Is it time for Variable PA

[davidnsquires]

For the vast majority of situations I think the potential ability method is the way to go. There is a small number of situations where it isn't, but I'm not sure it warrants the extra programming that would be required.

I'm actually going to take an example from another sport, cycling. Lance Armstrong was a world class cyclist (including winning a world championship in his early 20s), but because of his build he was never going to win the Tour de France. Of course, after recovering from cancer his build and physiology had changed to such an extent that he was a completely different kind of cyclist. The result is that he was able to go onto win 7 Tours (de France). One might argue that his potential was increased by the cancer, but it wasn't. The potential was always there, but required major changes to be reached. Without the cancer he would have been successful, but probably no-where nearly as successful as he was following the cancer.

I think it could work if major events altered potential slightly, but probably only negatively or selectively on certain characteristics. So, a player who suffered a couple of severe hamstring injuries may have a similar or slightly reduced potential, but his injury proneness would increase (due to torn hamstrings being problematic in the future). Also, the potential gains in his pace and acceleration might decrease. The injury shouldn't necassarily affect his passing or anticipation or whatever other potential, but could certainly have an impact on certain areas.

[Mitja]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by johnnydude:

I think that at the age of 14/15 every person has a potential to be the best if other factors are taken into account such as Stamina, fiteness and Mental attributes.

Its kinda like at school when teachers say you have all the potential in the world. You can have the best teachers to get you to that potential but if your mind isnt in the right place you will not reach it.

Therefore I think at 14/15 potential for youth should be quite high, this can be determined by his current mental attributes and ability. If as he ages you see that he isnt mentally up to the task (i.e. does not try etc) then his PA should fall as coaches start to learn more about the lad. Then once he has the personality worked out the coaches can keep working at him to get to that potential by improving his skills, technique etc.

I do not think PA should increase but i think that when the player is young they should have quite a high PA that will only stay the same or decrease depending on how he pans out over the important developing years. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So your saying that someone like me at the age of 14/15 had the same potential as Maradonna/Catona etc? I really don't think so! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Potentially yes (at least technical and mental attributes). But surely your CA is 100 points under his, so you never would be as good as him in planet earth. At 14 they were far beyond any 14 player. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But i like alot of other people have very poor technical abilities, whereas he has immense technical abilities. So your saying that if his CA at his prime was 198 mine would be 98? Thats good for a conference player! I wouldn't stand a chance at conference level! My CA would be around 10 at the most!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

are you a pro player? not. all he wanted to say is that Maradona was far better player at 14 then any other 14 year old kid. and that was his potential-being much better. he was spoted, he played in first argentinian league at age of 16 or smth. that's why he had all potential in the world.

but he never played to his ful potential, due to his personality and fame, he couldn't handle.

there is no such training facility which could make you or me new Maradona.

playing football on top level (senior) is the main thing for youngsters to improve. not facilities. that's why england or switzarland don't have best football youth. brazil has. why? becouse there are things that can't be learn by coaches, you just have it/not (learn it on the street...) but to sucseed globaly you have to play big matches.

even you and I might have become decent players if Ferguson gived us chance to play....but he didn't. we don't even play real football.

[Herter]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Soton:

No footballer has ever reached their full potential and none will.

No matter what you do you will never reach your full potential, unless the circumstances are perfect and nothing is perfect.

The CA/PA system needs to change if realism is to be abtained. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree.. all players, even Kaka, Ronaldinho, Robinho, Ronaldo, can get better

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

My scouts have a great idea, and also AI seems to see it in some way

But ever if they cannot see PA, it should not be that kind of limit, real limit depends on lots of factors. If any PA must exist, it would be not static and dependant on certain abilities (as it happens with CA I suppose). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So the answer to the the problem is that the scouts and AI shouldn't be able to read the PA correctly and only read the CA and make a guess at the PA. As it happens IRL, scouts only guess the PA. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No. I think that Soton has found the clue, I forgot KISS rule (Keep It Simple Stupid).

IRL PA is NEVER achieved, no matter what you do. So make a PA that can be achieved is unrealistic, and make a PA that is never achieved is stupid.

Then the problem is "when should a player stop improving?". I can give my opinion, but best open new thread.

[stumostro]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by johnnydude:

I think that at the age of 14/15 every person has a potential to be the best if other factors are taken into account such as Stamina, fiteness and Mental attributes.

Its kinda like at school when teachers say you have all the potential in the world. You can have the best teachers to get you to that potential but if your mind isnt in the right place you will not reach it.

Therefore I think at 14/15 potential for youth should be quite high, this can be determined by his current mental attributes and ability. If as he ages you see that he isnt mentally up to the task (i.e. does not try etc) then his PA should fall as coaches start to learn more about the lad. Then once he has the personality worked out the coaches can keep working at him to get to that potential by improving his skills, technique etc.

I do not think PA should increase but i think that when the player is young they should have quite a high PA that will only stay the same or decrease depending on how he pans out over the important developing years. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So your saying that someone like me at the age of 14/15 had the same potential as Maradonna/Catona etc? I really don't think so! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Potentially yes (at least technical and mental attributes). But surely your CA is 100 points under his, so you never would be as good as him in planet earth. At 14 they were far beyond any 14 player. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But i like alot of other people have very poor technical abilities, whereas he has immense technical abilities. So your saying that if his CA at his prime was 198 mine would be 98? Thats good for a conference player! I wouldn't stand a chance at conference level! My CA would be around 10 at the most!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

are you a pro player? not. all he wanted to say is that Maradona was far better player at 14 then any other 14 year old kid. and that was his potential-being much better. he was spoted, he played in first argentinian league at age of 16 or smth. that's why he had all potential in the world.

but he never played to his ful potential, due to his personality and fame, he couldn't handle.

there is no such training facility which could make you or me new Maradona.

playing football on top level (senior) is the main thing for youngsters to improve. not facilities. that's why england or switzarland don't have best football youth. brazil has. why? becouse there are things that can't be learn by coaches, you just have it/not (learn it on the street...) but to sucseed globaly you have to play big matches.

even you and I might have become decent players if Ferguson gived us chance to play....but he didn't. we don't even play real football. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've just said i'd be nowhere near good enough to be a pro player

This just seems to be going round in circles.

The system needs a PA for the game to work.

Would it be more suitable to have a seperate PA for Technical, Physical and Mental attributes, maybe.

Does anyone know whether getting to full PA in real life is achievable, who knows, no one can catagorically say that player X could improve even though they're at the top of their game.

The original post was saying that the PA needs changing, but it should be the CA which needs looking at because that is what determins how good a player is at a certain point in time.

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

PA is needed because players improving is not quite good IMHO, with a very good improving system it would be useless. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I could have sworn based on all your posts you were against having a PA! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am against having a PA... but with rigth circunstances! Without a good improving system, lots of players would improve to 200CA if PA would not exist. So now PA is absolutely needed.

But with a very good improving system, PA would not be useful, only an innatural limit. I want that improving system. Not easy, I know, but everybody has his wishes hehe

PA is like democracy, the worst system apart from those "tested by now"

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by johnnydude:

I think that at the age of 14/15 every person has a potential to be the best if other factors are taken into account such as Stamina, fiteness and Mental attributes.

Its kinda like at school when teachers say you have all the potential in the world. You can have the best teachers to get you to that potential but if your mind isnt in the right place you will not reach it.

Therefore I think at 14/15 potential for youth should be quite high, this can be determined by his current mental attributes and ability. If as he ages you see that he isnt mentally up to the task (i.e. does not try etc) then his PA should fall as coaches start to learn more about the lad. Then once he has the personality worked out the coaches can keep working at him to get to that potential by improving his skills, technique etc.

