New Idea - Scrap Fixed PA

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

just from reading your title i have thought this for a long time. fixed pa isnt good enough if si want to continue in their aim to make the game as realistic as possible.

i was looking for something else so i wasnt gonna read anything more than the title

[Drinky_08]

I don't think its a matter of not having fixed PA's. More players should have higher PA's and it should be harder to reach them.

I also think a system should be introduced that varies players PA growth but also has disadvantages such as;

early bloomer - a players PA improves dramaticaly, nearing his full potential at young age. However they could be prone to loss of form often or declining faster. Players like Aimar and Saviola, who were excellent from a young age but often had poor spells

Late Bloomer - players whose PA's rapidly increase in later years, like Drogba.

Etc.

[Brian Shanahan]

I don't think its a matter of not having fixed PA's. More players should have higher PA's and it should be harder to reach them.

I also think a system should be introduced that varies players PA growth but also has disadvantages such as;

early bloomer - a players PA improves dramaticaly, nearing his full potential at young age. However they could be prone to loss of form often or declining faster. Players like Aimar and Saviola, who were excellent from a young age but often had poor spells

Late Bloomer - players whose PA's rapidly increase in later years, like Drogba.

Etc.

I think you mean CA in the examples of early bloomers and late bloomers, if so and if it doesn't cause code problems I would definitely be in favour of a nuanced system like this.

[Orange Juice]

PA should be harder to reach for all players. The roles professionalism, determination and the training facilities play can be higher. It is right now too easy for a player to reach his PA as long as you have good training facilities and half-decent personality attributes. Varying the possibility whether a player reaches his PA would certainly bring about more variation.

[pleming]

I know we aren't supposed to talk about players necessarily here, but I decided to play a game and never see CA/PA, something I haven't done in a LONG time... as an experiment mostly. I went totally off of player ratings that my scouts saw.

Anyhow- I bought Karl Henry from Wolves and brought him to Anfield... he performed extremely well as cover to Maschereno and Lucas, to the point where I let Lucas go in the January transfer window and let Henry have the starting spot... he was a 7.45 or so rating for the season, he scored a few goals and never let me down. He covered Glen Johnson at right back as well, so he was versatile.

Anyhow- I never would have brought a guy like that in if I looked at his CA/PA. NEVER. But he performed well as a big part of why Liverpool got into CL in Europe for the next year. So I guess my lesson learned is CA/PA is not supposed to be seen. Use the scouts, play the game.

[Kenco]

I know we aren't supposed to talk about players necessarily here, but I decided to play a game and never see CA/PA, something I haven't done in a LONG time... as an experiment mostly. I went totally off of player ratings that my scouts saw.

Anyhow- I bought Karl Henry from Wolves and brought him to Anfield... he performed extremely well as cover to Maschereno and Lucas, to the point where I let Lucas go in the January transfer window and let Henry have the starting spot... he was a 7.45 or so rating for the season, he scored a few goals and never let me down. He covered Glen Johnson at right back as well, so he was versatile.

Anyhow- I never would have brought a guy like that in if I looked at his CA/PA. NEVER. But he performed well as a big part of why Liverpool got into CL in Europe for the next year. So I guess my lesson learned is CA/PA is not supposed to be seen. Use the scouts, play the game.

This pretty much sums it up. I prefer not to look at CA/PA, then I don't consider it a problem.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

i think some of the people responding to this dont really wholly understand the issue. its not about players 'suddenly' becoming unfavoured because you progress, or promoted or whatever, this is all known by the stats in the game and when me or this guy who OP'd, he means we get limited to their PA's, - WE DONT NEED TO KNOW WHAT THESE ARE!

thats irrelevant. 'playing the game as its supposed to be played' isnt the case either because i play it how its supposed to be.... but when i progress my team from a smaller club i always find i have to buy in better players rather than the players that 'dont progress with the team', like lets say a good chunk of Stoke City's team in real life are still in the first team, yet who would have thought it just a couple of years ago they would be a mid table Prem team? it certainly wasnt depicted in the previous versions of FM. I had to recruit a whole new team in 08 when i started as them getting them promoted.

i dont use scouts external from the game of fm, but i know players 'potentials' via the in game scouts who tell you how good they are gonna be or not. its as simple as that, and they cant surprise you at all by becoming world beaters when they come through on the first day from the youth academy they arent gonna be good enough for the prem!

