No right footed regens playing on the left, and vice versa

[abcdf]

Hi guys,

I never understood that.

In real football wingers are extremely rare.

The most external players play on the opposite side of the pitch.

If they're right footed, they play on the left, if they're left footed they play on the right, cutting towards the center of the pitch

Why with regens that never happens?

[SideLineBiscuit]

it happens, but maybe not enough. But I wouldnt say its a rule that right wingers are left footed etc. I wold say that normally a right winger is right legged. Yes there are a lot of inside forwards nowadays but they still are rarer than your normal winger/wide midfielder

[abcdf]

Honestly I think inside forward are the majority.

Look at all the most important teams. (Real, Barca, City ecc.)

They have  Messi, Neymar, Ronaldo, Sterling ecc.

Maybe the only true winger is Bale, but he plays almost all the matches on the right, despite he's left footed. 

That's really unrealistic, but talking in general regen are WAY too different from the original DB players.

I.E fullbacks lacking of crossing and dribbling, and center backs with really poor aggression and technical abilities.

 

[SideLineBiscuit]

you are thinking of the top teams, in that respect I agree. but on lower levels I`d be suprised to find a lot of inside forwards. I agree that regens differ too much from the players you start with on the database.

But thats not only for insideforwards, mind you,as you said,  that is for most type of players.

[johnhughthom]

I would imagine most of those players played on the "correct" side for their footedness throughout their youth career, and only became inside forwards as they got older and more tactically aware. Even past that stage Bale and Ronaldo, at least, played on their strong foot side for a lot of their career.

In FM it is more than possible to take a 16 year old right footed player with 0 rating for the AML position, and have him as a natural at the position by the end of his teens. I think the issue is more with AI teams not retraining youth intake with the attributes for another position, when the player is likely to see the potential and act upon it.

[dafuge]

I had the opposite problem at one point in my save, I wanted a left footed left winger but my best option was this right footed inside forward.

My scouts spotted this player and this one as the best prospects to sign for the left wing but no sign of a decent left footed left winger.

[noikeee]

I raised the same issue in this forum a few months ago and nobody seemed to take it seriously. A couple days ago I finally ran a few statistical queries on the FM database and pretty much proved it.

I didn't search specifically for right-footed players on the left, and left-footed on the right, but for versatile players - players that can play in both wings, at least at an "unconvincing" or "competent" level. My reasoning is that if a player can play in both wings, he'll be an inside forward in one wing (and a winger on the other). If he isn't accomplished in that position, he can be quickly retrained to it, if he's already at a unconvincing/competent level. I also further limited the search to players with finishing > 10, which is what you want in an inside forward, and for a CA of 110 to 140 which was the level I was managing at (roughly). My findings was that there's an absolute crapload of players like this at the beginning of your career (real players), but regens like this are incredibly rare. In 2015 there's 941 players like this, but by 2035 there's just 21 of them in the game. So basically, roughly, you're 45 times less likely to find a regen inside forward than a similar real life player.

I find this to be a huge, game-breaking problem - and so is the lack of fullbacks with decent crossing and dribbling. You're also about 30 times less likely to find a regen fullback with crossing and dribbling both > 12.

I honestly have zero will to play FM17 if these problems persist as my long-term career immersion is totally ruined, but I have no way of knowing if the problem persists, unless I buy FM17 and run the same searches again.

[noikeee]

12 hours ago, SideLineBiscuit said:

you are thinking of the top teams, in that respect I agree. but on lower levels I`d be suprised to find a lot of inside forwards.

 

12 hours ago, johnhughthom said:

I would imagine most of those players played on the "correct" side for their footedness throughout their youth career, and only became inside forwards as they got older and more tactically aware. Even past that stage Bale and Ronaldo, at least, played on their strong foot side for a lot of their career.

This is also BS. These days it's only British and Scandinavian football that persists with this idea that all wingers should be trained as classic wingers. Look at the original FM database in the lower levels of nations like Portugal, Spain, France, Croatia, you'll find truckloads of inside forwards at every lower level.

Bale came up within the British football system so no surprise, and Ronaldo came up in the early 2000s when tactics were not the same as they are today.

[Jimbokav1971]

This topic surprised me so I clicked on it and then continued to read because I didn't agree with what was being said despite the fact that some of what was being said seemed well-balanced. 

I have a personal dislike for "wrong-footed" players, (whether I be right or wrong), so this interests me. Paulo Dybala is one of the best players in my game at the moment and he plays for Bayern. Rather than look at my own Partizan squad, (who wouldm't be a readonable comparison because of my views, I instead clicked on Bayern and filtered the view to see all players in all squads who could play MR, AMR, ML & AML. Then I listed the players by value. Then I ignored real players. 

