Players to have attributes upgraded/downgraded in FM20

[decapitated]

EPL Players to be upgraded for FM20 in my opinion.

Bukayo Saka
Joe Willock
Tammy Abraham
Ruben Loftus-Cheek
Mason Mount
Callum Hudson-Odoi
Fikayo Tomori
Çağlar Söyüncü
James Maddison
Harvey Barnes
Hamza Choudhury
Daniel James
Scott McTominay
Aaron Wan-Bissaka
Aaron Connolly
Aaron Ramsdale
Tyrone Mings
John McGinn

Not sure of any to be downgraded that I can think of at the moment.

 

 

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Can only speak on Manchester United tbh:

 

Juan Mata is overdue a downgrade since three seasons ago tbh. Man is literally world class and hasn't been for years.

Marcus Rashford, too good, he's better than Lukaku in FM19 IMO, which I don't think is the case IRL.

Jesse Lingard, especially that ridiculous 18 for off the ball.

Anthony Martial, is always spoken about in terms of potential, but is far too good in the game.

Matic - can't even get a game atm.

Sanchez - been off the boil for a while now.

Pereira - apparently the David Beckham thing isn't quite true.

All need downgrading.

 

Paul Pogba needs upgrading, especially in vision (16 to Mata's 18 what?), but I think his defensive frailties are correct.

[dannysheard]

As a Liverpool fan:

 - van Dijk needs an upgrade in pace/acceleration and probably a few other stats

 - Robertson needs to be boosted in physical and mental to make him one of the best full backs in the game

 - Mane, who has been an absolute beast since Coutinho left

 - Fabinho

 - Wijnaldum, who is really good for Liverpool and Netherlands but pretty average on the game

 - Lallana needs a downgrade as he isn’t getting anywhere near the first team

 - Keita... who knows?

Edited October 13, 2019 by dannysheard

[Spurs08]

Tottenham probably need widespread downgrades on mental/hidden attributes, and in particular Kane needs some adjustments to try and reflect his sustained decline since his third consecutive injury to the same ankle back in March 2018.

[FrazT]

It is probably worth mentioning that it is very likely that player attributes will have already been submitted by the club researchers, possibly even some time ago and will, I suspect be already locked. This will mean that any changes, apart from clear input errors, will have to wait till the January transfer window update.

[swansongs]

Dan James is rubbish, mate. 

[2feet]

Van Dijk has only 17 for leadership (!), positioning and tackling .

The man’s only been dribbled past once since about 1997 or something.

And if he can’t get a 20 for jumping reach and strength I don’t know who can.

And bravery only 15?!

[sporadicsmiles]

The entire Manchester United team will be nerfed, I expect.

Weirdly I just played the second season of final save, and it went almost exactly like the current season. Liverpool absolutely battered everyone and scored over 100 goals - winning their first 14 matches. They scored 8 against Manchester United at Anfield (which could happen shortly in real life too). Manchester United languished in mid table but refused to fire Solskjaer (and still haven't). It is the first time in any save I have a winning record against Manchester United (4 wins from 4). Nice to know FM can sometimes mimic reality.

I'm also not sure many of the Chelsea guys should get an upgrade yet. They are motivated by their first team chance, and have to show this level for a while to be sure they are actually, well, good.

[dothestrand]

I would like Man Utd to be downgraded, so that managing them is a harder challenge. Obviously they'll be loaded, but the dead wood they're carrying at the moment (Mata, Jones, et al) should be exactly that. Turning them around into EPL contenders should be harder work than it probably will be. 

[Svenc]

1 hour ago, sporadicsmiles said:

The entire Manchester United team will be nerfed, I expect.

Weirdly I just played the second season of final save, and it went almost exactly like the current season. Liverpool absolutely battered everyone and scored over 100 goals - winning their first 14 matches. They scored 8 against Manchester United at Anfield (which could happen shortly in real life too). Manchester United languished in mid table but refused to fire Solskjaer (and still haven't). It is the first time in any save I have a winning record against Manchester United (4 wins from 4). Nice to know FM can sometimes mimic reality.