I do not think PA should increase but i think that when the player is young they should have quite a high PA that will only stay the same or decrease depending on how he pans out over the important developing years. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So your saying that someone like me at the age of 14/15 had the same potential as Maradonna/Catona etc? I really don't think so! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Potentially yes (at least technical and mental attributes). But surely your CA is 100 points under his, so you never would be as good as him in planet earth. At 14 they were far beyond any 14 player. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But i like alot of other people have very poor technical abilities, whereas he has immense technical abilities. So your saying that if his CA at his prime was 198 mine would be 98? Thats good for a conference player! I wouldn't stand a chance at conference level! My CA would be around 10 at the most!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, I didn't explained correctly.

Those great players and you had same mental and technical potential at 14. Their technical skills were so better than you that no known miracles could make that yours equalice them. Also their mental skills were surely far and far beyond yours, and only a microchip on your brain could do anything in order to equalize their mental attributes

You had maybe a 0.000000001% of chances of equalizing them. And only if you have really tried to play football. But there was not an invisible barrier, only your CA was crap

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Themistofelis:

You think Genaro Gatuzo has any technical skill at all? he just play with mental and physical good sportsmen and characters can play in proffesional level if they are committed to their work </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In fact he has marking, 1-2's, tackling, a bit of passing... still you are right, what makes him brilliant are not technical attributes, but mental and physical.

but what's the point about that

[Mitja]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

PA is needed because players improving is not quite good IMHO, with a very good improving system it would be useless. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I could have sworn based on all your posts you were against having a PA! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am against having a PA... but with rigth circunstances! Without a good improving system, lots of players would improve to 200CA if PA would not exist. So now PA is absolutely needed.

But with a very good improving system, PA would not be useful, only an innatural limit. I want that improving system. Not easy, I know, but everybody has his wishes hehe

PA is like democracy, the worst system apart from those "tested by now" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

there are games which don't have PA/CA, only attributes. it si not that hard. also we know what affects, if player will improve. now it is simply, if facilites/coaches are good, player with high PA will improve no metter he is playing or not.

even bigger problem is that AI is looking for CA/PA. and we can't see it like AI can.without this system things would be harder (for AI as well as humans) and moe realistic. does Wenger ask god for one's PA when he is trying to sign him. I don't think so, it's a risky buisness, sometimes you win, sometimes loose.

[stumostro]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

even bigger problem is that AI is looking for CA/PA. and we can't see it like AI can.without this system things would be harder (for AI as well as humans) and moe realistic. does Wenger ask god for one's PA when he is trying to sign him. I don't think so, it's a risky buisness, sometimes you win, sometimes loose. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes the AI looks at the PA, but if it was that heavily weighted in the favour of the AI, what chance would the human managers have of signing certain players? As every AI manager can see the PA as a number how come these players don't get snapped up straight away by them before we even have the chance to scout them in the game?

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

even bigger problem is that AI is looking for CA/PA. and we can't see it like AI can.without this system things would be harder (for AI as well as humans) and moe realistic. does Wenger ask god for one's PA when he is trying to sign him. I don't think so, it's a risky buisness, sometimes you win, sometimes loose. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes the AI looks at the PA, but if it was that heavily weighted in the favour of the AI, what chance would the human managers have of signing certain players? As every AI manager can see the PA as a number how come these players don't get snapped up straight away by them before we even have the chance to scout them in the game? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes the AI looks at the PA, but if it was that heavily weighted in the favour of the AI, what chance would the human managers have of signing certain players? As every AI manager can see the PA as a number how come these players don't get snapped up straight away by them before we even have the chance to scout them in the game?

There are sometimes players scouted by several or more teams, but their mates with same conditions are not scouted at all event being younger, having better attributes or performing better. Wegner signed fabregas because he was the best of his mates at that moment, if he'd had a better mate then, wegner should have signed that mate.

Without PA, managers should have own rules to choose better prospects. Some would be quite common, some not. For example some managers want fast strikers, others prefer them stronger, tall, with good shoot, with nice pass... quite a messy but great if possible.

[stumostro]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

even bigger problem is that AI is looking for CA/PA. and we can't see it like AI can.without this system things would be harder (for AI as well as humans) and moe realistic. does Wenger ask god for one's PA when he is trying to sign him. I don't think so, it's a risky buisness, sometimes you win, sometimes loose. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes the AI looks at the PA, but if it was that heavily weighted in the favour of the AI, what chance would the human managers have of signing certain players? As every AI manager can see the PA as a number how come these players don't get snapped up straight away by them before we even have the chance to scout them in the game? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes the AI looks at the PA, but if it was that heavily weighted in the favour of the AI, what chance would the human managers have of signing certain players? As every AI manager can see the PA as a number how come these players don't get snapped up straight away by them before we even have the chance to scout them in the game?

There are sometimes players scouted by several or more teams, but their mates with same conditions are not scouted at all event being younger, having better attributes or performing better. Wegner signed fabregas because he was the best of his mates at that moment, if he'd had a better mate then, wegner should have signed that mate.

Without PA, managers should have own rules to choose better prospects. Some would be quite common, some not. For example some managers want fast strikers, others prefer them stronger, tall, with good shoot, with nice pass... quite a messy but great if possible. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Im not sure what you mean by 'mate' it doesn't make sense in the context of your thread 'Wegner signed fabregas because he was the best of his mates at that moment' = Wegner signed fabregas because he was the best of his friends at that moment.

[Mravac Kid]

The feeling I got from this thread is that PA isn't the problem, but rather that the starting CA should be more closely related to PA... so you can see from a player what he's probably going to be like in the future.

Which is of course simply wrong, because there's lots of players who seem to be very good but simply don't progress any further, while their teammates who were less capable when they were younger develop past them.

And there's also players who don't seem to be anything special, but then have an absolute stormer of a season and rocket forward in ability.

I think the game mimics this reasonably close.

[SkidRo]

wat if they just demolish potential ability and just have current ability. in truth you can have an idea of how good a player is but how is that judged in real life :

- through performance

- how well they are doing in training

- maybe some other things buit i cant think right now lol

i think it shud be up to us to determine how good they will become for the team depending on how well they are doing in the game an dtheir current ability just raises or drops depending on how good/bad they are perfroming.

including potential ability just limits how good a player can become no matter what and scouts and coaches shudnt be so accurate it makes it too easy to determine who to buy, sell, ect

[DMaster2]

I think that PA is a worng system.

For me the best one is the one used in PES (!) but of course it can't be used like it is now in FM.

The major point is that all player improve. It's pointless to say me and you are crap and we remain crap forever no matter what because we are people sit in a chair writing in a FM forum,not professional players that train 5/6 days a week then play games at sunday.

If a player train all day in clubs the develop, they will never be good/world class but they get better day after day until they reach an age that physically stop them to improve.

So it could be a thing like this:

players start with attributes depending on their actual CA then start to improve when they start to train in the game.

Then how level they can reach? Well there are important factor and can be coded in the game with numbers :

- Talent -> is a natural gifted player? Most talented player develop faster than crappier one

- CA -> Starting CA should influence how fast they develop. The higher the CA is the slower the player develop

- Mentality -> Again the mentality affect the improvement of a player. A hard-worker professional player develop faster than a lazier one

- Age -> As the player grow older the development should slow down, then when the pick age is reached (depending on mentality and role) the player start to become weaker

- Coach Staff -> The better the staff is the faster the player develop

- Facilities -> The better the facilities the faster a player will develop

- First team experience

- Others

Then all these stat are combined in an equation (the weight of the single point is determined by SI,) and the result would be a stat called Development Speed. This stat would determine the speed of the growth of a player.

A player will grow as fast as the Development Speed is and will stop increase when his pick age is reached,then his stat (especially the physical one) start to decrease.

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

Im not sure what you mean by 'mate' it doesn't make sense in the context of your thread 'Wegner signed fabregas because he was the best of his mates at that moment' = Wegner signed fabregas because he was the best of his friends at that moment. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, I mean that fabregas was the best among other players playing in the same team. If a player in the team where fabregas was playing at 15 had been better, wegner'd bought that player instead Fabregas.

Sorry, I know my english su_cks ^_^

[Mitja]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DMaster2:

I think that PA is a worng system.