1. 25yo (BRA) ML/AML valued at £39M. Right footed. 

2. 24yo (BRA) AML valued at £38M. Either footed. (left foot strong, right foot very strong).

3, 25yo (BRA) AMR valued at £27M. Either footed.(left foot strong, right foot very strong).

So I've looked at the 1st big club I could think of and the best 2 players that play in the positions you talk about actually fit the criteria you say doesn't exist. 

Let's have a look at Barca and see what they look like. 

1. 27yo (KOR) AMR valued at £29M. Either footed. (left foot strong, right foot very strong).

2. 22yo (ESP) ML/AML valued at £28.5M. Left footed.

3. 20yo (ARG) AML valued at £4.7M. Left footed. 

So although Bayern had 2 out of 3 players meeting your criteria, Barca didn't have any, although they also probably only had 2 player who play in that wide role in the whole squad. (The 3rd player was playing at Barca B). If we look at Barca, it seems sensible to move on to R.Madrid after that. 

1. 26yo (POR) MR/AMR valued at £69M. Right footed.

2. 23yo (ITA) AML valued at £27.5M. Left footed.

3. 18yo (ARG) ML/AML valued at £6M. Left footed. 

I know this is a really tiny snap-shot, but as the very 1st player i looked at met the very criteria that you said didn;t exist, I thought I would continue and see how I could disprove your suggestion. Although the next player also fit your criteria, none of the following 7 players did. What I did notice however was that each squad I looked at, (Bayern, Barca and R.Madrid), all had high PA players that fit your criteria languishing in their Reserves. Where as Bayern embraced them to good effect, Barca seemed to be not playing with any width, (full-backs I'm guessing), and R.Madrid still had the real player Odegaard doing exactly what you said the AI couldn;t replicate. 

Part f the reason for me posting, (other than my neanderthal dislike for wrong-footed players), is that when I took over at PArtizan at the beginning of this save, I didn;t have a single player who wasn't wrong-footed. They were all playing on the opposite side and I hated it.

What I would say, (and this continues on from the previous comment about Bale being a product of the Britsih system that doesn;t play this way), is that you have to remember that whatever system is played, doesn;t have to be the same system that we see in todays football. Who is to say that Barce play the same way they play now? I would suggest that in order to produce these "wrong-footed" players, you would have to have players playing that system. Maybe that's the issue, (or not as the case may be), rather than the players not being produced themselves. From what I'm seeing, it's not an issue anyway.  

Anyway, interesting discussion.

[Edit]

The ast thing I woujld say is that uou also have to look at what's effective and not effective within the game, )or more accurately I should say, what's more effective?)

I think that in my save I am more likely to see a wide player beat his man on the outside and cross low into the box for the opposing wde player to slot home at the far post than a wide player cut in and either olay a little ball through to the central striker, or score a goal himself. Low crosses are over-powered, so expect the AI to pick up on what works and what works less well. 

 

 

[noikeee]

4 hours ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

This topic surprised me so I clicked on it and then continued to read because I didn't agree with what was being said despite the fact that some of what was being said seemed well-balanced. 

I have a personal dislike for "wrong-footed" players, (whether I be right or wrong), so this interests me. Paulo Dybala is one of the best players in my game at the moment and he plays for Bayern. Rather than look at my own Partizan squad, (who wouldm't be a readonable comparison because of my views, I instead clicked on Bayern and filtered the view to see all players in all squads who could play MR, AMR, ML & AML. Then I listed the players by value. Then I ignored real players. 

1. 25yo (BRA) ML/AML valued at £39M. Right footed. 

2. 24yo (BRA) AML valued at £38M. Either footed. (left foot strong, right foot very strong).

3, 25yo (BRA) AMR valued at £27M. Either footed.(left foot strong, right foot very strong).

So I've looked at the 1st big club I could think of and the best 2 players that play in the positions you talk about actually fit the criteria you say doesn't exist. 

Let's have a look at Barca and see what they look like. 

1. 27yo (KOR) AMR valued at £29M. Either footed. (left foot strong, right foot very strong).

2. 22yo (ESP) ML/AML valued at £28.5M. Left footed.

3. 20yo (ARG) AML valued at £4.7M. Left footed. 

So although Bayern had 2 out of 3 players meeting your criteria, Barca didn't have any, although they also probably only had 2 player who play in that wide role in the whole squad. (The 3rd player was playing at Barca B). If we look at Barca, it seems sensible to move on to R.Madrid after that. 