Did both respective side do so despite some of their actual Performance metrics telling a more nuanced Story tho. :P (See Team Analysis on StatsBomb, for instance -- the Team Rankings on FiveThirtyEight has City still slightly on place 1, and United actually still in the top 5).

(I'm personally questioning whether Liverpool are currently actually "battering everyone" myself, at least if moreso than in the last season). They've had a run of 9 straight wins in the last Season, during which City lost 3. Likewise, United had their bad spells of results during the last season too. Both didn't happen to be at the start of the Season though -- e.g. at the start of any Season, the table as an actual somewhat reliable ranking of Performance may or may not lie the most. Then again, who knows. Football is a funny Sports due to the ridiculously few Points made per Minute played -- as Klopp had found in his 2014/2015 Dortmund Campaign too, in particular the first half. Better or at least equal Team almost every other week as you'd at least expect from a CL Finalist a couple months Prior, even one in "Crisis" -- place 18 by February in the tables. Now if that were possible to happen on FM.  

Edited October 15, 2019 by Svenc

[sporadicsmiles]

I did not spend the time to check other performance metrics. Sadly the in world game is no so advanced as to generate these stats for me yet . Manchester United will be fine this season, if they can get some creativity in midfield anyway. Or Pogba can stay fit.

Liverpool have definitely rode their luck in recent games too, do not read this as an indepth analysis of the season! The long unbeaten run to start the year was the main point. Weirdly, I actually helped them along the way. I tried to sign Sancho, Liverpool jumped in and signed him instead and he was incredible for them. I ended up coming second to them, scored over 80 points. I do wonder what happens if I do not make that initial bid.

Anyway, this is derailing the thread, sorry OP!

[endtime]

Anyone who had a decent season/run of games will be upgraded, anyone who had a poor season/run of games will be downgraded, FM research is purely reactive.

[swansongs]

14 hours ago, 2feet said:

Van Dijk has only 17 for leadership (!), positioning and tackling .

The man’s only been dribbled past once since about 1997 or something.

And if he can’t get a 20 for jumping reach and strength I don’t know who can.

And bravery only 15?!

Our guidelines say Jumping Reach 20 should only be used for players 6'6 and over, with above average jumping ability. It's one of the more objective 1-20 scales we have. 20 is by-design proper NBA territory.

Strength 20 is Akinfenwa.

[Svenc]

3 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

Anyway, this is derailing the thread, sorry OP!

In a way, yes. However, in another, not quite. At least in a couple posts there seems an expectation that if Teams/Players start well/badly into a Season, they should receive Upgrades/Downgrades. Not sure how that works at the actual Research -- but that is much too short a time Frame. In particular in a Sport such as Football, where the perception of Performances is oft this overshadowed by raw results (in Matches that oft could have gone either way…)

I haven't actually looked, but it would be interesting to check whether CR7, Ibra et all back then received a Downgrade when they went slumping for a couple months (to be inevitably upgraded again a couple months later…). In truth they still had About as much Quality scoring chances as ever, and simply went through  slumps as of providing an end product (which are Pretty common in Football). Not sure whether actual Research takes such into account where available, mind. However, I'd personally hope they are eyeing longer term time Frames than but a couple weeks or months -- as kinda requested here. 
 

 

Edited October 15, 2019 by Svenc

[XaW]

9 hours ago, Svenc said:

Did both respective side do so despite some of their actual Performance metrics telling a more nuanced Story tho. :P (See Team Analysis on StatsBomb, for instance -- the Team Rankings on FiveThirtyEight has City still slightly on place 1, and United actually still in the top 5).

Yes, but looking a bit further into the details shows more of how United struggles. Michael Cox at the Athletic (paywall) did an great job at analysing the stats behind their xG. They are simply very poor at creating chances from open play. Their xG is boosted by getting quite a lot of pens.