For me the best one is the one used in PES (!) but of course it can't be used like it is now in FM.

The major point is that all player improve. It's pointless to say me and you are crap and we remain crap forever no matter what because we are people sit in a chair writing in a FM forum,not professional players that train 5/6 days a week then play games at sunday.

If a player train all day in clubs the develop, they will never be good/world class but they get better day after day until they reach an age that physically stop them to improve.

So it could be a thing like this:

players start with attributes depending on their actual CA then start to improve when they start to train in the game.

Then how level they can reach? Well there are important factor and can be coded in the game with numbers :

- Talent -> is a natural gifted player? Most talented player develop faster than crappier one

- CA -> Starting CA should influence how fast they develop. The higher the CA is the slower the player develop

- Mentality -> Again the mentality affect the improvement of a player. A hard-worker professional player develop faster than a lazier one

- Age -> As the player grow older the development should slow down, then when the pick age is reached (depending on mentality and role) the player start to become weaker

- Coach Staff -> The better the staff is the faster the player develop

- Facilities -> The better the facilities the faster a player will develop

- First team experience

- Others

Then all these stat are combined in an equation (the weight of the single point is determined by SI,) and the result would be a stat called Development Speed. This stat would determine the speed of the growth of a player.

A player will grow as fast as the Development Speed is and will stop increase when his pick age is reached,then his stat (especially the physical one) start to decrease. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that's about it.

only in my opinoum player shouldn't improve much if he is not given first team football. that was very good years ago on CM. if you gave your youngster a long run in the 1st team he improved drasticly.

[x42bn6]

In real life, does any player have a limit to how good they can be?

In real life, if age was not a factor, could Blue Square Premier winger Joe Average become as good as Cristiano Ronaldo today?

Do players ever reach their limit, if it exists?

I for one wouldn't advocate a limit for potential ability, but a ceiling sounds simple. When a player approaches this limit, the potential ability also increases, but at a very slow rate.

[James.Clench]

Wow thanks for all your post , I didn’t think I’d get such a response.

Anyway after reading your replies I think that I have come to agree with those who are in favour of not making PA variable (more on that later). But I do still believe that PA shouldn’t be given until you hit 18/19.

Looking back to my school days again I remember that 14 and 15 was a very different age for everyone, whilst many of us where covered in acne, some kids balls had only just dropped, and others could grow beards (like Rooney). I mean if Man Utd came across two identically gifted and passionate players, one who is fresh faced high pitch talking 14 year old kid, and one who is a beard growing 6ft tall 15 year old manboy, then it’s a fair bet to say that the Man Utd coaches would be able to develop the 14 year old kid to be a better player than the manboy. That’s why I don’t believe that PA’s should be given until a player hits 18 or 19.

I think that someone hit on a good solution in making PA affect certain stats differently, IRL you could take any player (even with an adjudged PA to be 1) at 14 who had 1 for pace and acceleration and turn them into someone who could run 100 meters in under 11 seconds by the time they where 21, yet this is impossible on the game. (which is probably more of a training issue than a PA one)

“You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink†I think this expression best sums up the reason why I believe that PA shouldn’t be variable. For instance you could give 100 new born babies a pure football upbringing, I mean the full works academies, private coaches, fitness regimes, etc etc, and they would all turn out different, they would all be pretty good, but there would still be some that stood out, and some that faded away, and there would be no guarantee that any would turn out world class. I don’t believe that the latter is down to been “Naturally gifted†in fact I don’t believe that such a thing exists at all, I do believe however that some people are quicker at learning than others, and are able to improve themselves (without coaching) a lot faster and more effectively than others, which is all about there PA, and is why 100 babies would all turn out different.

In conclusion I would keep PA the same, and not make it variable, but I would like to see it affect certain stats differently, the more technique and mentally based the stat, then the more PA should affect it, and the less it should improve the closer the player got to his PA, yet the more athletic the stat then the less PA should influence it, any player who’s CA is equally to their PA could learn to run faster, jump higher, last longer or be stronger. I would also like to see the training tweaked, but that’s for another day.

[Soton]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James.Clench:

After reading your replies I think that I have come to agree with those who are in favour of not making PA variable (more on that later). But I do still believe that PA shouldn’t be given until you hit 18/19.

I think that someone hit on a good solution in making PA affect certain stats differently, IRL you could take any player (even with an adjudged PA to be 1) at 14 who had 1 for pace and acceleration and turn them into someone who could run 100 meters in under 11 seconds by the time they where 21, yet this is impossible on the game. (which is probably more of a training issue than a PA one)

“You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink†I think this expression best sums up the reason why I believe that PA shouldn’t be variable. For instance you could give 100 new born babies a pure football upbringing, I mean the full works academies, private coaches, fitness regimes, etc etc, and they would all turn out different, they would all be pretty good, but there would still be some that stood out, and some that faded away, and there would be no guarantee that any would turn out world class. I don’t believe that the latter is down to been “Naturally gifted†in fact I don’t believe that such a thing exists at all, I do believe however that some people are quicker at learning than others, and are able to improve themselves (without coaching) a lot faster and more effectively than others, which is all about there PA, and is why 100 babies would all turn out different.

In conclusion I would keep PA the same, and not make it variable, but I would like to see it affect certain stats differently, the more technique and mentally based the stat, then the more PA should affect it, and the less it should improve the closer the player got to his PA, yet the more athletic the stat then the less PA should influence it, any player who’s CA is equally to their PA could learn to run faster, jump higher, last longer or be stronger. I would also like to see the training tweaked, but that’s for another day. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correct me if i'm wrong, but I think you'll agree that perhaps intelligence is a better word than potential ability. To me intelligence means ability to learn, players like Le Tissier were, in a football sense, utter geniuses. Footballers like Le Tessier could do amazing stuff with the least bit of training.

A player with high intelligence should be able to succeed under less than ideal circumstances, but try-hards like Roy Keane need greater guidance.

[James.Clench]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Correct me if i'm wrong, but I think you'll agree that perhaps intelligence is a better word than potential ability. To me intelligence means ability to learn, players like Le Tissier were, in a football sense, utter geniuses. Footballers like Le Tessier could do amazing stuff with the least bit of training. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes and no, Intelligence is certainly a major factor in PA, but I believe the potential of someone incorporates many other factors such as ambition, determination and workrate.

Le Tesseir, for example, was an awesome player and he probably mastered much of his technique quite quickly and without much effort due to his football intellegence, but I bet he was never first on and last off the training field, Beckham on the other hand work hard for hours every day after everyone else had gone home, over years on the training field practising and perfecting his deadballs and crosses until he got it right, and both players turned out very good, but there probably not in in many peoples all time 11. Whereas if Beckham had had Le Tessiers Intellegence, and vise versa then they probably would have been better players

[Soton]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James.Clench:

I do believe however that some people are quicker at learning than others, and are able to improve themselves (without coaching) a lot faster and more effectively than others, which is all about there PA, and is why 100 babies would all turn out different.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe I misinterpreted the above.

[Themistofelis]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

In fact he has marking, 1-2's, tackling, a bit of passing... still you are right, what makes him brilliant are not technical attributes, but mental and physical.

but what's the point about that </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not very familiar with football player development but i am a bit with basketball , hard work , physical and mental attributes can make anyone play in a good level and i do mean anyone .

What for example make English players competitive is not their skill (lol) it is that they are good athletes and have a mentality about the game (of course this mentality makes their national team play crap but this is another story) .

[Mitja]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James.Clench:

Wow thanks for all your post , I didn’t think I’d get such a response.

Anyway after reading your replies I think that I have come to agree with those who are in favour of not making PA variable (more on that later). But I do still believe that PA shouldn’t be given until you hit 18/19.