1. 26yo (POR) MR/AMR valued at £69M. Right footed.

2. 23yo (ITA) AML valued at £27.5M. Left footed.

3. 18yo (ARG) ML/AML valued at £6M. Left footed. 

I know this is a really tiny snap-shot, but as the very 1st player i looked at met the very criteria that you said didn;t exist, I thought I would continue and see how I could disprove your suggestion. Although the next player also fit your criteria, none of the following 7 players did. What I did notice however was that each squad I looked at, (Bayern, Barca and R.Madrid), all had high PA players that fit your criteria languishing in their Reserves. Where as Bayern embraced them to good effect, Barca seemed to be not playing with any width, (full-backs I'm guessing), and R.Madrid still had the real player Odegaard doing exactly what you said the AI couldn;t replicate. 

Part f the reason for me posting, (other than my neanderthal dislike for wrong-footed players), is that when I took over at PArtizan at the beginning of this save, I didn;t have a single player who wasn't wrong-footed. They were all playing on the opposite side and I hated it.

What I would say, (and this continues on from the previous comment about Bale being a product of the Britsih system that doesn;t play this way), is that you have to remember that whatever system is played, doesn;t have to be the same system that we see in todays football. Who is to say that Barce play the same way they play now? I would suggest that in order to produce these "wrong-footed" players, you would have to have players playing that system. Maybe that's the issue, (or not as the case may be), rather than the players not being produced themselves. From what I'm seeing, it's not an issue anyway.  

Anyway, interesting discussion.

[Edit]

The ast thing I woujld say is that uou also have to look at what's effective and not effective within the game, )or more accurately I should say, what's more effective?)

I think that in my save I am more likely to see a wide player beat his man on the outside and cross low into the box for the opposing wde player to slot home at the far post than a wide player cut in and either olay a little ball through to the central striker, or score a goal himself. Low crosses are over-powered, so expect the AI to pick up on what works and what works less well. 

 

 

Admitedly I didn't search directly for wrong-footed players, neither for players at world class level, so my findings may be a bit different. But, now how many of those players are capable of playing in both wings in all 4 positions to some extent, even if just unconvincing? MR, ML, AML and AMR? I'd be shocked if you found 2 of them. At the beginning of the save there's absolute truckloads of them. Real life players that can only play AMR, or only play AML, are extremely rare and not so much regens who seem to lack versatility to the extreme by contrast. 

 

It's also got absolutely nothing to do with the AI figuring out that crosses are overpowered, versatile wingers just aren't generated by the game. And don't tell me that's the AI job that doesn't retrain players enough, because plenty of 15/16/17 year old players in the original database are very versatile. 

[noikeee]

Also, I'd like to slightly clarify my statement: it's not true it's 45 times harder to find an inside forward, it's 45 times harder to find a versatile winger that can finish at the level I was managing at (that was the search I made). A subtle difference, but a difference.

Later today I'll run new searches specifically for wrong-footed players, not restricted to any CA level. I suspect I'll find an imbalance just not at the same dramatic order of magnitude. Looking over at @Jimbokav1971's players from Barça/Real/Bayern, just from the information he gave us, I already find two things that are wrong, though:

- 2 are classic wingers, 7 inside forwards. I'd expect it to be rather the other way around.
- he didn't mention a single one that could play both AMR and AML. In the original database the vast majority of players can at least do a job in the other wing. Many, many are accomplished in both wings.

This also rings true with @dafuge's complaint that he found a couple of inside-forwards but they were incompetent at the other wing, so useless for him. Wingers aren't versatile enough.

My beef with versatile wingers comes from the fact that the only time in my 20-season-long career I could really overachieve, was when I came up with an extremely convoluted set of tactical settings that morphed from 4-1-4-1 to 4-3-3, either with wingers or inside forwards. See here. So I needed players that could do both things so I could easily switch them between wings and both roles. (this also anecdotally disproves the idea that in FM16 wingers are better than inside forwards so the AI adapts to it - in some situations they are, in others they aren't and inside forwards are better).

I eventually abandoned those tactics for two reasons:
a) it was too time-consuming to have to watch every match in that detail
b) this was around 2025-ish so right about the time regens were taking over. You can imagine my frustration with the game when at just about the same time I finally came up with a really good set of tactics, the exact type of players I needed to make it work, were starting to disappear from the game: versatile wingers and good attacking fullbacks at crossing/dribbling.

