The issues I had on FM22 are now appearing but 100x worse on FM23

[Dance Seth Dance]

So, in every FM no matter which tactics I use, I (and my friend) typically end up with the same things across all saves.

1. Always, ALWAYS underachieve on xg. Usually I will always be underscoring xg. This game it's no different, in fact it's way way worse

This was 1 game before the end of the season, and it ended up -15.05. Obviously you're thinking "well it must be your players tactics", yet this is commonplace across all my saves, all my teams, all my tactics. Just finished my second season and with a totally new team and tactic, I've once again underperformed xg and am second worse in the table in that regard. 

2. Always conceding more than the xg. It's insane how many times I've had to watch my team ship 3 goals to 1xg this game. There is nothing more infuriating than watching your team go through on goal just to smash it wide, then see them run down the other end and score a screamer from outside the box. This season, 52.9xga, actually conceded? 64. You think I have a bad goalkeeper/defence then? 

3. Goalkeepers are utterly pointless and do nothing. A good 4 star experienced keeper is no better than a 2 star newgen. Every now and then I think of putting a lot into my GK because I WANT to actually stop conceding horrible training ground goals all the time. So this season I signed Gazzaniga in Dutch second division, he's 4 stars. He's second in key players. He then has a save percentage of 70. Expected 85. He's so far down on saved goals prevented that he can't make the top 20, my keeper last season also could not make the top 20. My keepers in all saves typically rarely make the top 20. I genuinely do not get good goalkeepers. I'm actually gonna wait for the editor and do a test, giving 20 stats all around to a GK and put him in my team. I bet even with that he will still stand out and perform like a top keeper. Every save where my first team goalkeeper flops, I just put in a youth player who's 2 stars, and their save %s are usually around the same, if not better. So what is the point in having "good" goalkeepers, you may as well just get the cheapest as they have no impact it's pure coin flip.

These problems existed on fm22 as well, just nowhere near as badly as they are showing up on 23 right now. No matter which tactic I use, no matter which players, it's always the same underachieve on xg, lose to teams that have a 3rd of my xg, watch my 4 star gk/striker play like they're 1 star *******, and watch their 2 star ******* players play like prime Kahn/Messi. How is it possible that these same problems can exist across both games, and across any and all tactics? This makes me think that the match engine knows when it's a human player and it goes to ****, cause none of it makes sense to me.

Also maybe a bug but my team went 1st season without a red card, 2nd season 18 games without a red card, then I got 10 in my next 18 games with a streak of 6 in 6 games straight at one point.

 

 

[FrazT]

If the problems that you mention were game issues specifically, then the forums would be full of users raising these concerns.  A lot of users have noted that they consider the game to be too easy, so it is a balancing act for the developers.

Without being able to pinpoint any specific issue from your post, it would be worthwhile to raise a thread in the tactics forum and lay out your team, player and tactics instructions and the guys in there can have a look and make some suggestions that may help

Please also do not use language that is against the forum rules in your posts- if the software comes up with a *, then it is not allowed and you should be capable of getting your point across without using unacceptable language.

[Dagenham_Dave]

Clearly doing it wrong then 

[Pafnus]

 

7 saat önce, FrazT said:

If the problems that you mention were game issues specifically, then the forums would be full of users raising these concerns.  A lot of users have noted that they consider the game to be too easy, so it is a balancing act for the developers.

Without being able to pinpoint any specific issue from your post, it would be worthwhile to raise a thread in the tactics forum and lay out your team, player and tactics instructions and the guys in there can have a look and make some suggestions that may help

Please also do not use language that is against the forum rules in your posts- if the software comes up with a *, then it is not allowed and you should be capable of getting your point across without using unacceptable language.

How can game easy or hard.. is no match engine same for player and ai ?

[FrazT]

1 minute ago, Pafnus said:

 

How can game easy or hard.. is no match engine same for player and ai ?

Yes it is the same- its what you and the AI manager do that will affect the results.

[sporadicsmiles]

8 hours ago, Dance Seth Dance said:

This was 1 game before the end of the season, and it ended up -15.05. Obviously you're thinking "well it must be your players tactics", yet this is commonplace across all my saves, all my teams, all my tactics. Just finished my second season and with a totally new team and tactic, I've once again underperformed xg and am second worse in the table in that regard. 