Quote

A partial explanation is simple: United’s good performances came a while ago. From their first four matches of the campaign, their overall expected goal difference (xGD) was 4.79, whereas in the last four it’s been just 1.2. Yet it is still notable that United have only been out-shot, in terms of xG, once this season — in the 1-1 home draw with Arsenal. More than anything else, it seems they’re suffering from poor finishing.

So that is the figure to investigate — nine goals from 12.1xG. Their shot conversion rate of 9.3 per cent is the fifth-worst in the league. So should we point the finger at the forwards, and in particular, the seemingly off-form Rashford?

Well, not entirely. Because once you break down the xG figures by situation, it seems United’s finishing in open play has been decent enough — seven goals from 6.23xG.

Their real issue has been not being clinical enough from set-piece chances.

Once you consider corners, free-kicks (both those shot directly, and those crossed or taken short) and penalties, United’s figures make for disappointing reading. They’ve scored two goals from 6.0xG. The chief offenders here are Pogba and Rashford, who have both missed penalties at crucial stages; Pogba in the draw at Wolves, Rashford in the home defeat to Crystal Palace.

But there’s also another surprise culprit — Harry Maguire. The centre-back wasn’t bought for his goal-scoring prowess, but in United’s last two defeats, away at West Ham and Newcastle, Maguire has wasted their best chance of the game. At the London Stadium, the ball broke to him after a corner and he sidefooted straight at Lukasz Fabianski, while at St James’ Park he miscued a header wide, having been allowed a free jump because of Fabian Schar’s sloppy marking.

But this, of course, is also a damning indictment of United — the fact their xG depends on set-piece chances shows they’re not creating enough chances from open play. Solskjaer has turned them into a side who have pressure, and then create chances from set-pieces, rather than a side that can penetrate the opposition in open play.

Once you restrict xG figures to open play, only Crystal Palace, Bournemouth and Newcastle have created less. That’s an alarming statistic, but it’s in keeping with what supporters have seen.

(...)

There are some positives to take from all this.

Maguire, while culpable for his two set-pieces misses, is at least getting himself into goal-scoring positions at set-pieces and is also effectively acting as a deep-lying playmaker. When combined with the side’s excellent record at denying the opposition good chances, he has proved a fine signing. Tuanzebe also looks impressive on the ball.

The other crucial aspect to consider is that United have been without both Pogba and Martial in recent weeks. Those two started the season excellently, both individually and as a combination, and their return should prompt an improvement in terms of chance creation.

But it’s difficult to escape the sense that United are no stronger than the sum of their parts; they don’t do anything well collectively in open play, and the dependence upon set-pieces for goal-scoring chances is alarming.

Solskjaer has frequently spoken about recreating the spirit of United’s 1999 Treble season, without ever truly explaining what that entails tactically. But perhaps he’s achieved it; this United, like in the dying stages of that incredible European Cup final win over Bayern Munich, seem somewhat reliant on chucking the ball into the box at corners.

So, even though their xG looks decent enough, they are depending a lot on set pieces. And with poor conversion on set pieces, they are where they are. I'd advise to read the entire article in its entirety. A good read if you like stats and tactics talk.

[ParanoidBuddha]

2 ore fa, swansongs ha scritto:

Our guidelines say Jumping Reach 20 should only be used for players 6'6 and over, with above average jumping ability. It's one of the more objective 1-20 scales we have. 20 is by-design proper NBA territory.

Strength 20 is Akinfenwa.

Thank you so much for sharing this.

Are there the guidelines somewhere? 

[Bigpole]

10 minutes ago, ParanoidBuddha said:

Thank you so much for sharing this.

Are there the guidelines somewhere? 