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

i think that simple fact that when you get your new crop of youth players through, on the very first day, you know if they are gonna be good enough or not. theres a hell of alot of no's and a couple maybe's. and the odd, oh he'll be good. it shouldnt be like that.(how would we know at such an early age if he's gonna cut the grade or not?) maybe the guy who they said would be a 'good championship player in the future' becomes a leading prem? he wouldnt in FM. ever. but the same goes with the guy who they say will become a leading prem, maybe they shouldnt, and then drop down. i think the players individually need a bit of variation, say instead of having a PA of say, 150, a PA of 135-165, or something similar. AND maybe....BY the age of 23, when they say they cant progress much, the PA margin of error shrinks, so, at age 23, the players PA be something more like 158-161, because hes done well, but maybe not quite reached the pinnacle of his starting range.

im pretty sure this is what the OP is trying to put across, and i would be all in favour of this. instead of knowing right from the get-go when you get a new batch of players through your academy, or when you scout a player, he'll be such and such a level, he could come up and surprise you one day. - im sure this would also make the scouting more ranged and (for the lack of better words) incorrect...in a good way. more realistic in other words.

because lets be fair, in real life, if you were an actual football manager, and your staff told you this 15 year old was gonna be a good prem player but not world class, you'd still be interested even as an elite club, you'd track them for a couple of years to see their progress etc. in my experience, on the game of fm, if you are an elite club, you shouldnt ever sign a youth who isnt touted as being a leading prem by one of your 20/20 potential judging scouts; simply because they never get better than lets use the example of just mentioned of a 15 y/o being a future good prem player. you get that in fm and you wouldnt sign him simply because he wont become a leading star, whereas if he had a range in PA, from lets say, 165-190, then he could be great, or he could be a decent prem/ good prem player in actual ability in years to come. you'd buy them and invest your time and mentorship to. it solves the problem of the scouts at the moment too. apparently they arent as accurate as they once were....but i dont see it - cause no one ever surprises me in-game

[Cougar2010]

thats irrelevant. 'playing the game as its supposed to be played' isnt the case either because i play it how its supposed to be.... but when i progress my team from a smaller club i always find i have to buy in better players rather than the players that 'dont progress with the team', like lets say a good chunk of Stoke City's team in real life are still in the first team, yet who would have thought it just a couple of years ago they would be a mid table Prem team? it certainly wasnt depicted in the previous versions of FM. I had to recruit a whole new team in 08 when i started as them getting them promoted.

and isn't that what they have done in real life?

Stoke finished 8th in the Championship in 2006/7 before gaining promotion to the Premiership in 2007/8.

Now just three seasons later very few of the 2006/7 squad are still with Stoke - Simonsen & Sidibe are probably the only two + a few promising youth players that have progressed (Wilkinson & Dickinson).

Likewise with Portsmouth relegating to the Championship very few of their current squad will be with them next season.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

i think rinso doesnt understand the fact players 'level-up' anyway.

players have always gone from one number to another. and they still would,but just by doing something, like golden boot or something, (from the other guys proposal). you dont see them level up and never will and never have. think about it.

edit: infact you DO see them level up, their stats go up!!

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

and isn't that what they have done in real life?

Stoke finished 8th in the Championship in 2006/7 before gaining promotion to the Premiership in 2007/8.

Now just three seasons later very few of the 2006/7 squad are still with Stoke - Simonsen & Sidibe are probably the only two + a few promising youth players that have progressed (Wilkinson & Dickinson).