It is absolutely something you are doing tactically. In fact I can predict what your XG graph will look like from these numbers. You have a steady stream of very small xG increases, like small steps, rather than big jumps. This represents creating a lot of very poor chances. So the xG will add up, but the chance of scoring each individual chance is low, so you always end up underachieving. It is always better to create fewer, higher quality chances. If you are seeing large chunks of xG increase and getting this, your players are not performing well. So the chances you create are not suited to them (lots of headers for players bad at heading, lots of 1v1s for players with terrible composure, etc). 

8 hours ago, Dance Seth Dance said:

2. Always conceding more than the xg. It's insane how many times I've had to watch my team ship 3 goals to 1xg this game. There is nothing more infuriating than watching your team go through on goal just to smash it wide, then see them run down the other end and score a screamer from outside the box. This season, 52.9xga, actually conceded? 64. You think I have a bad goalkeeper/defence then? 

This suggests you are giving up a lot of high xG chances to the opposition. No chance has an xG of 1, but if you keep giving up big chances, you are going to concede a lot of goals. Again, this points to something tactical in the way you defend. If I were to guess, taking these two points together. You are playing too high and too aggressive, and not leaving enough cover and keep getting hit by quick attacks by the opposition before you can get players back in position properly. Too many players forward limits their space, making it hard for you to create chances. While you gift the opposition tonnes of space. Just a guess, mind, only you can tell us what is happening. Look at the xG graph next time for some matches, and even post some of them so we can have a look. I'd be amazed if I guessed wrong here. 

8 hours ago, Dance Seth Dance said:

3. Goalkeepers are utterly pointless and do nothing. A good 4 star experienced keeper is no better than a 2 star newgen. Every now and then I think of putting a lot into my GK because I WANT to actually stop conceding horrible training ground goals all the time. So this season I signed Gazzaniga in Dutch second division, he's 4 stars. He's second in key players. He then has a save percentage of 70. Expected 85. He's so far down on saved goals prevented that he can't make the top 20, my keeper last season also could not make the top 20. My keepers in all saves typically rarely make the top 20. I genuinely do not get good goalkeepers. I'm actually gonna wait for the editor and do a test, giving 20 stats all around to a GK and put him in my team. I bet even with that he will still stand out and perform like a top keeper. Every save where my first team goalkeeper flops, I just put in a youth player who's 2 stars, and their save %s are usually around the same, if not better. So what is the point in having "good" goalkeepers, you may as well just get the cheapest as they have no impact it's pure coin flip.

If you keep forcing your keeper to face extremely good chances for the opposition, they are going to do badly. Unless the keeper is making errors leading to goals directly, he is only as good as the defence you stick in front of him. Relying on a keeper to make save after save after save of really good chances is a terrible defensive strategy. The aim of your defence is to make the keeper do as little as possible, and those things he has to do be as easy for him as possible. The keeper is a last resort, not the main part of the defence. This couples directly to point 2. 

If you want to fix this, you need to be willing to take a look at the way your team is set up, and to admit that you can improve your approach to the game.

[FrazT]

@Scottyt123  Welcome to the forums.  Your post above has ben hidden as completely unnecessary and before you post again, please make sure that you read and understand the forum rules and dont repeat this kind of post

[Dance Seth Dance]

On 06/11/2022 at 03:29, FrazT said:

If the problems that you mention were game issues specifically, then the forums would be full of users raising these concerns.  A lot of users have noted that they consider the game to be too easy, so it is a balancing act for the developers.

Without being able to pinpoint any specific issue from your post, it would be worthwhile to raise a thread in the tactics forum and lay out your team, player and tactics instructions and the guys in there can have a look and make some suggestions that may help

Please also do not use language that is against the forum rules in your posts- if the software comes up with a *, then it is not allowed and you should be capable of getting your point across without using unacceptable language.

Yeah I'm not saying they're bugs or whatever, but it makes me wonder if there's some sort of human manager modifier because things are so extreme in stats for humans players compared to ai. Well when you have a winning tactic and you save that then yeah the game gets very easy, but until you find a working tactic you will just be fired trying to test them out.

My question is how can I be underperforming on xg such an insane amount? -15.05 is crazy, then add that to my underperformance xga. Just don't really get how this can consistently happen over all tactics and saves.