Looking back to my school days again I remember that 14 and 15 was a very different age for everyone, whilst many of us where covered in acne, some kids balls had only just dropped, and others could grow beards (like Rooney). I mean if Man Utd came across two identically gifted and passionate players, one who is fresh faced high pitch talking 14 year old kid, and one who is a beard growing 6ft tall 15 year old manboy, then it’s a fair bet to say that the Man Utd coaches would be able to develop the 14 year old kid to be a better player than the manboy. That’s why I don’t believe that PA’s should be given until a player hits 18 or 19.

I think that someone hit on a good solution in making PA affect certain stats differently, IRL you could take any player (even with an adjudged PA to be 1) at 14 who had 1 for pace and acceleration and turn them into someone who could run 100 meters in under 11 seconds by the time they where 21, yet this is impossible on the game. (which is probably more of a training issue than a PA one)

“You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink†I think this expression best sums up the reason why I believe that PA shouldn’t be variable. For instance you could give 100 new born babies a pure football upbringing, I mean the full works academies, private coaches, fitness regimes, etc etc, and they would all turn out different, they would all be pretty good, but there would still be some that stood out, and some that faded away, and there would be no guarantee that any would turn out world class. I don’t believe that the latter is down to been “Naturally gifted†in fact I don’t believe that such a thing exists at all, I do believe however that some people are quicker at learning than others, and are able to improve themselves (without coaching) a lot faster and more effectively than others, which is all about there PA, and is why 100 babies would all turn out different.

In conclusion I would keep PA the same, and not make it variable, but I would like to see it affect certain stats differently, the more technique and mentally based the stat, then the more PA should affect it, and the less it should improve the closer the player got to his PA, yet the more athletic the stat then the less PA should influence it, any player who’s CA is equally to their PA could learn to run faster, jump higher, last longer or be stronger. I would also like to see the training tweaked, but that’s for another day. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

to tell youthe truth, what you wrote doesn't make any sense to me. it makes sense in computor world but you were talking about reality...

your 14 y.o. kid will have to work hard to come close to that manboy. there is no guarantee he'll sucseed. if you take into acount that humans are grownig up to some 18-20 years of age. characteristcs like pace and acceleration can be learned but only to some amount. one who is slow will never be fast, once he reaches 20 years. on the other hand strenght is different and person can get stronger even in his 30's. so the peak of pace, agility...is earlier then the peak of strenght.

about those 100 babies; it's very hypotetical thing, but I don't think any of them would play football at the age of 18, with all that pressure, they shoud handle. anyway, of course they would turn different. mosrly due to different personalities and "life factor"- randomness.

"natural gifted" player is someone who's got more skills at/from young age. is it some physical charateristics, or some mental factor his personality has, or some technical skills he learned on the street as a child.

I agree that techique and mental stats can improve more than physical ones. but I don't with runnig faster, jumoing higher thing. it's the metter of age. some mental stats should improve no metter how old is a player-experience. I believe humans are learning and improving/decliming their whole lifes.

no PA shouln't be set at all, if we want reality, no metter what. it's weird to see 17 year old, to be said by your scouts he won't improve anymore????!!? if there wasn't CA/PA system we should be told; not good enough to sucssed at our club level, don't believe he has enough qulity to ever play in our 1st ream. CA/PA is so simplified version of reality. look at luca toni, he peaked at age of 29. he is one of the best strikers. if there wasn't CA/PA system we would get more randomness in the game. I don't want everything to be fixed, and determined in advance. that's not life and that's not football.

[George Graham]

Maybe PA should be split.

For example certain attributes can be improved with training.

But there are ones that are natural gifts as such which should be set in stone.

Which attributes fall into which category is open to debate though, as even natural talents such as speed and acceleration can be marginally improved upon.

[Neb]

I thought I should link to this thread, along very similar lines.

http://community.sigames.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/521102691/m/4182090463/p/1

My opinion is pretty obvious, I agree with Xouman!

I do think that there should be a limit on how much a player improves. as we all know that not everyone can be the next pele.

However, that limit should be on how much a player can improve in the time he's got to improve. So if a player starts of with a CA of 1, he's never going to be a star (although he could improve immensly and be much much better, how much depends on his circumstances / mental)

A young player who starts the game with a CA of 150 could be amazing, purely because he doesn't have far to go to be amazing, so the chances are that he'd make it.

Think messi, he's been touted as an amazing player since he was really young. Why? because he had amazing 'potential'? or because for his age he was already excellent?!

As far as i'm concerned there is no such thing as 'potential' in real life and so there shouldn't be in FM, there is only current ability and the assumptions people make on development from that point. The development should be due to environment (whether the player enjoys his club, his manager, his co players, whether the club plays him in competetive games, whether the club has goo training facilities, etc) and mental ability (drive, ambition, proffessionalism, etc)

if the gap to make the grade is too big, then it should be just as simple as that. The 17 year old conference player that is absolutely rubbish, probably could make it to a decent level if he gets the right breaks, but the chances of him getting the breaks are slim, because no decent club would buy him and give him the opportunity to become decent.

In many respects I think the current FM system of CA/PA is too complicated. surely all you need is a CA and a guestimate of a 'PA' (which already exists). A player can improve as much as the game engine will let him (that might need to be tightened) depending on how much he improves would dictate how good the AI thought he could become.

Its logical and simple and equals real life. I really don't see the difficulties with it! I think if the development engine could be tweaked just right it would fix all the problems people seem to be having with poor regens. It'd make the game a lot more rewarding too!

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Neb:

I thought I should link to this thread, along very similar lines.

http://community.sigames.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/521102691/m/4182090463/p/1

My opinion is pretty obvious, I agree with Xouman!

I do think that there should be a limit on how much a player improves. as we all know that not everyone can be the next pele.

However, that limit should be on how much a player can improve in the time he's got to improve. So if a player starts of with a CA of 1, he's never going to be a star (although he could improve immensly and be much much better, how much depends on his circumstances / mental)

A young player who starts the game with a CA of 150 could be amazing, purely because he doesn't have far to go to be amazing, so the chances are that he'd make it.

Think messi, he's been touted as an amazing player since he was really young. Why? because he had amazing 'potential'? or because for his age he was already excellent?!

As far as i'm concerned there is no such thing as 'potential' in real life and so there shouldn't be in FM, there is only current ability and the assumptions people make on development from that point. The development should be due to environment (whether the player enjoys his club, his manager, his co players, whether the club plays him in competetive games, whether the club has goo training facilities, etc) and mental ability (drive, ambition, proffessionalism, etc)

if the gap to make the grade is too big, then it should be just as simple as that. The 17 year old conference player that is absolutely rubbish, probably could make it to a decent level if he gets the right breaks, but the chances of him getting the breaks are slim, because no decent club would buy him and give him the opportunity to become decent.

In many respects I think the current FM system of CA/PA is too complicated. surely all you need is a CA and a guestimate of a 'PA' (which already exists). A player can improve as much as the game engine will let him (that might need to be tightened) depending on how much he improves would dictate how good the AI thought he could become.

Its logical and simple and equals real life. I really don't see the difficulties with it! I think if the development engine could be tweaked just right it would fix all the problems people seem to be having with poor regens. It'd make the game a lot more rewarding too! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As a computer analyst/programmer, I can tell you that it's quite hard to implement this. PA is acting now in two ways, as far as I can see:

-Make sure that few players can turn into stars.

-Create an interesting work for managers, who have to look for future prospects instead of current better players.

The problem is that this don't reflect reality.

-Each generation has its own best players, maybe the best player in 2030 will be a normal EPL player nowadays. Or more probably, there could be in 2030 a bunch of players far better than Ronaldinho or Cristiano.

-Actually, managers buy best young players, and maybe those who have not change their body expecting them to grow nicely and have them already when they turn into adults. Very few of the last succeed, best players in the world were usually best players at 14. of course there are lots of great players at 14 that never succeed, and some great players who were not special at 14 (i read that Suker was a sub being 16). Turn a player into a star it's hard and involves evading bad luck, as usually happens.

Do you believe in destiny? I don't. What I will be tomorrow is heavily influenced by I was yesterday and what I do today.