Likewise with Portsmouth relegating to the Championship very few of their current squad will be with them next season.

no, alot of the stoke players are still there, in the first squad. several players at least, playing large roles they wouldnt ever have done in fm because their stats would have been so low to have done such a feat.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

...and lets face it, most of the players who come up from the championship with a team, say, birmingham, are in the first team, yet they finished top half this year. remarkable. you'd be lauded a god if you did that in fm. but YOU see the difference in the birmingham players stats the next fm compared to them a year ago, or even this year.

edit: (they would have gone up) ..they wouldnt on fm like that.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

and isn't that what they have done in real life?

Stoke finished 8th in the Championship in 2006/7 before gaining promotion to the Premiership in 2007/8.

Now just three seasons later very few of the 2006/7 squad are still with Stoke - Simonsen & Sidibe are probably the only two + a few promising youth players that have progressed (Wilkinson & Dickinson).

Likewise with Portsmouth relegating to the Championship very few of their current squad will be with them next season.

LOL i knew portsmouth were gonna go down before they even kicked their first ball of the season. why? because they sold and were selling so many players etc. it was obvious. and i dunno why, but it seemed like they were preparing themselves for the championship...a year early. it was weird. because most clubs do that just as they get relegated, not before the start of a fresh prem season.

i think you're choosing a poor example, because lets face it, portsmouth are in debt, of course they are gonna sell theyre players. their players werent paid for a while during the season, so they arent gonna want to stay to be frank.

and that doesnt account for the fact that every time you get a surprise package team on fm, the games stats for those players in that team increase. even if the players are late twenties or something. take di natale for example. he wasnt as good as what he was on last years game (minorly degraded this year) in previous versions.

ps. i only choose that example cause hes early thirties now and i played as udinese winning the serie a with them first season ;P

edit: what i mean is, the stats team for fm change the players stats for each season, but they dont take that into account for the in-game playing of fm itself? its strange to say the least.

[Cougar2010]

no, alot of the stoke players are still there, in the first squad. several players at least, playing large roles they wouldnt ever have done in fm because their stats would have been so low to have done such a feat.

Well then you would be wrong

I could prove it by listing the players but I have a feeling you still wouldn't believe me.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

Correct. PA does EXACTLY what it's supposed to, we only know about it because of editing tools.

no this is a load of bull. its not about numbers from the editors you can see.

i play the game without knowing these players 'numbers' (the ones out of 200). of course i know the players stats in game, for example finishing etc... but you're missing the point totally.

you think its something based on knowing what these figures are. its not. its about a player suddenly being better or not as good as what they are supposed to from IN GAME sources. its only because you have to have some sort of number system that those numbers are there. if you cant see that what hes trying to say is that the potential number should be maluable and change rather than coming though as a regen (or real player, indeed) with a set number that'll never change, whatever achievements he does, then you're beyond me.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

no id believe you, i just wouldnt believe my eyes, seeing as im a season ticket holder.

[hbtfdbs]

I do like the idea, and have mentioned it in another thread, but i dont like the way the op suggested adding pa or taking away, sounds like it would be worse than the current system. Also you said when teams get promoted theyd have to drop their players due to pa or not being good enough for that level, I have to disagree with that, ive had a number of players that play well the whole season despite on stats being the worst player, and their stats increase as the games go on, turns out they are irreplaceable for my newly promoted teams.