Yeah mb

On 06/11/2022 at 09:52, Dagenham_Dave said:

Clearly doing it wrong then 

Doing what wrong? I tried 3 different tactics and they all gave me the exact same matches

23 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

It is absolutely something you are doing tactically. In fact I can predict what your XG graph will look like from these numbers. You have a steady stream of very small xG increases, like small steps, rather than big jumps. This represents creating a lot of very poor chances. So the xG will add up, but the chance of scoring each individual chance is low, so you always end up underachieving. It is always better to create fewer, higher quality chances. If you are seeing large chunks of xG increase and getting this, your players are not performing well. So the chances you create are not suited to them (lots of headers for players bad at heading, lots of 1v1s for players with terrible composure, etc). 

Well I had work ball into box in my first season so I'm not shooting from range, I also 90% of the time am watching highlights of my players being 1 on 1 kicking it right at the keeper, or just straight wide. In my second season I specifically went with a direct counter attack and again, again I'm the second worst for underachieving. First season I had tiki taka for first half of the season, went with gegenpress second half of the season. 3 tactics same outcomes every time. Yeah I do specifically make it easier for my strikers to score, none of them are good aerially so cross are low, and I have inverted wingers telling them to pass it inwards rather than crossing it. All these things I know, yet when I'm against AI teams their 8 composure 9 finishing strikers score 1 on 1 chances.

23 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

This suggests you are giving up a lot of high xG chances to the opposition. No chance has an xG of 1, but if you keep giving up big chances, you are going to concede a lot of goals. Again, this points to something tactical in the way you defend. If I were to guess, taking these two points together. You are playing too high and too aggressive, and not leaving enough cover and keep getting hit by quick attacks by the opposition before you can get players back in position properly. Too many players forward limits their space, making it hard for you to create chances. While you gift the opposition tonnes of space. Just a guess, mind, only you can tell us what is happening. Look at the xG graph next time for some matches, and even post some of them so we can have a look. I'd be amazed if I guessed wrong here. 

Again, I get the same results across all tactics. Second season I'm actually running counter attack, so I'm sat back and don't play high at all. Yeah well that's why I'm confused, everything you're saying makes sense, and I've been through it all myself but I don't get results even whilst changing my tactics completely. I've played fm forever and typically been fine, and no doubt I'll eventually figure some tactics that work here and be fine, but it's frustrating how I'm such an extremity. -15.05xg is crazy, the fact I conceded 9 more goals than my xga making me the #1 is crazy, then add in my goalkeeper who is the second best player in the league being so low of expected saves that he can't make the top 20.

23 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

If you keep forcing your keeper to face extremely good chances for the opposition, they are going to do badly. Unless the keeper is making errors leading to goals directly, he is only as good as the defence you stick in front of him. Relying on a keeper to make save after save after save of really good chances is a terrible defensive strategy. The aim of your defence is to make the keeper do as little as possible, and those things he has to do be as easy for him as possible. The keeper is a last resort, not the main part of the defence. This couples directly to point 2. 

If you want to fix this, you need to be willing to take a look at the way your team is set up, and to admit that you can improve your approach to the game.

That's the problem, he doesn't. This is why the xga is not super high, and my gk has a crazy minus on expected saves because he's letting in really easy shots. But this happens no matter which tactic and keeper it feels like. In the last few fm's I'm not sure I've signed a single top goalkeeper that actually stands out and performs like they're a top keeper. Yeah my defence in front of him were all 3-4.5 stars, even the backup is decent. 

Yeah I've changed my tactics relentlessly, I try to do diff tactics every new save but these things seem to be consistent over all tactics and saves for me. Always underperform xg to the point of being top 3 every time. Always concede a lot of goals from poor shots. Goalkeeper is almost always in a negative for expected saves. It makes me think there is some sort of human 

So I just had a look at a bunch of this season's stats.

I have some of the lowest for opposition final third passes, opposition passes per defensive action, passes completed against, and I'm middle of the pack for shots allowed. This is all very interesting because somehow I'm still 2nd for most shots on target against me, so is the opposition just doing 1 pass through my entire team having insanely accurate shots and scoring? Very odd. I have a low line of engagement and defence.

It's a shame that I can't see my first season stats where everything was 10x worse

 

[FrazT]

8 minutes ago, Dance Seth Dance said:

Yeah I'm not saying they're bugs or whatever, but it makes me wonder if there's some sort of human manager modifier because things are so extreme in stats for humans players compared to ai. Well when you have a winning tactic and you save that then yeah the game gets very easy, but until you find a working tactic you will just be fired trying to test them out.