I will take myself as an example. Yes, I'm quite narcisist I'll put my current attributes, maybe after a week of training to recover minimally my former stats. Between 1(bad) and 5(good)

Mental Attributes

These attributes affect how your players think on the football pitch.

* Agression: 1 -> No manager or coach has ever tried to make an aggresive player from me. As I'm not strong, it was not useful. But if a coach teaches me, I can improve to 3, I'm sure

* Anticipation: 1

* Bravery: 2

* Composure: 2

* Concentration: 2

* Creativity: 4

* Decisions: 4

* Determination: 2

* Flair: 4

* Influence: 1

* Off the ball: 1

* Postioning: 2

* Team Work: 1

* Work Rate: 2

Technical Attributes

* Corners: 1

* Crossing: 1

* Dribbling: 2

* Finishing: 3

* First Touch: 1

* Heading: 1

* Long shots: 2

* Long Throws:1

* Marking:3

* Passing: 1

* Penalty Taking: 3

* Tackling: 1

* Technique: 1 (well, I actually deserve a 0 )

Physical Attributes

* Acceleration: 1

* Agility: 2

* Balance:1

* Jumping:1

* Natural Fitness:1

* Pace:1

* Stamina:2

* Strength:1

Hidden Attributes

* Consistency:?

* Dirtiness:?

* Important Matches:?

* Injury Proneness:?

* Versatility:4

* Adaptability:4

* Ambition:1

* Controversy:2

* Loyalty:5

* Pressure:?

* Professionalism:3

* Sportsmanship:4

* Temperament:1

Some hidden attributes are unknown even for me, as I haven't player professional football.

Well, with these traits I can have a CA of 5/200. I can't even play in a non-league team, I know. I am 26, quite late for me. But what would happen if a EPL team wanted to make the best player possible from me, coaching me for years, playing me at right level?

Mental Attributes

These attributes affect how your players think on the football pitch.

* Agression: 1 -> No manager or coach has ever tried to make an aggresive player from me. As I'm not strong, it was not useful. But if a coach teaches me, I can improve to 3, I'm sure

* Anticipation: 1 -> This one is not easy to improve, but playing often in a suitable role I can improve to 2 in 2 or 3 years

* Bravery: 2 -> A good motivating coach or captain can help me to improve to let's say 3

* Composure: 2 -> This one is "easy" to all players, but it's hard trained. In 1 year maybe I can't improve it, in 2 or 3 years maybe one point, to 3.

* Concentration: 2 -> Same as before, experience helps a lot, but also a good manager.

* Creativity: 4 -> I'm 26 and surely I can't change it now.

* Decisions: 3 -> surely as creativity

* Determination: 2 -> A determinated captain and mates can help me to improve, but by myself I can't.

* Flair: 3 -> I'm maybe too old to change it. Maybe if I play in a brazilian club...

* Influence: 1 -> I can improve it with experience,but maybe at a rate of 4 years a point (talking between 1 and 5 ratings)

* Off the ball: 1 -> Like anticipation, through matches I can improve it at slow rate

* Postioning: 2 -> Like anticipation and off the ball

* Team Work: 1 -> I have to play lots of matches, and being in a motivated club will be helpful. No available to improve without playing

* Work Rate: 2 -> as bravery

Technical Attributes

* Corners: 1 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 3 or 4

* Crossing: 1 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 3 or 4

* Dribbling: 2 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 4

* Finishing: 3 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 4 (maybe 5)

* First Touch: 1 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 3 or 4

* Heading: 1 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 3 or 4

* Long shots: 2 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 4

* Long Throws:1 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 3 or 4

* Marking:3 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 4 (maybe 5)

* Passing: 1 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 3 or 4

* Penalty Taking: 3 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 4 (maybe 5)

* Tackling: 1 -> If I focus a lot, I can improve to 3 or 4

* Technique: 1 (well, I actually deserve a 0 ) -> This one is different. I can improve a lot in a short period of time because I haven't trained for years, but I won't go beyond 2.

What's the problem with technical attributes? I can focus on any area, but not in all areas. Maybe I can improve let's say 3 points a year (equivalent to 12 fm points), but not in every area, but the sum of all my improvements. If I focus ONLY on penalties, I will be a master in 3 years, don't hesitate.

Physical Attributes

* Acceleration: 1 -> maybe 2? surely with good fitness training even being 26

* Agility: 2 -> maybe to 3.

* Balance:1 -> difficult, but not impossible

* Jumping:1 -> don't think i can increase it

* Natural Fitness:1 -> surely a more healthy live will improve this to 2, never beyond

* Pace:1-> maybe 2? surely with good fitness training even being 26

* Stamina:2-> 3 points will be easy with good training

* Strength:1-> maybe a 2, with good training and years

Hidden Attributes

* Consistency:? -> if my performances are decent and my coach takes care of me, could be a 3

* Dirtiness:? -> as my coach wants if I do what he wants

* Important Matches:? -> this is difficult to improve. winning important matches should help, losing them would drop this

* Injury Proneness:4 -> can't be changed imho

* Versatility:4 -> If I play in the same role always, it will decrease

* Adaptability:4 -> can't be changed imho

* Ambition:1 -> can't be changed imho

* Controversy:2 -> can change due to certain events

* Loyalty:5 -> with age, people changes it's priorities

* Pressure:? -> can increase with experience

* Professionalism:3 -> can increase with experience, decrease with bad habits

* Sportsmanship:4 -> can change with experience

* Temperament:1 -> can change with experience

As you can see I can turn into a decent BSS player, imho. I always will have crap technical attributes (maybe some decent, but crap all around) because I started too late and with low skills already, quite limited physically talking but with nice mental attributes. maybe a DMC, I will say.

But the problem is, what EPL team wants to train me into a BSS player? will I spend lots of hours every week pursuing a dream. What about if I have an injury, if my mates dislike me because I'm crap, if I'm not motivated to train 100%, if my coach can't inspire me? there is at least a 80% that I can't improve to BSS even with best environment. If a BSS team tries to train me, I will have even less oportunities.

After all, the important question. What is my potential? Someone can say? please I really want you opinion, I'm serious.

[Mitja]

-1

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

-1 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

well, I expected a number between 1 and 200, since it's that way how it it's implemented in DB (although my PA was created with a -1 _p)

so, what numer would you say?

[postal postie]

anyone can be a footballer. whether you can play professionally is another thing altogether.

whether you can play at the top of the professional leagues again, is another thing alltogether.

i believe there is a limit, in terms of technical ability that every footballer can be. some footballers limits are lower than others. but if every one that wanted to be a professional footballer and tried hard and were in physically good shape then the market for top class footballers wouldn't not be spiralling into 10s of millions of pounds. you'd just get 1 of the many people who are physically good,really wanted to be a footballer and was willing to train hard for peanuts.

[chopper99]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

After all, the important question. What is my potential? Someone can say? please I really want you opinion, I'm serious. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your potential now at 26 is the same as it was when you were 15 imo. I don't know you and have never seen you play football. But I get the impression that you've never really shown any natural aptitude for football and were not playing football constantly from a very early age as most professional footballers would have done.

For that reason I'd say your PA when you were 15 would be 35. Your CA when you were 15 may have been around 5 and is probably not any better now. So with all the top class training you mentioned you may in the next few years be able to up your CA to 10, in effect making you twice the player you are now. If you'd had top class coaching from the age of 15 you may have reached your potential of 35.

But, I genuinely believe you wouldn't get better than that. This is because almost all professional footballers were playing a lot of football from as soon as they were old enough to kick a ball. Many of them would have been playing at county level or for some team or other.

I'm making the assumption that this is not the case for you and because of this and perhaps a lack of natural footballing ability I believe your PA at 15 would be pretty low and stay that way.

Any coach for any sport will tell you that most people need to train from a very early age to get anywhere near the top of their sport.

That's why I believe your PA would be maybe 35 at the most, and that potential would not change no matter what you did after you were 15 because by then it would be too late.