[Jimbokav1971]

6 hours ago, noikeee said:

Admitedly I didn't search directly for wrong-footed players, neither for players at world class level, so my findings may be a bit different. But, now how many of those players are capable of playing in both wings in all 4 positions to some extent, even if just unconvincing? MR, ML, AML and AMR? I'd be shocked if you found 2 of them. At the beginning of the save there's absolute truckloads of them. Real life players that can only play AMR, or only play AML, are extremely rare and not so much regens who seem to lack versatility to the extreme by contrast. 

 

It's also got absolutely nothing to do with the AI figuring out that crosses are overpowered, versatile wingers just aren't generated by the game. And don't tell me that's the AI job that doesn't retrain players enough, because plenty of 15/16/17 year old players in the original database are very versatile. 

I've no idea actually, because I wasn't looking for that, but will certainly look at the same 9 players and see what's what now. 

(Before I do so however, I must admit that when it comes to me personally training players, I don't really want them to be versatile, because every additional position they play takes away from their PA, (or adds on to their CA if you get my drift), so that a player with xx ability could only actually ever be as good as xx less the value of however many additional positions he plays), but that's going off on a tangent so I will stop. 

Bayern. Player 1. Can play in 3 positions as Accomplished or above.  ML & AML (Natural), AMC (Accomplished), and MC (Awkward). 

Bayern. Player 2. Can play in 2 positions as Accomplished or above. AML (Natural) & AMC (Accomplished).

Bayern. Player 3. Can play in 6 positions as Accomplished or above. AMR (Natural), MR, MC, AMC, ML & SC (Accomplished).

Barca. Player 1. Can play in 2 positions as Accomplished or above. AMR & SC (Natural) & MR (Competent).

Barca. Player 1. Can play in 3 positions as Accomplished or above. ML & AML (Natural) and MC (Accomplished).

Barca. Player 3. Can play in 2 positions as Accomplished or above. AML (Natural) & ML (Accomplished).

R.Madrid. Player 1. Can play in 3 positions as Accomplished or above. MR & AMR (Natural) & MC (Accomplished).

R.Madrid. Player 2. Can play in 1 position as Accomplished or above. AML (Natural) & ML (Unconvincing).

R.Madrid. Player 3. Can play in 4 positions as Accomplished or above. MC, ML & AML (Natural), & SC (Accomplished). 

Using this as a tiny, (ok, minuscule), test, there is only 1 of the 9 players that can play on both sides above accomplished. 

If your issue is that they are not coming through at youth level able to play on multiple positions on both sides, well rather than check the likes of Bayern, Barca & R.Madrid, I can just check my own intake at Partizan. 

2025/26. 0 players who can play on both flanks.
2024/25. 1 player who can play on both flanks. (25e) Dejan Bajic (Bal) can play MR & AMR (Natural) and ML & AML (Accomplished).
2023/24. 1 player who can play on both flanks. (24c) Sasa Stank (Pro) can play AML, AMR & AMC (Natural) and SC (Competent).
2022/23. 2 players who can play on both flanks. (23j) Janko (F.Pro) can play AML (Natural), AMR (Accomplished) and ML (Competent).
2022/23. 2 players who can play on both flanks. (23k) Sarapa (Cas) can play MR (Natural), ML (Accomplished) & AMR (Competent).
2021/22. 2 players who can play on both flanks. (22j) Dragisa (F.Det) can play AML, AMC & AMR (Natural) and MC (Competent).
2021/22. 2 players who can play on both flanks. (22p) Lazar Pejovic (Pro) can play ML, MR, AML, & AMR (Natural).
Going back further than this means that I have some players who are no longer in the game so I'm not able to check all 16 players of each intake. 
2020/21. 0 players out of 10 I could check could play on both flanks. 
2019/20. 2 players out of 15 I could check who can play on both flanks. (20e) Vasic (Bal) can play AML & AMR (Natural), ML (Accomplished) and MR (Awkward). 
2019/20.  2 players out of 15 I could check who can play on both flanks. (20m) Lekic (Bal) can play ML, MR & AMR (Natural) and AML (Unconvincing).
2018/19. 0 players who can play on both flanks. 
2017/18. 0 players out of 13 I could check could play on both flanks. 
2016/17. 1 player out of 11 I could check could play on both flanks. (17c) Jord Jovan (F.Pro) can play AMC & SC (Natural) and MC, AML & AMR (Accomplished). 

I've also had more players than I would like come through who had some ability on both full-back sides. I REALLY don't like this.  Have more full-backs come through with the ability to play on the opposite flank than wingers who are capable of playing on the opposite flank? Yes, absolutely. Is this right? No, it's probably not. 

