timmy Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Which is a better remark decent or useful? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vic Taylor Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Which is a better remark decent or useful? Useful, I should think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyewackett Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Decent. I would think Useful in my mind, seems to imply they would come in handy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vic Taylor Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Talk about giving the guy different anwsers. To settle this, just look at how many stars a decent guy has, and how many a useful guy has. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pyewackett Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Talk about giving the guy different anwsers. To settle this, just look at how many stars a decent guy has, and how many a useful guy has. Haha, though that would happen. It tepends, though doesn't it. In this case I agree, just look at the stars, stats, and if appropriate if work permits are eligable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timmy Posted November 10, 2009 Author Share Posted November 10, 2009 Perhaps in future Fms should change the word decent and useful to helpful differentiate them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
senorcoo Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 I think SI should do away with the stars altogether and just go with comments - but just expand the comments from half a dozen to hundreds. That way, it would seem like an actual person talking to you about a player instead of a computer making an evaluation based on numbers. Maybe that would even lead to doing away with ratings altogether? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fall Ark Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 See, this is when newspeak would come in handy -- This person doubleplusgood! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
senorcoo Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 In the USA, regarding baseball, players are quantified with a 20-80 rating system on different skills (speed, defensive range etc), but that is a sport where there is more statistically quantifiable evidence for such things. Football does not provide the same environment for a rating system. I would love a plain language scouting system. How about it, SI? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kace500 Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 In future they could use the jamie redknapp rating system. top player top top player top top top player Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jirki88 Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 I would think that "decent" means that he'd be okay, could do a decent job on a pitch. "Useful" seem to indicate he could actually contribute something in particular to the squad, question is what? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.