The guidelines are for us researchers, I don't know if we can share these information (even though it's not super secret knowlege really)

[FMExperiment]

I'm a United fan and its gonna be funny as hell (and silly) when I load up fm 2020 and we're still a top 4 team lol

[puffascruffowitz]

3 hours ago, FMExperiment said:

I'm a United fan and its gonna be funny as hell (and silly) when I load up fm 2020 and we're still a top 4 team lol

In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death, taxes, and Man U being OP on FM.

-Benjamin Franklin

Edited October 15, 2019 by puffascruffowitz

[MagicHat]

17 hours ago, sporadicsmiles said:

The entire Manchester United team will be nerfed, I expect.

i'll bet they don't

[Rippo]

Thinking about Serie A:

 

Upgrade: Castrovilli, Cistana, Tonali (not much, but some upgrade on CA, he already looks like a veteran of Serie A), Bennacer (good season with Empoli, even tho they got relegated, great performances with his national team), Pobega (former AC Milan youth, went to Pordenone in Serie B and is doing great, could need a good PA boost), Sensi (made the right step on his career and with Conte he's showing all his skills, amazing player), Marco Mancosu (Lecce) and Alfredo Donnarumma could request a bit of an upgrade for their performances, Di Lorenzo CA and PA after he signed for Napoli.

Don't really know: Actually don't know about Berardi, he always looks like a total beast in the first matches, but injuries and some bad habits (yellow and red cards due to irritation) could affect his next performances. He's always a solid player, but his actual stats could be OK for him. Also don't know about Piatek, he totally needs an upgrade after last season, but beginning of new season holds me from that. Like, cannot understand if he's really good or not.

 

Downgrade: I think Paquetà needs to have the same PA, but lower CA, I mean, he arrived from Brazil and had terrific stats. He has the potential to be one of the best players in the world, but he has to work ALOT to achieve this challenge.

Former AS Roma Forward Schick could need a bit of a downgrade, did not  good in 2/3 years of AS Roma and not playing (dunno if he's injured) with Lipsia. Conti, came back to AC Milan after a long injury, he looks more like a midfielder than a defensive player. Not playing well as a right back.

Pjaca, destroyed by injuries.

 

Edited October 16, 2019 by Rippo

[Svenc]

16 hours ago, XaW said:

So, even though their xG looks decent enough, they are depending a lot on set pieces. And with poor conversion on set pieces, they are where they are. I'd advise to read the entire article in its entirety. A good read if you like stats and tactics talk.

Oh yeah, Looking at the raw numbers in isolation never tell the full Story -- though it's 9.9/10 still more "accurate" than what is written in the papers or discussed amongst fans / pundits (I've seen guys arguing United may be in for a relegation battle, whicih granted, given this is Football, is possible -- ask Klopp about it). At the same time, purely Looking at raw results, the table, the assists and goals also doesn't suffice to gauge performances. As anybody making a Living off this argues, be it club analysts, bookies, bettors:  as a reliable ranking of Performances, "the table and results lie" (which is why bookies love to publish just such results and recent WDL streaks on their Websites). Naturally the table lies much more in the early season than later on: A side Winning tight Matches in sequence won't be able to do so for an entire Season typically… e.g. their results would eventually regress towards their actual Performances. Same as what Alcacer did first half last Season at Dortmund just wasn't sustainable in any Kind of way -- basically every shot on target being a Goal when he was brought on -- whilst Neuer seemed to have faded completely on the other end for Bayern, and appeared to have lost all his shot stopping ability (which had cost Bayern dearly). And then there's also the influence of the fixture lists, etc.

This may be also worthwhile when generally considering upgrading/downgrading entire Squads after a single successful or unsuccesful Campaign. Naturally, it's tricky to do.   In Germany there's oft a talk about a supposedly "Euro League Curse". It refers to Teams  that, oft by "surprise", make it into the top six -- but then don't ever seem to repeat it the Season/s after. Sometimes they are even relegated the Season after. Given the previous overperformance before, decline is only natural to be expected… over a single Season, much goes. Over multiple ones… not so much. Accumulated point tables over 5 - 10 Seasons are a depressingly predictable affair most of the time in General. 

