[Discussion] - No numerical player attributes

[RandomGuy.]

Just an idea, and not sure exactly how workable it is or if its been suggested before. Instead of the numerical values for each attribute, as seen below...

... you simply have a screen listing the attributes, separated into sections (potentially simple terms eg offensive, defensive, physical). 

You hover over any particular attribute and you get a mini report on it.

Example: Hover over finishing, you get a view of their attacking stats over their career (xGvShots, Goals per shot, xG per goal, shot conversion %, type things, to give an insight into how "clinical" they are).

Hover over "Pace" you get a overview of their top speed in a match/average speed in training/score from pre-season testing.

Could potentially have a rank in these reports that compares them to the rest of the squad, and a small table showing the top 5 ranked players in your squad, to help put context into them.

Mental attributes are no longer visible, and are things you can only discover via coach or scout reports/how they react to meetings/how they react during matches.

For scouting, you only see the figures for matches they were involved in while you were scouting them (so hovering over pace for a scouted player would only show the highest figure in a match you scouted), and their mental attributes are harder to find out (could maybe change this for higher profile players?). Can even get a report that shows what "percentile" they would be in compared to the division you want them to join...

... to make a simple overview, but without assigning actual numbers. Either that or use the player radars that seem more popular just now.

Just an idea, and it's maybe not something that can be easily done. Feel like this would be more realistic than assigned numbers, and be closer to reality in terms of how players abilities are judged? 

Apologies if this has all been suggested before, tried to search but couldn't find anything the same recently.

Edited November 8, 2020 by RandomGuy.

[BruceyNTFC]

I think the biggest issue with doing it this way, for me, would come at the start of the game when there wouldn't be such stats available (unless of course they were arbitrarily made up.) How at that point would you be able to ascertain a starting XI without knowing something about the players? Yes, obviously in the game there would still be some way to report this, but it wouldn't be based on any sort of factual context.

[RandomGuy.]

1 hour ago, BruceyNTFC said:

I think the biggest issue with doing it this way, for me, would come at the start of the game when there wouldn't be such stats available (unless of course they were arbitrarily made up.) How at that point would you be able to ascertain a starting XI without knowing something about the players? Yes, obviously in the game there would still be some way to report this, but it wouldn't be based on any sort of factual context.

Yeah there's definitely holes in it, which is why I left it as a discussion topic, hoping it could be worked out by those smarter than me. Maybe the link up with SciSports could provide some initial data? 

Or you don't get anything until the players return to training and get tested throughout the first week. Say you get 2 weeks worth of training, and a bounce game, before you start pre-season for real. Could help build a picture.

If you move clubs halfway through a season you'd only keep that data if you kept some of the coaching staff that was previously there. Would maybe add a new dynamic to moving clubs?

[BruceyNTFC]

18 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Yeah there's definitely holes in it, which is why I left it as a discussion topic, hoping it could be worked out by those smarter than me. Maybe the link up with SciSports could provide some initial data? 

Or you don't get anything until the players return to training and get tested throughout the first week. Say you get 2 weeks worth of training, and a bounce game, before you start pre-season for real. Could help build a picture.

If you move clubs halfway through a season you'd only keep that data if you kept some of the coaching staff that was previously there. Would maybe add a new dynamic to moving clubs?

I think that's the inherent drawback in it. The SciSports link up wouldn't be able to provide you with data across the size of db FM has and there would be an inevitable misalignment between statistical analysis and what the researchers put in. At the level I research, there's no way I can use those sort of stats to make my analysis and therefore what I'm putting in wouldn't tally with what's coming out, solely because we'd be looking at the game in different ways. You'd literally need to reinvent the way players are assessed by the team to achieve that and have it ready to go prior to the game.

The second option about playing blind, I think the reason if I'm SI, I decide against it, is that it puts off people who don't want to go in for that deep dive into the game, who want to be able to pick up a team, see who their best players are and get cracking. I think outside of this forum, that's an awfully huge part of the playing public.

I'm not against removing the display of numerical attributes and replacing them with something else however and I think it's probably only a matter of time (see the way condition has been changed.) I think we're more likely to see textual reports on attribute sets however, which should hopefully mean that people link the attributes and preferred moves when looking at them, which would produce a more natural way to ascertain a player, combined with those sort of more in depth statistics coming into play as the game progresses for those users who wish to use them as a complimentary tool for building their assessment of their team.

[rsihn]

Interesting concept.  I've been theorizing that I'd like to see a system where even the best scout/staff can't pinpoint any stat down to one particular number and the range of their judgement gets smaller as the staff's JPA/JPP goes up.  Maybe a 20/20 JPA/JPP can get his stats down to a +-1 range while a 10/10 JPA/JPP might only be able to narrow the range down to +-3.  

 

 

[Luke Hume]

Reviewed so locked