I dont know how the pa mechanics work exactly but im sure i saw some of my players who'd hit their potential had both their ca and pa increase at the end of the year. Maybe they should increase their ca/pa if the player played extremely well at a higher level or something, that way a few average players could turn into amazing players, but the same needs to happen in the other direction, players playing badly with high ca and pa lowering possible after an awful season, which seems to be what this thread suggests, players like mido and d'allessandro, probably only lowered in ca/pa in recent versions because they didnt play well enough, or as well as they should.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

INFACT! if some of you are all stuck in your ways and unwilling to conform to change (improvement, realism), then how about, a change in the way the scouts/ player reports work. as i said, MY main bug-bear with the game is that you can scout a specific player, or look at the player report from your youth team and it will say how good they will be. they wont surprise you and if you sell them for example, come back and bite you in the butt by rearing his head to score against you every game in the future when he wasnt supposed to be playing at that level.

but a way to make that work would be a PA range, instead of a single number.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

I do like the idea, and have mentioned it in another thread, but i dont like the way the op suggested adding pa or taking away, sounds like it would be worse than the current system. Also you said when teams get promoted theyd have to drop their players due to pa or not being good enough for that level, I have to disagree with that, ive had a number of players that play well the whole season despite on stats being the worst player, and their stats increase as the games go on, turns out they are irreplaceable for my newly promoted teams.

I dont know how the pa mechanics work exactly but im sure i saw some of my players who'd hit their potential had both their ca and pa increase at the end of the year. Maybe they should increase their ca/pa if the player played extremely well at a higher level or something, that way a few average players could turn into amazing players, but the same needs to happen in the other direction, players playing badly with high ca and pa lowering possible after an awful season, which seems to be what this thread suggests, players like mido and d'allessandro, probably only lowered in ca/pa in recent versions because they didnt play well enough, or as well as they should.

to be honest, the part where you said mido, d'allessandro's pa's decrease is exactly what i mentioned. when players in the real world dont perform great for a while, say a year or in particular, more, the game stat-men decrease their current AND potential numbers. THAT should happen DURING a game of fm (and obvs the other way round to the good)

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

Well then you would be wrong

I could prove it by listing the players but I have a feeling you still wouldn't believe me.

but do you believe me that the fact the players that were playing in the championship that still play have improved stats? yes or no, answer it.

if yes then it answers it all.

that just wouldnt happen in fm. players adapt and maybe get better in real life beyond what people perceive them to be possible of. (sometimes i do believe its about adapting as much as being good, if you're already a good professional player)

edit: what if stoke finished next year in a europa league position? with the majority of the same players? would you say their potentials should have had some 'scope' for that potential happening on fm? would you have said that would have been realistic to add that system into the game? a range between two figures of potential not a single number out of 200?

[Cougar2010]

no id believe you, i just wouldnt believe my eyes, seeing as im a season ticket holder.

Just for you then as I've got the info to hand (I've not included a few that have come through the youth team).

Joined 2010

Begovic

Joined 2009

Huth

Beattie

Whitehead

Tuncay

Collins

Etherington

Joined 2008

Griffin

Higginbotham

Whelan

Soares

Kitson

Pugh

Shawcross

Davies

Tonge

Faye

Sorensen

Sonko

Joined 2007

Lawrence

Diao

Delap

Joined 2006

Fuller

Joined 2005

Sidibe

Joined 2004

Simonsen

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

Just for you then as I've got the info to hand (I've not included a few that have come through the youth team).

Joined 2010

Begovic

Joined 2009

Huth

Beattie

Whitehead

Tuncay

Collins

Etherington

Joined 2008

Griffin

Higginbotham

Whelan

Soares

Kitson

Pugh

Shawcross

Davies

Tonge

Faye

Sorensen

Sonko

Joined 2007

Lawrence

Diao

Delap

Joined 2006

Fuller

Joined 2005

Sidibe

Joined 2004

Simonsen

joined 08, most of which were in the season they were in the championship.

which actually proves you wrong? because the majority werent played much, and thinking of taking away the last year or so's worth of players because theyve finished mid table twice....i make my point strongly.

edit: beattie, joined mid season, etherington, same, etc etc, i could go on, but i wouldnt want to waste the time

[Cougar2010]

but do you believe me that the fact the players that were playing in the championship that still play have improved stats? yes or no, answer it.

if yes then it answers it all.

that just wouldnt happen in fm. players adapt and maybe get better in real life beyond what people perceive them to be possible of. (sometimes i do believe its about adapting as much as being good, if you're already a good professional player)

Its just not that simple.