My question is how can I be underperforming on xg such an insane amount? -15.05 is crazy, then add that to my underperformance xga. Just don't really get how this can consistently happen over all tactics and saves.

Yeah mb

Doing what wrong? I tried 3 different tactics and they all gave me the exact same matches

Well I had work ball into box in my first season so I'm not shooting from range, I also 90% of the time am watching highlights of my players being 1 on 1 kicking it right at the keeper, or just straight wide. In my second season I specifically went with a direct counter attack and again, again I'm the second worst for underachieving. First season I had tiki taka for first half of the season, went with gegenpress second half of the season. 3 tactics same outcomes every time. Yeah I do specifically make it easier for my strikers to score, none of them are good aerially so cross are low, and I have inverted wingers telling them to pass it inwards rather than crossing it. All these things I know, yet when I'm against AI teams their 8 composure 9 finishing strikers score 1 on 1 chances.

Again, I get the same results across all tactics. Second season I'm actually running counter attack, so I'm sat back and don't play high at all. Yeah well that's why I'm confused, everything you're saying makes sense, and I've been through it all myself but I don't get results even whilst changing my tactics completely. I've played fm forever and typically been fine, and no doubt I'll eventually figure some tactics that work here and be fine, but it's frustrating how I'm such an extremity. -15.05xg is crazy, the fact I conceded 9 more goals than my xga making me the #1 is crazy, then add in my goalkeeper who is the second best player in the league being so low of expected saves that he can't make the top 20.

That's the problem, he doesn't. This is why the xga is not super high, and my gk has a crazy minus on expected saves because he's letting in really easy shots. But this happens no matter which tactic and keeper it feels like. In the last few fm's I'm not sure I've signed a single top goalkeeper that actually stands out and performs like they're a top keeper. Yeah my defence in front of him were all 3-4.5 stars, even the backup is decent. 

Yeah I've changed my tactics relentlessly, I try to do diff tactics every new save but these things seem to be consistent over all tactics and saves for me. Always underperform xg to the point of being top 3 every time. Always concede a lot of goals from poor shots. Goalkeeper is almost always in a negative for expected saves. It makes me think there is some sort of human 

So I just had a look at a bunch of this season's stats.

I have some of the lowest for opposition final third passes, opposition passes per defensive action, passes completed against, and I'm middle of the pack for shots allowed. This is all very interesting because somehow I'm still 2nd for most shots on target against me, so is the opposition just doing 1 pass through my entire team having insanely accurate shots and scoring? Very odd. I have a low line of engagement and defence.

It's a shame that I can't see my first season stats where everything was 10x worse

 

You have asked a question that nobody can answer without seeing how your team and tactics are set up- try the tactics forum- you have nothing to lose and a lot to gain.

[HUNT3R]

It's the same ME for human and AI, so if there's a difference in stats for you, it's down to something you're doing. It might be tactical (especially if you're creating low quality chances) or it may be player related (in the case of good chances created, but not finished off) or even a combination of both.

I don't consider myself a stats person as I rely more on watching matches, but I have started to pay attention to certain stats and also xG, which is a very useful metric.

In matches, I aim for an average xG/shot of 0.1xG and I try and set up tactics to try and concede lower than 0.1xG per shot. That's on average, which means there should be a mix of lower quality <0.08 xG, but also good (imo, >0.18 xG) chances. I also aim for 11-13% for a conversion rate.

I save at the end of most seasons (and I played up to about 2044) so I have a few examples of achieving this and sometimes even doing better than that. I also watch the xG table in the Data Hub, which also helps track my performance over the course of a season:

That's what I can add from a General Discussion point of view, but it might be worth opening a thread in the tactics forum if you want to take a deeper dive into tactical analysis and/or advice.

[enigmatic]

I'll point out that overperforming xG isn't all that anyway.

See, I've got Eddie Nketiah obscenely overperforming his xG at the moment. He's quick and has the right PPMs to run in behind, he's a decent enough finisher to put away his one on ones at an above-average rate, and *he never gets on the end of crosses for half chances, or tries to create a goal out of nothing*. Which means if the opposition are good at marking him, he doesn't underperform his xG, he just doesn't take any shots. Generally I'd rather have strikers that have a lot of chances and miss a few to strikers that are extremely clinical but let an entire half go by without doing much. You get goals from rebounds too...