If you look at the above and just assume for a minute that this is reflective of the game as a whole, (I have absolutely no idea if it is, but I would say that I have never purposefully played a winger on the wrong flank on even 1 single occasion in all the games I have managed in this save), then would you consider that reasonable?

 

[Jimbokav1971]

14 hours ago, noikeee said:

I find this to be a huge, game-breaking problem - and so is the lack of fullbacks with decent crossing and dribbling. You're also about 30 times less likely to find a regen fullback with crossing and dribbling both > 12.

Hi. I'm managing Partizan in FM16 and I'm playing a Youth only save so obviously the players I have available to me are pretty limited. I'm only in May 2026 so granted I haven't gone very far into the game, (at least as far as my games usually go).

While I haven't got a full back with crossing and dribbling > 12, I have the following.

A 21yo DL with crossing of 14 and dribbling of 12. 

A 19yo DR who only has crossing of 9 and dribbling of 8, but I'm pretty sure that both will finish up > 12, (although they are not there yet).

If I do a search in my game, (in May 2026 for dull-backs who have dribbling and crossing at least 13, then it comes up with 10 players. 

Starting at the oldest, Fernandes, Sandro, Kurzawa, Bernat, Bellarin, Gaya & Jorge are all 30+ and then we have 3 newgens who are aged 26, 24 and 24 respectively. Now I only have 33% World scouting knowledge, but seeing as my game is only 10 years old, I think that's a reasonable response when you consider that players are still developing. 

What do you think? Does that seem reasonable to you?

[BoxToBox]

35 minutes ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

(Before I do so however, I must admit that when it comes to me personally training players, I don't really want them to be versatile, because every additional position they play takes away from their PA, (or adds on to their CA if you get my drift), so that a player with xx ability could only actually ever be as good as xx less the value of however many additional positions he plays), but that's going off on a tangent so I will stop.

This isn't right. The only difference that multiple positions can make is the cost of CA for certain attributes. For example, players on the wings Pace and Acc costs more points than central players, so if you train a CAM to play on a wing you may see a dip in pace as the cost/points are re-balanced. To play on both wings, or all of AML/R and ML/R would have no impact on CA or PA.

[Jimbokav1971]

2 minutes ago, BoxToBox said:

This isn't right. The only difference that multiple positions can make is the cost of CA for certain attributes. For example, players on the wings Pace and Acc costs more points than central players, so if you train a CAM to play on a wing you may see a dip in pace as the cost/points are re-balanced. To play on both wings, or all of AML/R and ML/R would have no impact on CA or PA.

Are you sure about that? 

I thought that there was a CA hit for positions above a set competency level?

[BoxToBox]

1 minute ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

Are you sure about that? 

I thought that there was a CA hit for positions above a set competency level?

I am, yes.

[Jimbokav1971]

I have tried to search for something to back me up but I am getting absolutely diddly-squat and I have been of this opinion for so long that I would have to go back a loooooong time. 

I think I will have to assume that you are correct and I have just been living in ignorant bliss for about 4 years now. 

[Edit]

I remember there was a brilliant thread about attribute weighting and positions and that's, (I think), where I got it from. 

[noikeee]

54 minutes ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

I've no idea actually, because I wasn't looking for that, but will certainly look at the same 9 players and see what's what now. 

(Before I do so however, I must admit that when it comes to me personally training players, I don't really want them to be versatile, because every additional position they play takes away from their PA, (or adds on to their CA if you get my drift), so that a player with xx ability could only actually ever be as good as xx less the value of however many additional positions he plays), but that's going off on a tangent so I will stop. 

Bayern. Player 1. Can play in 3 positions as Accomplished or above.  ML & AML (Natural), AMC (Accomplished), and MC (Awkward). 

Bayern. Player 2. Can play in 2 positions as Accomplished or above. AML (Natural) & AMC (Accomplished).

Bayern. Player 3. Can play in 6 positions as Accomplished or above. AMR (Natural), MR, MC, AMC, ML & SC (Accomplished).

Barca. Player 1. Can play in 2 positions as Accomplished or above. AMR & SC (Natural) & MR (Competent).

Barca. Player 1. Can play in 3 positions as Accomplished or above. ML & AML (Natural) and MC (Accomplished).

Barca. Player 3. Can play in 2 positions as Accomplished or above. AML (Natural) & ML (Accomplished).

R.Madrid. Player 1. Can play in 3 positions as Accomplished or above. MR & AMR (Natural) & MC (Accomplished).

R.Madrid. Player 2. Can play in 1 position as Accomplished or above. AML (Natural) & ML (Unconvincing).