Players that improve as a club progresses are simply improving their CA and have not reached their RL PA.

In RL everybody estimates & judges players on what they see now and those can be wrong.

PA is a hard fact that exists in RL that we cannot see. If anything the two worst parts about PA within the game are:

A) Players reach it too easily &

B) Scouts/coaches/assistants judge it too accurately

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

I don't like this idea. I would prefer it if many players had higher PA but much fewer players would reach their PA's. At the moment if a player doesn't get seriously injured and gets a reasonable amount of playing time when he is younger, there is a big chance he will come very close to reaching his PA. If less players actually come very close to their PA, we could raise the PA's of the original players in the db which would give us much more variety.

that sounds alright.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

Its just not that simple.

Players that improve as a club progresses are simply improving their CA and have not reached their RL PA.

In RL everybody estimates & judges players on what they see now and those can be wrong.

PA is a hard fact that exists in RL that we cannot see. If anything the two worst parts about PA within the game are:

A) Players reach it too easily &

B) Scouts/coaches/assistants judge it too accurately

thats what i dont like. the second bit. scouts DO indeed judge it too easily and too early!! definitely.

edit: id like the coaches and staff say a range of how good the player might be. i think we come to a simple fix. maybe the variety in scouting, and wording to, and giving them a range like, could be a leading star or good prem. just for example.

[edgar555]

joined 08, most of which were in the season they were in the championship.

which actually proves you wrong? because the majority werent played much, and thinking of taking away the last year or so's worth of players because theyve finished mid table twice....i make my point strongly.

edit: beattie, joined mid season, etherington, same, etc etc, i could go on, but i wouldnt want to waste the time

How does it prove him wrong. Most of those 08 signings joined you lot in the summer after promotion, so therefore, the majority of your players joined once you were in the Prem. Maybe you need to buy a programme next time you use your season ticket.

[hbtfdbs]

to be honest, the part where you said mido, d'allessandro's pa's decrease is exactly what i mentioned. when players in the real world dont perform great for a while, say a year or in particular, more, the game stat-men decrease their current AND potential numbers. THAT should happen DURING a game of fm (and obvs the other way round to the good)

Yea i agree that should happen in some way, but like i said I think it does happen the other way, as in players playing well and stats/ca/pa increasing. Just not sure if it happens the other way as in getting worse.

I think the current system is good but maybe it should decrease stats too for playing badly and maybe overall stat changes should be a lil more extreme.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

I've made this suggestion before: Use two systems.

First, start with "natural talent"/"expected potential." This would be the current PA system, though using only the random numbers (-10, -9, etc.) and not a fixed number. This determines player growth up to the age of 24 or so.

Second, use a player's performance to adjust PA after the age of 24. Meaning, if a player maxes out their PA at 120 or so they could see an increase in their PA based on how well they perform relative to the league they're in. I think a PA adjustment of up to 5 points a year would be sufficient:

Example:a player with a current/max PA of 120 averages a 7.3 for the season. His PA is then raised a few points for the next season. If he performs well again, his CA will increase to match the PA increase, and he may be rewarded with another small boost to PA (relative to the quality of the league he plays in, so you won't be seeing any players reach 200PA on a League 6 squad or anything.) After two years (and possibly a +10 point increase in CA/PA) the player will likely attract the interest of another team from a better league. The player makes the move, but only averages a 6.8. His performance doesn't merit any increase to his PA, and his CA may actually decrease slightly as a result.