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by chopper99:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

After all, the important question. What is my potential? Someone can say? please I really want you opinion, I'm serious. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your potential now at 26 is the same as it was when you were 15 imo. I don't know you and have never seen you play football. But I get the impression that you've never really shown any natural aptitude for football and were not playing football constantly from a very early age as most professional footballers would have done.

For that reason I'd say your PA when you were 15 would be 35. Your CA when you were 15 may have been around 5 and is probably not any better now. So with all the top class training you mentioned you may in the next few years be able to up your CA to 10, in effect making you twice the player you are now. If you'd had top class coaching from the age of 15 you may have reached your potential of 35.

But, I genuinely believe you wouldn't get better than that. This is because almost all professional footballers were playing a lot of football from as soon as they were old enough to kick a ball. Many of them would have been playing at county level or for some team or other.

I'm making the assumption that this is not the case for you and because of this and perhaps a lack of natural footballing ability I believe your PA at 15 would be pretty low and stay that way.

Any coach for any sport will tell you that most people need to train from a very early age to get anywhere near the top of their sport.

That's why I believe your PA would be maybe 35 at the most, and that potential would not change no matter what you did after you were 15 because by then it would be too late. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I really liked your post I fact, that was what I wanted, though I expected something worse. well done!

You think than PA is set in stone, so no matter what I do I can't go further. Good. But in that case, I have to do everything perfectly, a 100% healthy life, perfect coaches and mates who make me suffer in the exactly moments and help me when I need. I agree that in perfect conditions, all players are not the same, and I also think that there is a limit for all. If you can shoot a ball from 50 yards and pass it by a hoop just 1 milimeter wider than the ball, and you can do it always, I can say you are a perfect passer: you have reached the limit. Will you find someone that can do this? I don't think so, then perfection should not be achieved.

Nobody reaches his perfection. So why have a PA? To limit players CA in FM. It is an artificial number, and does not represent potential, but the CA the player is likely to have under normal circunstances and lots of players reach it.

You do not have a static potential. Every day I'm further to the player I could have been when I born. Maradona could be a better player himself, as Pelé. All of us.

The important thing is the change of the player. One player can develope a lot one skill if he trains hard, if he is motivating in learn, if he plays and tests it, if he hasn't trained it before... and under certain circunstances players don't improve, or lose some of their current hability. System works nicely now, maybe the problem is most players develope easy under certain circunstances and then they stop without an explanation.

In real life Ronaldinho stopped improving because:

-Physical attributes: Ronaldinho did not improve because he trained with less intensity, and already has trained at a very good level.

-Mental attributes: he increased influence, composure a bit but lost work rate, bravery... just he focused on technical attributes, but not more than he did before. he is not really eager to improve.

-Technical attributes: since he is not training hard, he has not improved. His training just maintains his skills, and maybe he lose some.

but messi

-physical attributes: he can't improve drastically, but has gained a lot of strengh, some balance, agility... since he's young he's adapting to his body

-mental attributes: he has learned a lot from players like ronaldinho, and works hard in matches and trainings. Playing important matches he's learning a lot.

By the way, I don't have a PA of 35

I have a potential about 3/10 for physical, 4/10 for technical (at this moment, could be higher if I started 10 years ago) and 10/10 for mental, though this 10 in mental depends on lots of factors, some quite random.

[iacovone]

Soton I'm not sure you're quite right there. For one there is no way of defining what a players real life potential is. It's all objective.

Anyway I largely agree with the original poster, I feel there should be some leverage in PA.

[postal postie]

Originally posted by xouman:

Nobody reaches his perfection. So why have a PA? To limit players CA in FM. It is an artificial number, and does not represent potential, but the CA the player is likely to have under normal circunstances and lots of players reach it.

You do not have a static potential. Every day I'm further to the player I could have been when I born. Maradona could be a better player himself, as Pelé. All of us.

The important thing is the change of the player. One player can develope a lot one skill if he trains hard, if he is motivating in learn, if he plays and tests it, if he hasn't trained it before... and under certain circunstances players don't improve, or lose some of their current hability. System works nicely now, maybe the problem is most players develope easy under certain circunstances and then they stop without an explanation.

QUOTE]

the game has to have a static upper limit otherwise the possiblity to go past it is there.

its like in real life. for beckham to cross the ball he has to have the ball in his posession.

this is obvious. to a piece of software it is not. so you have to specificly tell it.

if beckham is on wing AND has ball then cross

in my opinion we all do have a static potential. you may be closer to being a better player every day. that just means your getting closer to your PA every day. not that your PA is extending exponentially into the distance as you get better.

[Neb]

I agree that there needs to be a limit on how far a player develops and I can see why the current system is in place.

Its just that its been the same system for over 10 years!

I'd rather see a dynamic development of players. Increase due to being looked after, decrease after being frozen out of the team, young stars hitting the headlines when they are 17 but never really making it, players suddenly doing well even though they are 'unknowns'. Less reliance on an imaginary number created when the player entered the game world.

I'm sure it would be difficult to do, to balance it out correctly, but I think I'd prefer it to the current system.

I think its more that because I know PA exists, it annoys me! I don't ever look at it, it just annoys me that my 18 year old striker isn't ever going to get any better, no matter what I do and no matter where he trains, or who trains him. To a certain extent it makes the whole player development thing a little bit pointless.

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Neb:

I agree that there needs to be a limit on how far a player develops and I can see why the current system is in place.

Its just that its been the same system for over 10 years!

I'd rather see a dynamic development of players. Increase due to being looked after, decrease after being frozen out of the team, young stars hitting the headlines when they are 17 but never really making it, players suddenly doing well even though they are 'unknowns'. Less reliance on an imaginary number created when the player entered the game world.

I'm sure it would be difficult to do, to balance it out correctly, but I think I'd prefer it to the current system.

I think its more that because I know PA exists, it annoys me! I don't ever look at it, it just annoys me that my 18 year old striker isn't ever going to get any better, no matter what I do and no matter where he trains, or who trains him. To a certain extent it makes the whole player development thing a little bit pointless. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with you. The fact is that the current system works nice now, I enjoy it a lot. But like you, I think that could be improved. Our point of view is that some players improve further than other because of their current abilities and environment, not by mystical reasons.

I have a science mind. I think that rains not because some God wants, but just because an electric reaction happens lots of meters above. Maybe there is a God, I don't deny it, but then he's rules is what we call Science, and humans are just guessing those

In other words: I can easily accept some kind of PA, but not any. What PA can I accept?

-A PA given from current mental stats, feeling with coach and quality of him, facilities, performance at matches, good relation with other players in the team, morale... and maybe starting CA. Also Natural Fitness could help to PA in physical traits and technique in technical skills. That is, a PA made from current abilities, so not a hidden value, just a calculated one, and not static by nature.

This PA will not be useful, same as player don't have a global 8.1/10 or something like so. One of the things I love from FM is that a player is usually not better than another, just different. In other games a player with lots of attributes at maximum and a couple at minimum like speed and strengh can be amazing, while in FM won't be quite useful. Players are good if they do what you expect with them: maybe you want a winger with good crossing or you prefer him to go into the middle while your forward runs to the wing, creating spaces. Maybe you want a keeper great rushing out or just one solid at keep, with deep defence. Well, maybe useful to calculate, as CA does, but in game CA is not as important as attributes IMHO, as has to be.

[stumostro]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Neb:

I agree that there needs to be a limit on how far a player develops and I can see why the current system is in place.

Its just that its been the same system for over 10 years!

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But at the same time, it works!

Why try and fix/make something more complicated that isn't broken?

[robin_trott_hoof]

PA has to be set, but the real issue is that hotly tipped players without fail become amazing players by their early twenties. It's too linear and players don't progress in a identikit fashion.

You almost never see a player who just turns into a decent Championship/League One player or one who's career is set back by repeated injury.

[Mitja]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Neb:

I agree that there needs to be a limit on how far a player develops and I can see why the current system is in place.