R.Madrid. Player 3. Can play in 4 positions as Accomplished or above. MC, ML & AML (Natural), & SC (Accomplished). 

Using this as a tiny, (ok, minuscule), test, there is only 1 of the 9 players that can play on both sides above accomplished. 

That checks out with what I expected. This is bad, and to me qualifies as a pretty clear bug. Check the original database and probably 7 or 8 of every 9 player at that level would be able to play both wings.

Also players that can play ML/AML/MC or MR/AMR/MC and no other positions are very weird as they're extremely rare at the beginning of the game, but weirdly common in regens.

54 minutes ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

2025/26. 0 players who can play on both flanks.
2024/25. 1 player who can play on both flanks. (25e) Dejan Bajic (Bal) can play MR & AMR (Natural) and ML & AML (Accomplished).
2023/24. 1 player who can play on both flanks. (24c) Sasa Stank (Pro) can play AML, AMR & AMC (Natural) and SC (Competent).
2022/23. 2 players who can play on both flanks. (23j) Janko (F.Pro) can play AML (Natural), AMR (Accomplished) and ML (Competent).
2022/23. 2 players who can play on both flanks. (23k) Sarapa (Cas) can play MR (Natural), ML (Accomplished) & AMR (Competent).
2021/22. 2 players who can play on both flanks. (22j) Dragisa (F.Det) can play AML, AMC & AMR (Natural) and MC (Competent).
2021/22. 2 players who can play on both flanks. (22p) Lazar Pejovic (Pro) can play ML, MR, AML, & AMR (Natural).
Going back further than this means that I have some players who are no longer in the game so I'm not able to check all 16 players of each intake. 
2020/21. 0 players out of 10 I could check could play on both flanks. 
2019/20. 2 players out of 15 I could check who can play on both flanks. (20e) Vasic (Bal) can play AML & AMR (Natural), ML (Accomplished) and MR (Awkward). 
2019/20.  2 players out of 15 I could check who can play on both flanks. (20m) Lekic (Bal) can play ML, MR & AMR (Natural) and AML (Unconvincing).
2018/19. 0 players who can play on both flanks. 
2017/18. 0 players out of 13 I could check could play on both flanks. 
2016/17. 1 player out of 11 I could check could play on both flanks. (17c) Jord Jovan (F.Pro) can play AMC & SC (Natural) and MC, AML & AMR (Accomplished). 

I've also had more players than I would like come through who had some ability on both full-back sides. I REALLY don't like this.  Have more full-backs come through with the ability to play on the opposite flank than wingers who are capable of playing on the opposite flank? Yes, absolutely. Is this right? No, it's probably not. 

If you look at the above and just assume for a minute that this is reflective of the game as a whole, (I have absolutely no idea if it is, but I would say that I have never purposefully played a winger on the wrong flank on even 1 single occasion in all the games I have managed in this save), then would you consider that reasonable?

Your Partizan youth looks surprisingly better than I expected. Still, I'd say players that can't play at all, not even at a awkward level, one of the ML/MR/AML/AMR positions, are rare in the original database, even at youth level. You've got a few of those that can play AML and AMR but not ML for example. This can happen in real players but not often. Although it can be common in striker/wingers (ie if you can play ST you're less likely to be set by the researchers to also play ML or MR).

34 minutes ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

Hi. I'm managing Partizan in FM16 and I'm playing a Youth only save so obviously the players I have available to me are pretty limited. I'm only in May 2026 so granted I haven't gone very far into the game, (at least as far as my games usually go).

While I haven't got a full back with crossing and dribbling > 12, I have the following.

A 21yo DL with crossing of 14 and dribbling of 12. 

A 19yo DR who only has crossing of 9 and dribbling of 8, but I'm pretty sure that both will finish up > 12, (although they are not there yet).

Cherish this left-back like a treasure, and not sell him by any money in the world. You've found a rare Pokemon. 

 

34 minutes ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

If I do a search in my game, (in May 2026 for dull-backs who have dribbling and crossing at least 13, then it comes up with 10 players. 

Starting at the oldest, Fernandes, Sandro, Kurzawa, Bernat, Bellarin, Gaya & Jorge are all 30+ and then we have 3 newgens who are aged 26, 24 and 24 respectively. Now I only have 33% World scouting knowledge, but seeing as my game is only 10 years old, I think that's a reasonable response when you consider that players are still developing. 

What do you think? Does that seem reasonable to you?