To me, this addresses the fundamental flaw of the current system- even though people will say "Drogba always had that level of ability," the simple fact is that FM cannot compensate for our inability to accurately guess what a player's true potential may be...so we have to make do with players suddenly gaining 20 or 30 points to their CA/PA with each year's release. With this system, you could theoretically take a player from a pub team with an initial PA of 100 and, after the course of ten successful years, end up with a player with 150PA. Of course, this would only happen so long as the player performs well in better and better leagues. It would be uncommon to see such an incredible increase over a player's career, but it should still be possible. I believe this would be the best way to make the PA system more "realistic."

this basically says what i think without me typing it.

[Cougar2010]

joined 08, most of which were in the season they were in the championship.

which actually proves you wrong? because the majority werent played much, and thinking of taking away the last year or so's worth of players because theyve finished mid table twice....i make my point strongly.

edit: beattie, joined mid season, etherington, same, etc etc, i could go on, but i wouldnt want to waste the time

Way to miss the point

Your point was that players should grow with clubs citing Stoke City as an example.

I've proven that only a minority of players grow with clubs and that these tend to be young players who are yet to reach their potential.

Stoke City were promoted to League 1 in 2001/2 and then to the Championship in 2003/4. They have then spent four seasons in the Championship before promoting to the Premier Division. Over that time the squad has been rebuilt (possibly several times) with, arguably only Andy Wilkinson progressing alongside the club.

Very few of the current squad were at Stoke in their first few seasons in the Championship and only joined when they showed the potential to play Premiership football. Also during that time only one youth player has gone on to play a regular role at Premiership level.

[looknohands]

To go along with the PA tweak, one thing I wouldn't mind seeing is how scouts/coaches interact with the manager- namely, I want their opinions to reflect what's happening in-game.

An example:

I sign an 18 year-old that my scout rates as 3 stars for PA. Over the course of the season (and future seasons) I'd love to see reports from my staff stating "Player X is developing as expected," "Player X is surpassing our expectations" (at which point they'd add half a star or whatever to his PA) or "Player X is struggling to meet our expectations" (in which case they may remove half a star.)

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

I think that you are all missing the point of the game. It is to be as realistic as possible. But the game has its limits thats the nature of games. It would be too easy to find a tactic that works stick a youth striker up front and get him to tap the ball in all the time. This would improve the player beyond anything he would normally become. if the way you are talking about raising the players PA was to happen it would be again too easy to make superstars. The game needs the PA as a back ground to tell it the potential of the player. If i buy a 15 year old i have no idea how good he will be. Unless i cheat and look in the editor i will never know how good this player can get all i can go on is the coaches and the how he plays.

If you have a problem with PA dont look for it and it will not ruin your game. Managers in real life pick up players all the time not knowing how they will turn out so why would it be any different in the game.

two flaws with this, one, you do know how good a 15 y/o will turn out, why sign him if you dont? because the scouts tell you.

and two, what tactic do you use!? if i could put a youth striker up front and it was that easy to score i wouldnt need worry about signing any striker again! ha!

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

How does it prove him wrong. Most of those 08 signings joined you lot in the summer after promotion, so therefore, the majority of your players joined once you were in the Prem. Maybe you need to buy a programme next time you use your season ticket.

it proves him wrong because believe it or not, MOST of the players playing in that first season were infact already there. so, they bought what, 20 players? no?

i was right before, i was right, now.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

to re-cap: i bought a whole new squad, every last player was changed, in fm when i played as them.

in real life, what a few players in a squad of 25 or so?

yeah, so manyyyy players.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

How does it prove him wrong. Most of those 08 signings joined you lot in the summer after promotion, so therefore, the majority of your players joined once you were in the Prem. Maybe you need to buy a programme next time you use your season ticket.

unlike you i arent among the prawn sandwich brigade.

i see the players on the pitch, not in the programme.

i also see players already in the squad from previous years. oh, still in the team even though a mid table team? oops

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

Way to miss the point

Your point was that players should grow with clubs citing Stoke City as an example.

