012.

He may have done, but there is no guarantee.

Link to post
Share on other sites
theincrediblehulk

theincrediblehulk

Posted
Posted
Well that has absolutely no relevance.

No they don't, and I never suggested that they did. ;)

Maybe Wilshere is over hyped in real life? In recent years just about every Arsenal youngster coming through is over hyped simply because they play for Arsenal - thankfully the Arsenal researcher of the game has chosen to show some objectiveness.

Well, that's funny that some of you lot think of Wilshere being when in reality I'm willing to bet that most haven't ever see him touch a football. Like I said, whenever he's been given a chance, he's stepped up. The funny thing is that if guys like Denilson, Ramsey etc were playing for a smaller club, people would have been drooling over them.

And yes, on the FM09 patch, some Arsenal players were a little over-rated but it was nothing that bad. The problem for me is that SI has been making them worse every new patch/game from then on and that's the stupid part. I don't have too many problems with the first-team players this year except Fabregas and Arshavin who looks exactly the same as last year to me (surely he should be better considering his impact at the club since his arrival)! The U18's/Reserves evaluation is what irritates me.

Anyway, I don't think I'll ever be to get you to see past your bias and the same goes for me! ;)

If you want to go down that root, there are better candidates to be included in that category than Wilshere & Walcott, Kakuta would be one of those (imo). SI did the right thing, Arsenal players have always been overrated. Out of topic : I saw someone complain about Iniesta & Xavi being better than Fabregas attribute-wise, i personally won't have fab ahead of those two just like in the Spanish team (not for now anyways).... i want to applaud SI for sorting it out yet again.

The Xavi/Iniesta/Cesc debate - I actually agree with you there and I too would play Xavi/Iniesta as starters. Xavi is in a class of his own so let's leave him out of it. As far as Cesc & Iniesta go, its not because Iniesta is a better player than Cesc that I would choose Andres. It's because Cesc is too similar to Xavi while Iniesta gives them something different when playing with Xavi and ofcourse he too is world-class. But as Cesc has shown recently, he's more than capable of playing with/instead of Xavi.

As for the other bit about Kakuta being a better candidate..... :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
tomtuck01

tomtuck01

Posted
Posted
Well, that's funny that some of you lot think of Wilshere being when in reality I'm willing to bet that most haven't ever see him touch a football. Like I said, whenever he's been given a chance, he's stepped up. The funny thing is that if guys like Denilson, Ramsey etc were playing for a smaller club, people would have been drooling over them.

[snip]

Anyway, I don't think I'll ever be to get you to see past your bias and the same goes for me! ;)

I not biased against Wilshere or anyone else. Ask a few people around here and they will probably say that I am one of the most unbiased football supporters.

Infact I think he (Wilshere) is an excellent prospect - be bloody stupid not to. I was merely questioning the merits of him being given a -10 as apoosed to a -9 when he hasn't done an awful lot to warrant it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
theincrediblehulk

theincrediblehulk

Posted
Posted
I not biased against Wilshere or anyone else. Ask a few people around here and they will probably say that I am one of the most unbiased football supporters.

Infact I think he (Wilshere) is an excellent prospect - be bloody stupid not to. I was merely questioning the merits of him being given a -10 as apoosed to a -9 when he hasn't done an awful lot to warrant it.

Ah, damn, sorry it came across in the wrong way. Wasn't accusing you of bias, I was kidding around there. Apologies for that. I've read your posts plenty of times to make a good assessment of you in that regard. :)

Regards Wilshere - well you sort of answered your own question I guess. The point is simple - as far as I'm concerned, SI donot base their evaluations atleast as far as youth players are concerned on achievement. But of the other hand, I can see why they wouldn't. It'll be impossible to evaluate a youngster on achievements because not many of them would have achieved a lot at the age of 16/17! You have to go with what they've done for the team they play in (even if it's the reserves or U18's) and how they did in the few opportunities they got to prove themselves.