That looks very bad. I'd be willing to bet if you made a similar search at the beginning of the game (obviously impossible to make the same exact search because you won't have 33% scouting knowledge) you'd find at least 10 times more players.

My findings were based on crossing and dribbling both >=12, btw (not >12 as I incorrectly stated above). There's an absolute crapton of fullbacks like this at the very beginning, and I limited my search to 110-140 CA which are nowhere near world class level.

[Cougar2010]

1 hour ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

Are you sure about that? 

I thought that there was a CA hit for positions above a set competency level?

 

Box to Box is right.

Training positions alters the ratio for how important each attribute is to the player and therefore increases the cost of a higher number of attributes.

AML & AMR have the same attributes therefore a player can be trained on the opposite side without altering any ratios, same with ML/MR & DL/DR.

Adding say ML to an AML will result in a slight change but hardly noticeable.  Same with something like MC/AMC or DM/MC.

[footy1]

This is also a major problem for me. In my Atletico save, I'm in 2025. With 30% scouting knowledge, I searched for players who are inside forwards who are completely natural in the role, and were 25 and under, so only newgens came up.

There were 3 results. An 18 yo, 21 yo and a 22 yo all with very low potential ability.

If I changed the search to over 26 so non-newgens appeared, 121 results came up. Obviously this doesn't count the many that have retired already at this stage.

This is a major issue and shows the imbalance between real life and the game.

[noikeee]

So, I just made the searches I said I was gonna do. For footedness in the AML and AMR positions, and for crossing/dribbling on fullbacks. Not limited to any range of CA.

The method I'm using here is I'm comparing a 2015 database right after loading the game, to a database 20 years further in the future after holidaying it. I used FM Genie Scout to crunch the numbers (as it's much more reliable than in-game search which is limited to scouting knowledge). I also forced the 2035 numbers to not include any non-newgen, which slightly lowers the numbers but not much as by 2035 very few original players remain. There's just a total of 66 real life players remaining on the database (out of 48008), and very few of these are wingers of fullbacks so they hardly affect my statistics.

Here's my findings:

- The lack of inside forwards is indeed not as dramatic as the lack of versatile players in both wings. However, there are still problems. We've gone from 3523 inside forwards in the left in 2015 to 1094 in 2035. In the right, we've gone from 1165 to 260. So you're 3 times less likely to find a regen inside forward AML; and about 4.5 times less likely to find a regen inside forward AMR.

- Please notice these numbers DO NOT include players that are competent/unconvincing, as we've seen from my previous searches the lack of such players (which are handy as they can be much more quickly retrained than someone who can't play a position at all), is a much deeper problem that limits the availability of inside forwards further and dramatically so.

- An interesting twist is that, both in the real life database and in the regens database, inside forwards are much more common on the left than the right. So the OP's statement that there's far more inside forwards than wingers in real life is not true. There's slightly more of them than classic wingers on the left-wing, and a lot fewer of them vs classic wingers on the right-wing. FM actually gets this right, but exaggerates the proportion.

- As for fullbacks the problem is dramatic. There's also some slight differences from left-flank to right-flank as left-backs appear to be slightly more talented in crossing/dribbling. However, the lack of availability of them in 2035 compared to 2015 is striking. We've gone from 580 players with >= 12 at both stats to just 20 players. So you're 29 times less likely to find a leftback like this. If you raise your standards to players that can cross and dribble both >= 13, there's only 5 left-backs like this in the whole world, and just 2 right-backs. In the real database, by comparison? 195 left-backs and 152 right-backs. Summing both up, you're 49.5 times (let's round that up to 50) less likely to find a regen fullback that's really good at crossing and dribbling (>=13) than a real life player.

- As if it wasn't bad enough, the 2 right-backs with crossing and dribbling >= 13, both have absolutely rubbish CA, so are absolutely rubbish players. 

So, yes, problem. Big one. Please fix.

The Excel with all my searches is publically available here.

[BoxToBox]

16 minutes ago, noikeee said:

- An interesting twist is that, both in the real life database and in the regens database, inside forwards are much more common on the left than the right. So the OP's statement that there's far more inside forwards than wingers in real life is not true. There's slightly more of them than classic wingers on the left-wing, and a lot fewer of them vs classic wingers on the right-wing. FM actually gets this right, but exaggerates the proportion.

I would assume this is because lefties are less common in all walks of life.

[noikeee]

3 minutes ago, BoxToBox said:

I would assume this is because lefties are less common in all walks of life.

Well, yes, but it also seems that a bigger proportion of "righties" are being tried as left-wingers than "lefties" as right-wingers.