I've proven that only a minority of players grow with clubs and that these tend to be young players who are yet to reach their potential.

Stoke City were promoted to League 1 in 2001/2 and then to the Championship in 2003/4. They have then spent four seasons in the Championship before promoting to the Premier Division. Over that time the squad has been rebuilt (possibly several times) with, arguably only Andy Wilkinson progressing alongside the club.

Very few of the current squad were at Stoke in their first few seasons in the Championship and only joined when they showed the potential to play Premiership football. Also during that time only one youth player has gone on to play a regular role at Premiership level.

so what about birmingham? were they or werent they a championship side last year?

top half prem this year?

and no, you missed the point. stoke were in the championship the previous season with most of the players in the same squad. EVERY team buys and sells players. you'd be a noob to think that you can 'win' from being wrong by saying on blabla theyve bought quite a few plyayers over the years. give me a club that hasnt.

[paganizer]

Well since the game is updated every year, things like fixed PA doesn't really matter, because players have their abilities adjusted yearly. As for long career games, it doesn't have much impact either as regens quickly take over as the new world class players. As long as production of regens works right, it's not a big problem imo.

[hbtfdbs]

to be honest, the part where you said mido, d'allessandro's pa's decrease is exactly what i mentioned. when players in the real world dont perform great for a while, say a year or in particular, more, the game stat-men decrease their current AND potential numbers. THAT should happen DURING a game of fm (and obvs the other way round to the good)

this basically says what i think without me typing it.

Actually what i can see wrong with this idea is that, just because a player plays badly doesnt mean its all down to him, its also the teams performance. If a keeper is playing behind a shocking defence hes more likely to get bad ratings, and even if they do get bad ratings doesnt mean theyve gotten worse or they're not a good player, could be many reasons like not settling in or bad gelling, playing out of position. In general if you lose a game your players will get on average 6.7 depending on how heavy a loss, basically youll see the top team in a league and the bottom teams drifting apart in terms of player stats massively, imo id stick with the current system.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

I would love SI to come out and say THIS IS HOW IT IS AND THIS IS WHY.

Silense would fall upon you all!

Chris Eagles has something like CA/PA of around 142, yet he played in my CL qualifying campaign with Newcastle playing 30 EPL games and getting 8.47 average. In your world you'd have sold him or not given him a look.

I agree with what has been said: play the game the way it was intended and you'll not have issues. Delve in too deep and you can get stuck on silly little details which take away from YOUR experience, at your expense, whilst everyone else is having a ball.

ironically, thats exactly what they are talking about. players playing amazing at high levels yet only have certain numbers ..oh it dont matter. lost cause, always is, you never get anyone say oh i see the light now on here.

[Cougar2010]

and no, you missed the point. stoke were in the championship the previous season with most of the players in the same squad. EVERY team buys and sells players. you'd be a noob to think that you can 'win' from being wrong by saying on blabla theyve bought quite a few plyayers over the years. give me a club that hasnt.

As I said I wish I had never started the conversation now as you only see what you want to and you seem to have little idea what your point was.

Your original post is below:

thats irrelevant. 'playing the game as its supposed to be played' isnt the case either because i play it how its supposed to be.... but when i progress my team from a smaller club i always find i have to buy in better players rather than the players that 'dont progress with the team', like lets say a good chunk of Stoke City's team in real life are still in the first team, yet who would have thought it just a couple of years ago they would be a mid table Prem team? it certainly wasnt depicted in the previous versions of FM. I had to recruit a whole new team in 08 when i started as them getting them promoted.

Thats exactly what Stoke have done over the course of three seasons, brought in better players and they have ditched the ones that haven't "Progressed with the team"

Its no surprise that the bulk of the team that have finished this season in a mid-Prem position are experienced Premiership players with other clubs mixed in with a few talented younger players.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

Wasn't guaranteed a start? Scored around 10 goals a season?

