Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Sreddy

Average ratings - what do you consider to be a brilliant season?

Recommended Posts

I have often complained that I miss the old CM-style ratings where you had the ratings from 1-10 but they were more spread. I recall an average rating in CM3 at 8.0 after a season not being that rare, but nowadays they are all just around the 7.0 after a relative good season.

Some have 6.85, some 6.95 and the best just make it to 7.12. It is not much difference considered the scale goes from 0.00 to 10.00 and I have trouble judging who have made a serious impact and who just been average.

What do you consider a good season-average rating?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't look at average ratings in absolute numbers any more.

What I look at is the team performance and success primarily, without any view to average ratings.

Then I check the relative average ratings of the players within the team.

That enables (or let's say: helps) me to see who my stand-out performeers are, to see how much of an impact a player had and how much he contributed to the success. Without looking at team performance first I would not be able to put that into relation to the division I'm playing in as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me personally anything above the 7.20 mark is a good season. Others will probably differ from this however. I also think it depends what type of save you're playing, Brazil for example where a lot of fixtures are played throughout the season; I've noticed players scoring 25-30 goals having an average rating of below 7 quite a frequently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really depends on the position the player plays.

Goalscorers tend to have better ratings as do those providing assists to a lesser extent so for anyone in an advanced position something around say 7.5+ I would consider to be a great season and anything less than say 7 a poor season.

For the more defensive players who tend to have lower ratings in FM14 I would be less harsh, anything over 7 being good, say maybe 7.2 being great with under say 6.6 being poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely doesn't matter to me. Success is what matters. If I win a competition I'm playing in, but most of my players have below 7, then it doesn't matter to me at all.

Purely aesthetically though, I'd say anything above 7 looked good in my eyes, and anything above 8 is just icing on the cake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are too many variables in this for you to be able judge anything at all on just average ratings alone.

How does my defensive TM compare with someone else's poacher who scores goals for fun and takes all the pen's.

How do I compare my left back, (who takes pens and free-kicks), to his back-up who doesn't or to the 1st choice right back who also doesn't.

Then there is management style. When the game is won, I take off my better players. I hardly ever score hat-tricks because they keep getting subbed when on 2 goals and this in comparison to my son for example who would specifically leave a player on if he was on 2 goals just so he could get his hat-trick. As a result my players might win fewer top goalscorer awards, but they are generally that little bit fitter and..... (more importantly in my opinion), what is the value of the regular game-time that the youngster gets coming on to replace them, or maybe it's just enough to keep the back-up guy happy.

Is your player a holding midfielder who rarely ventures forward, regularly gets booked and only ever gets an assist if one of his aimless hoof clearances somehow lands nicely for your striker to run on and slot home?

Is your striker a player at the peak of his powers or is he a young and up-coming superstar of the future who will be far too good for you by then but will learn his trade with you for the next couple of seasons? You sell the young up-coming superstar for a bomb. Your striker at the peak of his powers however is being paid 5 times as much and will offer little if any re-sale value.

It's all swings and roundabouts.

The other thing is, what is the definition of a good season? Avoiding relegation in Serie A and getting to a Cup Final with San Marino, or winning Serie A with 2 games to spare when managing Inter?

I do try to compare them to similar players, (age, ability, position etc), but to be honest I have recently set up my squad page to offer me far more info than just average ratings.

Form, fitness, match fitness, morale.

Then the things that are easier to quantify and gauge against similar positions.

To give you an example, I seem to struggle with who to pick when it comes to my 2 wide positions and my central attacking position.

My current stats page for them reads as follows.

Assists.

Assists per 90 min.

Crosses attempted.

Crosses %.

Crosses completed. (I keep meaning to change the order there!)

Distance covered.

Distance covered per 90 mins.

Dribbles.

Dribbles per game.

Goals. (Not sure why I don't have goals per 90 mins in there!!)

Key passes.

Offsides.

Pass attempts.

Pass attempts per 90 mins.

This is what I base my selection on. Not who has a higher average rating.

Just to give you an answer though.... playing as a San Marino club manager in Serie A..... anything above 6.90 is pretty good. Above 7.0 is better. Anything above 7.1 is pretty special.

For someone managing Inter in my save, 7.2 would be a starting point.. 7.3 would be good. 7.5 and above over the course of the season is pretty special.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But isn't the whole point of the rating system to average out all those individual stats and give you an idea of how well a player is playing?

My best players, season in and seaon out are my two primary DCs. They are getting 7.3-7.4 averages over the whole season. They are nowhere near my best players, but they seem to consistently perform well. Considering that I also leak a lot of goals (whilst also scoring a lot) this is particularly interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But isn't the whole point of the rating system to average out all those individual stats and give you an idea of how well a player is playing?

My best players, season in and seaon out are my two primary DCs. They are getting 7.3-7.4 averages over the whole season. They are nowhere near my best players, but they seem to consistently perform well. Considering that I also leak a lot of goals (whilst also scoring a lot) this is particularly interesting.

My DC's ratings are unfairly inflated by scoring goals at corners, so it could be the same for you.

I'm with Jimbokav - average ratings without context are not very helpful. My GKs rarely average above 7, my DCs usually get around 7.6-7.8, defensive MC usually around 7.2, attacking MC 7.4, striker 7.9, ML about 7.5, MR 8.0.

My first choice MR is the highest because he gets a lot of assists being my first choice for all set pieces and takes penalties, but then my backup MR doesn't, so if he starts to average around 7.5 he might actually be playing better than the one who averages 8.0.

so I have to judge each position and player on its/his own merits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, anything about about 6.7 is passable. 7.2 would be quite a good season, and 7.5 or above is rather excellent. Although of course it is all relative to the performance of the squad. My main striker, Nicola Ferrari, on my Aprilia Calcio save scored 25 in 32 but got just a 7.12 rating overall while the club was promoted from the Serie C2. I think there a lot of variables associated with the averages and that the numbers, despite their apparent usefulness, should not be used too much for decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goals carry far too much weight, especially when a defender scores. A CB can be having a poor game in terms of his defensive duties but his rating shoots up well over 7.0 if he scores from a corner.

Maybe the assigned player roles should be linked to average rating? For example, a ball winning midfielder should be rated more on interceptions / tacking where as an Advanced Playmaker on assists / goals etc..

Would lead to a more realistic distribution of ratings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i take note of average ratings, and normally like over 7's, but also analyze and asses them. For instance, my two CMs (DLP and BWM) not average very high. Yet they are basically the reason for my teams good performances. DLP averages over 100 passes a game, often rotating possession and switching play. Never a key pass, but very important, and normally executes at around 90% pass completion (very Busquets like). My BWM also has a lot of "simple passes", often given the ball over to the DLP or the AP ahead of him. He tackles hard, presses hard and intercepts regularly. You will very rarely see either of them get over 6.8 unless they pop up with a goal or an assist. My team wouldn't win without them, but unfortunately the game doesn't understand and appreciate their role in my tactics so they score low ratings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...