Youth Intake ineffective

[enigmatic]

9 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

But that's because SOME players start with a high enough CA (and adequate PA), so AI staff are able to identify them as good enough to sign and play.

When I way "unscrewable", I mean that it doesn't take any effort, besides signing them, to turn a 17yo prospect into a regular starter for an EPL side. However, FM struggles a bit more, IMO, when there is a player with good potential but with low starting CA or with a weird attributes distribution

But here's the thing: the quality of the players in leagues isn't going down over time as regens take over (if anything, usually the criticism is the other way). So clearly the AI is developing enough players. The way the game actually balances out the limitations in AI development (and perhaps also intentionally supports human player youth development) is to generate slightly higher average PAs in newgens than in the starting database, but again, this is the complete opposite of the original poster's claims it doesn't generate enough high PA players.

And frankly, there'd be something very wrong with the model if it didn't sometimes fail to do anything with decent PA players that had a low starting CA.

 

20 minutes ago, RBKalle said:

Sure, future Ranheims must get their players from somewhere, but I bet that "somewhere" is partly youth intake (clearly inferior to top division sides) or random, often relatively expensive, signings from same division or from obscure clubs abroad.

But the Ranheims typically don't get worse or go bankrupt further into saves, like they would if they were relying solely on weaker intakes from their division or expensive foreigners. As I said in the previous post, simple logic suggests they are on average more reliant on top division castoffs than RL, because there are usually very few players generated in un-simulated lower leagues.

[WillHoward42]

This is in response to earlier in the post of this. 

But if you were to look at any team right now (and lets take a 'big' team) as an example as it is being rationalized that due to big money and the best facilities that you should get the best youth prospects on intake.

Pick a team, Chelsea? Man City? Liverpool?

How many of the first 11 or even first 18 players are from their own 'youth intake' they all get purchased from other youth squads and brought in.

Man City have Phil Foden... but who else?

Liverpool have Trent Arnold... but who else?

Chelsea have... well we know the issues with this.

But this is over what 5-10 years?

So even to expect one player a year from your own intake to develop into a top player for your team is probably unrealistic.

I am an arsenal fan and see players get chances and come in and try to become a first team player... all we have is Iwobi and Bellerin. Bellerin came from Barcelona. The same when Fabregas came through, he wasn't a result of original Arsenal youth teams.

The point is fairly simple... big teams who have the money and the big youth set ups, dont just suddenly start finding local players who will become world beaters. They still have to scout them and bring them in, they just come at a younger level than they used to. Majority of your big teams will still be made up of big money transfers and younger players brought from other academy's.

[Just-Wool]

1 hour ago, WillHoward42 said:

This is in response to earlier in the post of this. 

But if you were to look at any team right now (and lets take a 'big' team) as an example as it is being rationalized that due to big money and the best facilities that you should get the best youth prospects on intake.

Pick a team, Chelsea? Man City? Liverpool?

How many of the first 11 or even first 18 players are from their own 'youth intake' they all get purchased from other youth squads and brought in.

Man City have Phil Foden... but who else?

Liverpool have Trent Arnold... but who else?

Chelsea have... well we know the issues with this.

But this is over what 5-10 years?

So even to expect one player a year from your own intake to develop into a top player for your team is probably unrealistic.

I am an arsenal fan and see players get chances and come in and try to become a first team player... all we have is Iwobi and Bellerin. Bellerin came from Barcelona. The same when Fabregas came through, he wasn't a result of original Arsenal youth teams.

The point is fairly simple... big teams who have the money and the big youth set ups, dont just suddenly start finding local players who will become world beaters. They still have to scout them and bring them in, they just come at a younger level than they used to. Majority of your big teams will still be made up of big money transfers and younger players brought from other academy's.

Yup. I feel people look at Manchester United's class of 92, or Liverpool with Owen, Carra and Gerrard and use that as the benchmark rather than the exception.

[Snorks]

1 hour ago, monkeywool said:

Yup. I feel people look at Manchester United's class of 92, or Liverpool with Owen, Carra and Gerrard and use that as the benchmark rather than the exception.

True that - at that time, the investment in youth wasn;lt as widespread so I think there tended to be a focus on the 'big' academies like Utd and Liverpool as well.

Utd's academy is still one of the strongest - against Spurs at Wembley there were five players used that came 'through the academy'.

 

[djnition]

to be honest i think its brilliant how many high quality regens you can get my man utd saves churn out good regens then its a case of having good scouts to find you high quality foreign regens to mix in but if you give them minimal game time 1st season in 1st team and gradually raise stats will increase alot faster i always get my regens to a championship level and if they still cannot claim a 1st team place they go out on loan until they are good enough for my 1st team