[PontinPlays]

On 06/11/2022 at 03:19, Dance Seth Dance said:

So, in every FM no matter which tactics I use, I (and my friend) typically end up with the same things across all saves.

1. Always, ALWAYS underachieve on xg. Usually I will always be underscoring xg. This game it's no different, in fact it's way way worse

This was 1 game before the end of the season, and it ended up -15.05. Obviously you're thinking "well it must be your players tactics", yet this is commonplace across all my saves, all my teams, all my tactics. Just finished my second season and with a totally new team and tactic, I've once again underperformed xg and am second worse in the table in that regard. 

2. Always conceding more than the xg. It's insane how many times I've had to watch my team ship 3 goals to 1xg this game. There is nothing more infuriating than watching your team go through on goal just to smash it wide, then see them run down the other end and score a screamer from outside the box. This season, 52.9xga, actually conceded? 64. You think I have a bad goalkeeper/defence then? 

3. Goalkeepers are utterly pointless and do nothing. A good 4 star experienced keeper is no better than a 2 star newgen. Every now and then I think of putting a lot into my GK because I WANT to actually stop conceding horrible training ground goals all the time. So this season I signed Gazzaniga in Dutch second division, he's 4 stars. He's second in key players. He then has a save percentage of 70. Expected 85. He's so far down on saved goals prevented that he can't make the top 20, my keeper last season also could not make the top 20. My keepers in all saves typically rarely make the top 20. I genuinely do not get good goalkeepers. I'm actually gonna wait for the editor and do a test, giving 20 stats all around to a GK and put him in my team. I bet even with that he will still stand out and perform like a top keeper. Every save where my first team goalkeeper flops, I just put in a youth player who's 2 stars, and their save %s are usually around the same, if not better. So what is the point in having "good" goalkeepers, you may as well just get the cheapest as they have no impact it's pure coin flip.

These problems existed on fm22 as well, just nowhere near as badly as they are showing up on 23 right now. No matter which tactic I use, no matter which players, it's always the same underachieve on xg, lose to teams that have a 3rd of my xg, watch my 4 star gk/striker play like they're 1 star *******, and watch their 2 star ******* players play like prime Kahn/Messi. How is it possible that these same problems can exist across both games, and across any and all tactics? This makes me think that the match engine knows when it's a human player and it goes to ****, cause none of it makes sense to me.

Also maybe a bug but my team went 1st season without a red card, 2nd season 18 games without a red card, then I got 10 in my next 18 games with a streak of 6 in 6 games straight at one point.

 

 

Without seeing the tactics your using id say that's the issue as others have said either load it to a tactics page or maybe try Zealand's redit or YouTube videos may help he explains things to new players also does something call save your saves where you may see some issues you have, or just pop the tactic in here and we will help you but without that all i can say is the game is now very in-depth and is more then just one thing so may be a few issues with what your doing.

[SC00P0NE]

maybe try default tactics just to see what happens? What about training and tactical familiarity, cohesion?

[Teferi]

On 06/11/2022 at 19:48, sporadicsmiles said:

It is absolutely something you are doing tactically. In fact I can predict what your XG graph will look like from these numbers. You have a steady stream of very small xG increases, like small steps, rather than big jumps. This represents creating a lot of very poor chances. So the xG will add up, but the chance of scoring each individual chance is low, so you always end up underachieving. It is always better to create fewer, higher quality chances. If you are seeing large chunks of xG increase and getting this, your players are not performing well. So the chances you create are not suited to them (lots of headers for players bad at heading, lots of 1v1s for players with terrible composure, etc). 

This suggests you are giving up a lot of high xG chances to the opposition. No chance has an xG of 1, but if you keep giving up big chances, you are going to concede a lot of goals. Again, this points to something tactical in the way you defend. If I were to guess, taking these two points together. You are playing too high and too aggressive, and not leaving enough cover and keep getting hit by quick attacks by the opposition before you can get players back in position properly. Too many players forward limits their space, making it hard for you to create chances. While you gift the opposition tonnes of space. Just a guess, mind, only you can tell us what is happening. Look at the xG graph next time for some matches, and even post some of them so we can have a look. I'd be amazed if I guessed wrong here. 