Giving a player a -10PA is not saying that the player will definitely be one of the best players in the world. It's simply acknowledging the fact that based on their current rate of progress, they have every chance of being exactly that. Think about it - there are not a lot of 17/18 year olds who become as good as Cesc & Rooney at that age. If we were to put that as a bar for giving a youngsters a -10PA, you'll end up with a game with just one or two -10PA players, if that. That doesn't really bode well for the game as far as I'm concerned. I would absolutely hate to play a game where there are not atleast 7-10 youngsters who can potentially become the best players in the world at their peak. Because then, when the Ronaldo's and the Fabregas's have retired, you'll be left with only regens who can be as good as the retired ones. The real players might still be good, but hardly any would be extra special. That right there would cause a lot of people to delete the save.

Hence, the reason for me saying that Wilshere deserves a -10PA. Which is why I've got no problems with guys like Balotelli, Otamendi etc given that rating even if I've never heard of some of them.

I hope that rant makes sense?

Link to post
Share on other sites
tomtuck01

tomtuck01

Posted
Posted

theincrediblehulk

It does make sense and I do see your point of view - I just think there needs to be a balance.

In the past plenty of players have been over done attributes/potential wise in FM and in real life they have not turned into anything - that is researchers over-hyping a young player on very little evidence. At the age of 17 players who are very talented can still fall by the way side, so atleast giving players at that age a -9 they have the potential to be great, but it is not a near certainty, like if you give them a -10.

[/rambling]

Link to post
Share on other sites
theincrediblehulk

theincrediblehulk

Posted
Posted
as a novice, what is the difference between -10 and -9?

thanks

Bascially a player with a negative PA means that every time you start a game, he will randomly assigned a PA by the game engine between a certain band. Hence the -10, -9, -8 etc.

A -10 PA player will range from 170-200 every time you start a save and a -9 PA player will range from 150-180 every game. That's the pattern all the subsequent ones follow.

theincrediblehulk

It does make sense and I do see your point of view - I just think there needs to be a balance. In the past plenty of players have been over done in FM and not turned into anything - this is due to researchers over-hyping them on very little evidence.

I agree with finding a balance. But also, it doesn't really matter if a particular player lives up to the hype IRL. Because you're bascially playing the game for 1 year before the new one comes out and the player is unlikely to decline so badly that he'll go from a -10 to a -8 or something. It does happen, but not within a year I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SiN8

SiN8

Posted
Posted
Ah, damn, sorry it came across in the wrong way. Wasn't accusing you of bias, I was kidding around there. Apologies for that. I've read your posts plenty of times to make a good assessment of you in that regard. :)

Regards Wilshere - well you sort of answered your own question I guess. The point is simple - as far as I'm concerned, SI donot base their evaluations atleast as far as youth players are concerned on achievement. But of the other hand, I can see why they wouldn't. It'll be impossible to evaluate a youngster on achievements because not many of them would have achieved a lot at the age of 16/17! You have to go with what they've done for the team they play in (even if it's the reserves or U18's) and how they did in the few opportunities they got to prove themselves.

Giving a player a -10PA is not saying that the player will definitely be one of the best players in the world. It's simply acknowledging the fact that based on their current rate of progress, they have every chance of being exactly that. Think about it - there are not a lot of 17/18 year olds who become as good as Cesc & Rooney at that age. If we were to put that as a bar for giving a youngsters a -10PA, you'll end up with a game with just one or two -10PA players, if that. That doesn't really bode well for the game as far as I'm concerned. I would absolutely hate to play a game where there are not atleast 7-10 youngsters who can potentially become the best players in the world at their peak. Because then, when the Ronaldo's and the Fabregas's have retired, you'll be left with only regens who can be as good as the retired ones. The real players might still be good, but hardly any would be extra special. That right there would cause a lot of people to delete the save.

Hence, the reason for me saying that Wilshere deserves a -10PA. Which is why I've got no problems with guys like Balotelli, Otamendi etc given that rating even if I've never heard of some of them.