[BoxToBox]

9 minutes ago, noikeee said:

Well, yes, but it also seems that a bigger proportion of "righties" are being tried as left-wingers than "lefties" as right-wingers.

That's my point though, if right footed people outnumber left footed by roughly 9 to 1(IIRC), surely there's going to be a greater proportion of the right footers moving left side. Where there's for lack of a better term, a gap in the market.

[Cougar2010]

3 minutes ago, noikeee said:

Well, yes, but it also seems that a bigger proportion of "righties" are being tried as left-wingers than "lefties" as right-wingers.

Well that sounds fairly normal tbh.

In general terms if a team IRL has four wingers, say three are right footed & one left footed then its more likely that a right footer will get stuck on the left wing than a left footer on the right wing.

I'm left footed and its a prime reason looking back that I played DL & ML as opposed to centrally or on the right.  In fact for several years I was the only left footer in the squad.

 

I haven't read in detail the rest of the thread but just on the above post I have a couple of comments:

A) Regarding the newgens footedness on the other wing.

You have shown that the balance between natural footedness is different in newgens to current RL and I think this is something that SI should probably look at.  FM should allow for variation between different "eras" but if that is happening in every save then its an area that could be improved.  That said I think you should also be looking at the weaker footedness as well to get a better understanding of the relationship.

B) Fullback's crossing & dribbling

This doesn't surprise me at all.  There are five roles for fullback & 10 role/duty combinations.  Of the 10 crossing is a key attribute in just four and a secondary skill in three.  Dribbling is a key attribute in three, secondary in three.  Fullbacks seem to come in two moulds, they are either defender types that generally look like a DCs or winger types.  The DC types generally do well in most roles as they are strong in the other key attributes while users often seem to bypass the winger types due to them lacking more in other key attributes.  I've said for a few versions now though that true fullbacks are the hardest position to find in FM.

 

[JWVG]

The lack of fullbacks doesn't surprise me. What 15 year-old wants to be a fullback?

FB are either failed wingers or failed centerbacks. So retrain...

[Gramm0]

A point that hasn't been mentioned in the thread yet, is the fact that players in the original database tend to be able to play loads more positions than regens. Often this is a result of the researcher seeing them used in those positions. However, regens used in positions they aren't trained in, don't get this easy positional accomplishment.

So, original players probably have more positions than they actually are accomplished in, while regens probably can play in more positions than they have.

[noikeee]

1 hour ago, Gramm0 said:

A point that hasn't been mentioned in the thread yet, is the fact that players in the original database tend to be able to play loads more positions than regens. Often this is a result of the researcher seeing them used in those positions. However, regens used in positions they aren't trained in, don't get this easy positional accomplishment.

So, original players probably have more positions than they actually are accomplished in, while regens probably can play in more positions than they have.

Really?  It's the main thing I've been going on and on about so far. Regen wingers aren't versatile enough.

[BoxToBox]

6 minutes ago, noikeee said:

Really?  It's the main thing I've been going on and on about so far. Regen wingers aren't versatile enough.

I think he means more guys like Oscar De Marcos, Kevin Groskreuts, John O' Shea, Alessandro Florenzi, etc, that can play all kinds of positions and roles.

[Jimbokav1971]

On 06/09/2016 at 21:40, Gramm0 said:

A point that hasn't been mentioned in the thread yet,

Not only has it been mentioned, I've given examples of the versatility in players that I have seen come through my academy. I thought though that I haven't seen enough specific examples of both sided wingers/midfielders. 

[Edit]

I was only specifically looking at both-sided wingers, but I actually saw a fair amount of versatility within my newgens.(just not what noikeee was looking for).

[Gramm0]

On 7/9/2016 at 00:35, noikeee said:

Really?  It's the main thing I've been going on and on about so far. Regen wingers aren't versatile enough.

You have gone on about wingers yes, but my point is all positions generally have other positions they can play as well. You looked at players who could play at both AML/R. My point is that there is a lot more of these in the starting database, because players who are otherwise ST, AMC, DR, MC etc. also have these positions because the researcher once has seen them play there. So my point is that positions in the initial database are inflated, and thus not comparable to regens. Just check the top clubs at the start of the game. Pretty most of the offensive players can play M(L/C/R), AM(L/C/R), S. I agree that it should be a lot more common to be able to play AML/R at the same time, but the comparison to the initial database is probably flawed.

I will however say this. I checked some of the players at the top clubs when they only have regens, and the position diversity has gotten a lot better since some versions ago. I mostly play in the lower leagues, where position diversity is very limited, as it probably should be. I do miss the wingers who can play on both sides though.