If you keep forcing your keeper to face extremely good chances for the opposition, they are going to do badly. Unless the keeper is making errors leading to goals directly, he is only as good as the defence you stick in front of him. Relying on a keeper to make save after save after save of really good chances is a terrible defensive strategy. The aim of your defence is to make the keeper do as little as possible, and those things he has to do be as easy for him as possible. The keeper is a last resort, not the main part of the defence. This couples directly to point 2. 

If you want to fix this, you need to be willing to take a look at the way your team is set up, and to admit that you can improve your approach to the game.

That's not how xG works.

A small number of high xG chances is better than a large number of low xG chances - but that is because winning 10-0 still only gets you 3 points. The latter team would have lower xPts than the former team, but there is no evidence no reason whatsoever that a team would underperform or overperform on goals based on xG distribution.

Your way of thinking is literally the old-school way of "small chances doesn't matter" and "clear-cut chances are good" that have statistically been proven to be inferior at predicting outcomes than xG.

[sporadicsmiles]

On 26/11/2022 at 07:24, Teferi said:

That's not how xG works.

A small number of high xG chances is better than a large number of low xG chances - but that is because winning 10-0 still only gets you 3 points. The latter team would have lower xPts than the former team, but there is no evidence no reason whatsoever that a team would underperform or overperform on goals based on xG distribution.

Your way of thinking is literally the old-school way of "small chances doesn't matter" and "clear-cut chances are good" that have statistically been proven to be inferior at predicting outcomes than xG.

xG is something akin to a probability of scoring a goal. But these are results of independent, unlinked events. Therefore adding the probability and saying when it gets above 1 you should have scored a goal by now makes absolutely no sense from the standpoint of the numbers. It will work because number of shots from a team usually correlates with how well that team is doing in a match. It is almost a surrogate outcome to simplistically model a complex system in a simple way.

As an example, your logic of many small xG is as good as few large xG boils down to something along these lines. If winning the lottery is a million to one and you play 1 million times you will win. That is the expectation value (from where xG gets its x, I guess. But the distribution is very large. It could take 500,000 tries. Or 3 million. Take an example of tossing a coin. You have a 50% chance of getting heads. You expect 2 coin tosses to get a head. However you can flip tails 3 times. The spread of expectation values is smaller. The probability of 5 heads is much lower. 

The point of these examples is that good chances work like coin tosses. You need much fewer of them to "guarantee" a goal (of course it is not really a probability but a model so it does not guarantee). Poor chances work like the lottery (although far less extreme, a D12 or D20 perhaps is better but more people are familiar with the lottery). You need to try more, and the spread of the number of times you have to try is greater.

On 26/11/2022 at 07:24, Teferi said:

Your way of thinking is literally the old-school way of "small chances doesn't matter" and "clear-cut chances are good" that have statistically been proven to be inferior at predicting outcomes than xG.

This is not what I said, and I hope it is clear from my description above. Small chances are fine. At no point did I say that you should exclusively focus on better xG chances. You should actually try to create as many chances as possible, because xG is not something you can control. But if you are exclusively producing low xG chances you are more likely to struggle (this is the "AH the super keeper was stupid I could not beat him the defence is overpowered for the AI" type rant when the probability is against you). And the fact that you can succeed by focusing on few very good chances is obvious, as it is the "one good chance, goal, I was FM'd meme".  You can make both work. And I'd most like to create a lot of very good chances. When you do this, you usually end up creating a few good ones and a lot of poor ones. And none of this takes into account the other factors in football. For example a goalkeeper fumbling a header into the net. There is no exact correct way.

The other point is that xG being included in FM did not drastically change how you succeed at FM. and in FM having a continuous dribble of very small xG chances has been a sign that your tactic is simply not creating the chances that are more likely to score. And then you struggle because you will have games where the probability is against you. 

[The3points]

On 26/11/2022 at 01:24, Teferi said:

That's not how xG works.

A small number of high xG chances is better than a large number of low xG chances - but that is because winning 10-0 still only gets you 3 points. The latter team would have lower xPts than the former team, but there is no evidence no reason whatsoever that a team would underperform or overperform on goals based on xG distribution.

Your way of thinking is literally the old-school way of "small chances doesn't matter" and "clear-cut chances are good" that have statistically been proven to be inferior at predicting outcomes than xG.