20 goals from 45 appearances for Guingamp in the French top flight (a small team remember), followed by 19 in 35 for Marseille. That's a goal every other game, coincidentally the same record he has at Chelsea. Since joining Chelsea, he's played on average around 30 games a season. Hmmm, it seems that he is just as much a regular in the starting line up now as he was in France.

Remember, Chelsea paid over £20 for him. He already had pedigree.

chelsea paid 20 quid for drogba? bargain

jokes

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

As I said I wish I had never started the conversation now as you only see what you want to and you seem to have little idea what your point was.

Your original post is below:

Thats exactly what Stoke have done over the course of three seasons, brought in better players and they have ditched the ones that haven't "Progressed with the team"

Its no surprise that the bulk of the team that have finished this season in a mid-Prem position are experienced Premiership players with other clubs mixed in with a few talented younger players.

we're not talking about a few seasons. my example was in use of a single season promotion. you cant use the same players...

lets say you took an average championship side and pulled them from there and placed them in the prem in the editor and started, theyd no doubt finish bottom, thats exactly whatd be like with a team thatd overperformed and got promoted without changing virtually the whole team.

and to reiterate, stoke did not buy a whole new first squad. yeah some good additions, granted, but that wasnt the point. nowehre did i say 'they bought no players preseason'.

[StevoRobbo]

To be fair, most Championship sides are average and will come straight back down anyway. Only now and again a promoted team will punch above their weight first season (Birmingham, Ipswich and Charlton)

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

and ive also already stated i dont believe PA is the actual real issue, its actually scouts and coaches saying too accurately how good they will be. if they werent as correct or close they could make that sudden rise or fall etc as has been mentioned i guess. my point about getting a youth player through and him being stated as no good is a valid one, seeing as there are players that in real life would conflict with the whole 'i can get rid of these youth players, at age 15'.

but taking upon yourself to look up at how many signings a team made, and not take into consideration the fact they played and used a lot of players in a lot of games that were already there is rather childish apart from not hitting the point.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

To be fair, most Championship sides are average and will come straight back down anyway. Only now and again a promoted team will punch above their weight first season (Birmingham, Ipswich and Charlton)

thats true - and those players who do really well when promoted in real life dont see that represented as a possibility in fm.

[edgar555]

unlike you i arent among the prawn sandwich brigade.

i see the players on the pitch, not in the programme.

i also see players already in the squad from previous years. oh, still in the team even though a mid table team? oops

Judgmental much? (the bolded part, also fantastic use of the English language)

I really don't care for Stoke, your brand of football is not appealing, but you have had 'success' fair play.

I am looking at the list Cougar has put up and if the dates are correct (you'd obviously know better than me) then 19 out of 25 joined you in 2008 or later (my football knowledge is good enough to know that a good proportion of those 2008 signings were summer ones) which means that 76% of them have joined since gaining promotion.

Seriously mate, argue how you want, those numbers do not lie. You'll probably tell me I'm wrong though, and judging by this thread this afternoon, you'll take 3 posts to do so.

[Cougar2010]

but taking upon yourself to look up at how many signings a team made, and not take into consideration the fact they played and used a lot of players in a lot of games that were already there is rather childish apart from not hitting the point.

Sorry for backing up my points with hard facts

[edgar555]

Sorry for backing up my points with hard facts

You can't win in GD can you?

Facts = childish, thats a legendary post. Conshaldo you are a comedy genius and you didn't even know it!

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

hard facts?

you listed players who they signed after they were in the prem and performed to the mid table level. they didnt sign more than a few players in pre season from championship to prem. full stop.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

he went out of his way to 'back up' that he was right, but showed he was wrong? it was childish, for going out of his way to get a list of players when that isnt the issue, ie childish, and its not fact when it is wrong. unless the first team was wholly changed you wouldnt be correct and it wasnt.

[conshaldo_bonaldo]

THAT is why you cant win in GD, because you have to be RIGHT before you can win.