I hope that rant makes sense?

I completely agree here. In FM09, there are about 15 newgens created every year with 180+ PA. Unfortunately, the research data tends to be very conservative regarding youth and gives out very few high PAs. In a couple of years of the game, you'll see there's a gap in talent between the newgens and the real life youth. There's a noticeable lack of world class players who are born around 1991/1992.

Link to post
Share on other sites
arsenal_2111

arsenal_2111

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Why does these things always descend into pages and pages of discussion about the Arsenal youngsters? There's a thread about Arsenal in the Data forum you know guys?

It's the thread to discuss PA's in FM10 - it's expected that there will be some talk about the data and that's almost inevitable imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
arsenal_2111

arsenal_2111

Posted
  • Author
Posted
How could I.

Lots of talent :cool:.

Do you know the PAs of Anderson, Tosic and Evans.

Cheers.

EDIT: Oh and Paul Pogba if he's on.

Anderson - 175

Tosic - 170

Evans - 174

Pogba - -8

Could you please tell me the pa of Aaron Woodley (Oxford United) if hes on the game? :)

Woodley - -4

Good to see at least 2 Villa players on that list :)

Wheres Marc Albrighton/Ashley Young on there aswell :-(

Albrighton - -8

Young - 175

What happened to bojan?

Bojan - 170 PA

Any idea of what Gourcuff's PA is? He looks great, I just wanna get an idea of how much he'll improve. Thanks in advance.

Gourcuff - 187

Were is Pato????????

Pato - 187

Arsenal, can you get the PA's of the following for me?

David Wotherspoon - Hibs

Kurtis Byrne - Hibs

Gary Glen - Hearts

Steven Thicot - Hibs

Darren McCormack - Hibs

Ross Forbes - Motherwell

Cheers :-D

Wotherspoon - -7

McCormack - 128

Thicot - 130

Byrne - -7

Glen - -8

Forbes - 135

Think that's all of them now?

Link to post
Share on other sites
killface

killface

Posted
Posted

I never said Wilshere didn't deserve to be a -10, but someone said what people had to do to be -10's. Last year most of them were completely justified because they had all had a lot of appearances for big clubs at that point. I just meant Wilshere's first team appearance didn't mean a whole lot. His friendly and reserve appearances warrant a high PA though. It seems that they're shaving back the amount of -10's this year though. Wasn't there about 10 last year? I think England probably does deserve a -10. Wilshere is probably the most deserving too. By the way, anyone know what Jay Spearing is? I figured he would be at least a -9. According to coach reports, he's only a decent Championship player.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Lelouch Lamperouge

Lelouch Lamperouge

Posted
Posted
Any chance of letting me know the PA of Rene Adler and Manuel Neuer?

Adler and Neuer are both 185. On a sidenote, these are all listed on the XLS file linked to by arsenal_2111.

I completely agree here. In FM09, there are about 15 newgens created every year with 180+ PA. Unfortunately, the research data tends to be very conservative regarding youth and gives out very few high PAs. In a couple of years of the game, you'll see there's a gap in talent between the newgens and the real life youth. There's a noticeable lack of world class players who are born around 1991/1992.

Hear, hear! Definitely rings true for me too. It really is quite frustrating trying to find good players in FM10; whereas it was difficult in FM09, it's getting impossible to find truly good prospects in FM10. For an example, take a look at the player linked to Man Utd today by the Guardian and other noted papers, Steven Defour. In FM10, he's rated quite abysmally, and Ferguson wouldn't even take a second look at him in-game. Espanyol's Juan Forlin, who's already made his debut for Argentina and scored for Espanyol against Real Madrid, is quite underrated as well. What really takes the cake though is Arsenal's youth team coaches telling you there isn't a single youth team prospect in the team - but I wonder which team just won the FA Youth Cup, trouncing Liverpool 4-1 in the process? That just goes to show you how unrealistic and non-visionary (compared to previous game ratings) these ratings have become.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...