That doesn't really make any sense? If you cut down on low xG shots and increase your xG per chance it will take less shots, and thus less possessions to score. xG done cumulatively can sometimes even be misleading for this reason. There's a reason why the "xG era" means less long shots.

[Teferi]

5 hours ago, The3points said:

That doesn't really make any sense? If you cut down on low xG shots and increase your xG per chance it will take less shots, and thus less possessions to score. xG done cumulatively can sometimes even be misleading for this reason. There's a reason why the "xG era" means less long shots.

xG era means less long shots because taking very unlikely shots is almost always bad for your cumulative xG, due to the reason you said. 

It doesn't mean that a high cumulative xG consisting of low xG shots should result in a worse goalscoring performance.

The OP has a specific cumulative xG number. And his team is underperforming significantly. Suggesting that the underperformance is due to the OP's tactics is basically hindsight at its finest.

Instead, what would actually be constructive would be "You were unlucky to underperform your xG by so much, but instead here's how you can try to acquire even more xG so that you're fine even when your players underperform".

 

Also, even in real life no team really have the majority of their chances be - to quote the post I responded to - "big jumps" instead of "small steps" on the xG graph. If you look up Man City or Liverpool's xG graphs the majority of their chances are going to be around 0.1 xG.

Kevin de Bruyne takes a bunch of low xG shots in his career and in 20/21 he had a season where he underperformed xG by a lot. Based on that logic, KDB should stop doing those useless low xG chances and focus on the high xG ones.

Guess what? His average xG per chance was even lower in 21/22 yet he significantly overperformed his xG and helped City win the title. Pretty sure Pep Guardiola did not bring up the concept "big jumps" in his team talks.

Edited November 28, 2022 by Teferi

[Overmars]

Some reasons you can get those horrible underperforming xG statistics are:

1. Talent Deficit -- Your players are worse than the average player in your league. Presented with identical chances to score, you would expect the better player to score more often than the worse player. Simple concept, but it's the main reason why the top teams crush xG while everyone else lags behind.
2. Poor Form -- Your attacking players might be in poor form and you weren't able to shake them out of poor form before they did a bunch of damage to your stats. Warnings and fines are necessary tools to mitigate this.
3. Poor Team Cohesion -- This can lead to a lot of shots hitting the woodwork and general squandered chances.
4. Poor Player Mentality -- Your players might have terrible hidden attributes (ex. pressure, important matches, consistency) and you might be amplifying their anxiety with your interactions and shouts. If someone is always useless in big matches or anxious whenever you need a goal, you probably need to replace them for someone better.
5. New Players -- You might be using attacking players who are new to your club. Unless they have great adaptability, it usually takes time for those players to assimilate and produce up to their talent level.
6. Bad Luck -- And this can quickly snowball into form/confidence issues.
7. Match Fixing -- I haven't seen evidence of this in FM, though it would be a great storyline if it happened.

[The3points]

16 hours ago, Teferi said:

xG era means less long shots because taking very unlikely shots is almost always bad for your cumulative xG, due to the reason you said. 

It doesn't mean that a high cumulative xG consisting of low xG shots should result in a worse goalscoring performance.

The OP has a specific cumulative xG number. And his team is underperforming significantly. Suggesting that the underperformance is due to the OP's tactics is basically hindsight at its finest.

Instead, what would actually be constructive would be "You were unlucky to underperform your xG by so much, but instead here's how you can try to acquire even more xG so that you're fine even when your players underperform".

 

Also, even in real life no team really have the majority of their chances be - to quote the post I responded to - "big jumps" instead of "small steps" on the xG graph. If you look up Man City or Liverpool's xG graphs the majority of their chances are going to be around 0.1 xG.

Kevin de Bruyne takes a bunch of low xG shots in his career and in 20/21 he had a season where he underperformed xG by a lot. Based on that logic, KDB should stop doing those useless low xG chances and focus on the high xG ones.

Guess what? His average xG per chance was even lower in 21/22 yet he significantly overperformed his xG and helped City win the title. Pretty sure Pep Guardiola did not bring up the concept "big jumps" in his team talks.

I'm not saying only get good chances. I'm saying get yourself to a good average, which like you said is 0.1 Below 0.1 you aren't creating anything. I also think you've misunderstood what we meant by good chances. Each shot of around 0.2 xG is a good chance, and if you average a half-chance per shot you will succeed