Its just that its been the same system for over 10 years!

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But at the same time, it works!

Why try and fix/make something more complicated that isn't broken? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

becouse it's not realistic.

[Coop7774]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by James.Clench:

I was never the most gifted footballer in my youth, in fact at school I was only ever picked 3rd or 4th in the playground on the premise that I would go in goal (I was, and still am quite lanky) so I know I am not exactly the authority on how a footballer develops, but..

I’ve been playing CM/FM since the 96/97 game (the one with the grey square boxes as a menu) and the one thing that hasn’t changed in all these years is that PA is determined when you are invented on the game at 14/15 and it doesn’t change. It just seems to me that it’s a bit restricting to be labelled as a player with potential of 85 or 63 or 121 at the tender age of 14/15, and no matter which football club you are at, and no matter how good the facilities and coaches are, that PA number will never change. Take me for example, when I was 15 if I had been put on the game I’d have been judged to have a potential of somewhere between 1 and 1, yet if at the age of 15 I went to a state of the art youth academy with a state of the art training setup and 23 world class coaches it’s a fair bet to say that I’d be a lot better footballer than I am now, some 10 years later.

I think that on the game when you get a fresh batch of youngsters their PA shouldn’t be set in stone, and until the player hits 18 or 19 that PA could rise or fall depending on the environment where they train and who trains them. The future change in a players PA could also be linked to there own stats such as ambition, intelligence, determination etc. The rise/fall of the PA wouldn’t have to be huge, but the training facilities and coaches at a club should make a difference to a players PA. I’d love to think that if I got a youngster aged 14 on the game and he had a PA of 160, there was a chance that with my clubs youth setup and coaches, I could make him world class. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

doesnt PA mean the best a player can potentially be?

thatz y so many top class players are below their ultimate PA.. becoz the PA is absolute maximum - that being exposed to the best youth facilities and training facilities in the world???

[Neb]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Neb:

I agree that there needs to be a limit on how far a player develops and I can see why the current system is in place.

Its just that its been the same system for over 10 years!

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But at the same time, it works!

Why try and fix/make something more complicated that isn't broken? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It does work, I agree, but so did the limited tactics of the original CM, the lack of 2d match action, the fact you could only play one league. Fair enough it works, but just because it works doesn't mean it shouldn't be improved!

As robin said, its too linear and there is little interaction to be had with the players. If I buy a young lad of 15, keep him for 10 seasons and develop him into a superstar, I don't feel like I've done anything special because he'd have ended up like that anyway! In reality it takes a lot of luck and the right development to make a player that good. I hate the way my 18 year old striker is playing the games, scoring the goals and performing week in week out but he won't get any better no matter what I do. even if he is suddenly bought by arsenal and developed perfectly he won't get any better. which is rubbish, because in real life he would get significantly better (whether he'd be as good as messi isn't the point) but he would definately improve.

In a similiar vein, if I buy a player he'll play well. I think it would make for a much more realistic experience if his ability, (or more, change of ability) was linked to his environment, his relationship with manager/players. Think of Shevchenko, would that ever happen in FM at the moment? A world class striker moving to a successful team and not performing? All the players I've signed have always met with expectation (unless they were on the wrong side of their peak). That seems silly.

It'd certainly make LLM more exciting knowing that by being a good 'manager' you can get more out of your players, influence their careers and get a reputation for being a good manager. Signing those awkward underperforming 'stars' and turning them into real professionals. etc. The list is endless and it would certainly make for an involving rewarding game!

[chopper99]

I think there are two main points being made here:

1 - Some people think that PA should not exist at all and that any player who has the best training etc should be able to improve. They are not limited by things such as natural ability and as they improve their potential also improves. I disagree with this opinion because I firmly believe that everyone has an upper limit and no amount of luck or hard work will make them better than the potential they have.

2 - Other people believe that it's the way in which a player reaches their potential that's the problem. This should not be so linear and more effort is needed by the manager to improve young players. Mental attributes such as determination should play a bigger part in how well a player improves, and only by perhaps changing some of these mental attributes with tutoring can certain players ever get close to their potential.

Injuries and the like should also play a part in development. Any event that has a negative effect on a player should have more of an impact on his ability to reach his potential. Although you have to be carful when implementing this as negative events only make some players more determined to improve (i.e Beckham after he got sent off in the '98 world cup).

I agree entirely with the second point of view. So I accept that there needs to be an upper limit, as in real life every person does indeed have a potential and once they get to be the best their body and brain will allow them to be at something they can improve no further. But at the same time a players ability to reach their potential needs to be much more varied and fluid. I personally believe that many mental attributes should be the only things seperate from the traditional PA system. These should be improved in the main by experience. What leagues and competitions a player has participated in should have a big impact.

So which of the two opinions do you agree with?

[Mitja]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by chopper99:

I think there are two main points being made here:

1 - Some people think that PA should not exist at all and that any player who has the best training etc should be able to improve. They are not limited by things such as natural ability and as they improve their potential also improves. I disagree with this opinion because I firmly believe that everyone has an upper limit and no amount of luck or hard work will make them better than the potential they have.

2 - Other people believe that it's the way in which a player reaches their potential that's the problem. This should not be so linear and more effort is needed by the manager to improve young players. Mental attributes such as determination should play a bigger part in how well a player improves, and only by perhaps changing some of these mental attributes with tutoring can certain players ever get close to their potential.

Injuries and the like should also play a part in development. Any event that has a negative effect on a player should have more of an impact on his ability to reach his potential. Although you have to be carful when implementing this as negative events only make some players more determined to improve (i.e Beckham after he got sent off in the '98 world cup).

I agree entirely with the second point of view. So I accept that there needs to be an upper limit, as in real life every person does indeed have a potential and once they get to be the best their body and brain will allow them to be at something they can improve no further. But at the same time a players ability to reach their potential needs to be much more varied and fluid. I personally believe that many mental attributes should be the only things seperate from the traditional PA system. These should be improved in the main by experience. What leagues and competitions a player has participated in should have a big impact.

So which of the two opinions do you agree with? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

your point 1 is quite simpified and I wouldn't agree with it either. the most important factor should be age, level of competition in which the player is in and either he plays or not. definetly not training facilites.

the limit of how much he can improve is allready his CA. the point is that with these CA/PA system you have plenty of 17, 18 y.o kids who can't improve.??!!! IRE if they were given the chance to play they would improve drasticly. and that's how players do improve IRE, by playing football. plus at the moment AI is only looking for CA instead of attributes.....

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by chopper99:

I think there are two main points being made here:

1 - Some people think that PA should not exist at all and that any player who has the best training etc should be able to improve. They are not limited by things such as natural ability and as they improve their potential also improves. I disagree with this opinion because I firmly believe that everyone has an upper limit and no amount of luck or hard work will make them better than the potential they have.

2 - Other people believe that it's the way in which a player reaches their potential that's the problem. This should not be so linear and more effort is needed by the manager to improve young players. Mental attributes such as determination should play a bigger part in how well a player improves, and only by perhaps changing some of these mental attributes with tutoring can certain players ever get close to their potential.

Injuries and the like should also play a part in development. Any event that has a negative effect on a player should have more of an impact on his ability to reach his potential. Although you have to be carful when implementing this as negative events only make some players more determined to improve (i.e Beckham after he got sent off in the '98 world cup).

I agree entirely with the second point of view. So I accept that there needs to be an upper limit, as in real life every person does indeed have a potential and once they get to be the best their body and brain will allow them to be at something they can improve no further. But at the same time a players ability to reach their potential needs to be much more varied and fluid. I personally believe that many mental attributes should be the only things seperate from the traditional PA system. These should be improved in the main by experience. What leagues and competitions a player has participated in should have a big impact.

So which of the two opinions do you agree with? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with both points:

1-You don't have limits (only physically), but there are things that a player can't reach in all his career. A player who appears at 16 with 2 in technique never should have a 16 no matter what happens. Only if he has never played football could explain that improve, but we assume that all players have played some years before.

Maybe SI can create some regens that came from other sports and improve drastically first years their technical skills (this happens irl) But this is another question.

Well I was saying that we don't have limits, but this not means we could improve to god's skills. You can improve 10 point each year among all technical traits when they are low. Some years later, you improve quite slower, and training works maintaining level, not truly improving. But if a new trainig system appears, you can improve again at good pace.

Raul, a famous Real Madrid player, is told to sleep in a special chamber that has different oxygene % or something like that and his performances have increased a lot. All people were sure that his level was absolutely achieved and lost, but new improvements make people better. The hypothetical limit does not exist, just you improve quite slowly at some time.

Players don't stop improving technical attributes because they cannot improve anymore. Just they have to focus their time in some skills and they are improving slower due to some reason, or just spend training time in maintaining those attributes.

2-If we both agree, no problem with this.

[postal postie]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Neb:

I agree that there needs to be a limit on how far a player develops and I can see why the current system is in place.

Its just that its been the same system for over 10 years!

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But at the same time, it works!

Why try and fix/make something more complicated that isn't broken? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

becouse it's not realistic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

we can't really claim its not realistic.

most arguments here some to be saying that potential goes up and down.

it doesn't.

what does go up and down is the chance of hitting your potential.

1. your at a poor club with poor training so your ability to hit your potential isn't particularly high.

2. your at a good club with good training. your chances of hitting your potential is much higher.

potential doesn't change. its still at the same level.

different things like your surroundings and your mentality merely help you or hinder you in achieving that potential.

[xouman]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by postal postie:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Neb:

I agree that there needs to be a limit on how far a player develops and I can see why the current system is in place.

Its just that its been the same system for over 10 years!

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But at the same time, it works!

Why try and fix/make something more complicated that isn't broken? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

becouse it's not realistic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

we can't really claim its not realistic.

most arguments here some to be saying that potential goes up and down.

it doesn't.

what does go up and down is the chance of hitting your potential.

1. your at a poor club with poor training so your ability to hit your potential isn't particularly high.

2. your at a good club with good training. your chances of hitting your potential is much higher.

potential doesn't change. its still at the same level.

different things like your surroundings and your mentality merely help you or hinder you in achieving that potential. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then if potential is the best ability you could ever have, as you never could have PERFERCT career, you won't achieve that PA. If you can't achieve PA, why have it?

[Guest pehoni]

OK guys. Talking about potential ability, I believe that everyone has a limit. If you think that human potential in terms of mental, physical and technical abilities is limitless, then this would mean that you reject genetics! No one can continue to improve forever. This is so because it is an innate quality of people to get satisfied at some point, no matter how selfish or ambitious they are in nature. The process of improvement itself is a kind of "stress" for the individual, because the body, the mind and the abilities change. Subconsciously we do not want this "stress" to continue forever and that's why guys like Ronaldinho at some point decide that that they're already doing well enough and decrease the endeavours. So, my argument ,obviously, is that both psychologically and mentally we have a limit.

I saw some people writing about current ability and that it is what really matters givig Messi for example. Well, I partially agree with them. However, do you think that Messi has always been as good as he is now? NO! His current ability used to be potnetial ability that he has managed to reach through training and endeavour, but only because he had the right genes!

[postal postie]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by xouman:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by postal postie:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stumostro:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Neb:

I agree that there needs to be a limit on how far a player develops and I can see why the current system is in place.

Its just that its been the same system for over 10 years!

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

But at the same time, it works!

Why try and fix/make something more complicated that isn't broken? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

becouse it's not realistic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

we can't really claim its not realistic.

most arguments here some to be saying that potential goes up and down.

it doesn't.

what does go up and down is the chance of hitting your potential.

1. your at a poor club with poor training so your ability to hit your potential isn't particularly high.

2. your at a good club with good training. your chances of hitting your potential is much higher.

potential doesn't change. its still at the same level.

different things like your surroundings and your mentality merely help you or hinder you in achieving that potential. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Then if potential is the best ability you could ever have, as you never could have PERFERCT career, you won't achieve that PA. If you can't achieve PA, why have it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

because this is a computer program. there needs to be limits. if you don't have a lmit to hhow far a player can improve then the program will allow the player to improve for ever.

computers have no concept of the basics without a human inputting that concept into it.

for example one problem could be that if you dont tell the program that the player has to have the ball before he can cross it then the program will attempt at some point to make the player cross a ball that he doesn't have.

we know this is silly but a program is merely running the logic that has been input into it.

[Bongo-Bongo]

The idea that everybody can become a star at whatever they choose to do is typical of the idealistic, politically correct fantasy land that the world has now become.

If we can all become great, why is it that a school friend of mine tried and tried all throughout school to do as well as he could but never did very well, whilst I put little effort in at all and was always one of the top of my class? We both went to the same school, were in the same year group and had many of the same teachers, yet despite trying his hardest, and rarely socialissing in order to get good grades, he didn't, whilst I took the p*ss and still did well. It's simply because, whilst despite the fact I was often being lazy, I still had the room to improve, whilst my friend didn't. He did the best he could, but was never going to do particularly well.

And it's the same for football. Yes, there are limitations that will make it harder for a footballer to achieve his potential, but what is needed here is a much stronger development model, and not a change to a variable PA. Wenger and Benitez have gone buying youth players from around the globe simply because they believe the players from their youth academies aren't good enough. They just don't have the potential.

[xouman]

I still think that there is not a global PA at all. Well, maybe there is, but nobody has ever reached it, so it's stupid to assign an unreachable PA.

1st statement: Nobody has ever reached his potential.

2nd statement: an unreachable PA is useless

Of course CA is not improving all the time. We improve faster at the beginning, then slower under normal conditions. Some factors may alter the learning curve, as injuries, good performances, changing the club, personal environment... As our body does, we don't improve forever in all ways. in fact, lots of players have a CA curve, thay grows until first 20's and decreases at 30's. However this curve is not the same for all players at all, most have very different curves, some players peaking at 21, others at 25, 29, even some at 30's.

3rd statement: All players stop improving at any time.

4th statement: most players have a CA curve, with highest point at the middle or middle-end of their career.

5th statement: this curve is not the same for all players.

What makes players improve? Playing, training, physical improvements, maturity. how? playing increases players mentality and motivate players for training. Training is the most important aspect: a good training may improve all players areas, unless physical attributes that are close to the limit. But it is impossible to have a perfect training, you must have 100% motivated players, perfect exercices, lots of hours of hard working... Physical improvements are due to training, gym and also body changes, specially with young players. Finally, maturity is influenced by personal life events, that can change player's proffesionalism, determination, concentration...

6th statement: players' attributes change due to different things, and have them in a perfect way is impossible.

7th statement: there can be always better environments, trainings... for a players. So, a player could be always better than he is.

But of course, some players are more naturally gifted than others. There are players that have succed with worse environment and training than other players who have not succed. That's because they had better learning curve, had better initial skills, more coordination, were more motivated at trainings, had better coaches or mates, injuries didn't affect them... Generally, I think that the problem is not "when and why players improve" but "when and why players stop improving". maybe their learning curve has peaked, and training just helps player avoiding losing of attributes, but player does not learn anything from training. Some players are just not motivated and train the same as always, and some players had bad morale. Others have injuries, there are players that don't play of play in a bad time, maybe they clash with coach, and some young player were touted better that they actually are because some good performances. And of course, some players decrease their attributes because their body has peaked and they lose physical attributes, coordination (that affects tactical attributes) and decreases motivation.

8th statement: some players are more gifted than another

9th statement: why players stop improving? because of many factors

Final statement: the key to determine players attributes (CA) is fininding a good learning curve. With a good evolution, there is no need of assingning a top CA, just the player will have a "natural" limit, and we will know it at the end of his career.

PD: wegner and benited do not sign players with better potential, but best players of their age who still are progressing