Edited October 16, 2019 by Svenc

[XaW]

15 minutes ago, Svenc said:

Looking at the raw numbers in isolation never tell the full Story -- though it's 9.9/10 still more "accurate" than what is written in the papers or discussed amongst fans / pundits (I've seen guys arguing United may be in for a relegation battle, whicih granted, given this is Football, is possible -- ask Klopp about it).

Of course, media love to use hyperbole and war fonts for anything that will get readers. That's why that article was interesting to me, a rather balanced point as to how the stats reflect and don't reflect both results and the general consensus how United plays at the moment.

18 minutes ago, Svenc said:

This may be also worthwhile when generally considering upgrading/downgrading entire Squads after a single successful or unsuccesful Campaign. Naturally, it's tricky to do.  

Oh, I agree, and even for single players! I were certain Jamie Vardy were a one-season wonder after the Leicester title, and I were wrong... I expected him to be "found out" by the end of that season, but he have managed to keep a higher level of performance than I could have ever though.

35 minutes ago, Svenc said:

n Germany there's oft a talk about a supposedly "Euro League Curse". It refers to Teams  that, oft by "surprise", make it into the top six -- but then don't ever seem to repeat it the Season/s after. Sometimes they are even relegated the Season after.

I think this is quite common all around the place. Burnley struggled last season after competing in Europe. And Wolves have also struggled quite a bit this season.

[RPM_01]

I'd expect Frenkie De Jong to get an upgrade of some sort. Tackling of 9, marking of 8 and positioning of 11 seems low. Impresses me every time I watch him play!

[diddydaddydoddy]

I'd be expecting massive upgrades for Alisson, Adrian, TAA, Robertson, VVD, Matip, Lovren, Gomez, Henderson, Milner, Wijnaldum, Fabinho, Keita, Ox, Lallana, Shaqiri, Mane, Salah, Firmino, Origi 

[Svenc]

2 hours ago, XaW said:

I think this is quite common all around the place. Burnley struggled last season after competing in Europe. And Wolves have also struggled quite a bit this season.

In the BL it also isn't that unusual for there to be but a gap of 12-15 Points between European spots and the Relegation play-off. That's basically 3 wins turned into losses (or vice versa) plus a couple Additional draws. A lot of competitive Football Matches are tight Affairs that could really have gone either way at some Point. Whilst there's also something to say that overperforming sides oft lose some of the key players the coming season, and all that… There's also a saying that goes: Luck doesn't endlessy repeat, skill does. If "luck" played a significant part in the Prior Season's Performance, then Teams would come crashing down simply because of that. Whilst that is hard to gauge -- I think the role of such tends to be big time downplayed, as else we wouldn't have heroes to upgrade celebrate and losers to Downgrade rubbish (and the margins between both, in particular in competitive Sports in which athlethes of comparably equal ability apply by Definition, could be Pretty damn tight…).

 

As of Vardy, his raw xG backed him up back then.  

Edited October 16, 2019 by Svenc

[Bothan Spy]

Tomori definitely needs an upgrade. At best he was a good championship defender in FM19.

I've also never been a huge fan of Ryan Sessegnon and Jaydon Sanchos stats in the last couple of games. They just look undervalued at first glance for a pair of wonderkids.

Edited October 16, 2019 by Bothan Spy

[ParanoidBuddha]

9 ore fa, Rippo ha scritto:

Thinking about Serie A:

 

Upgrade: Castrovilli, Cistana, Tonali (not much, but some upgrade on CA, he already looks like a veteran of Serie A), Bennacer (good season with Empoli, even tho they got relegated, great performances with his national team), Pobega (former AC Milan youth, went to Pordenone in Serie B and is doing great, could need a good PA boost), Sensi (made the right step on his career and with Conte he's showing all his skills, amazing player), Marco Mancosu (Lecce) and Alfredo Donnarumma could request a bit of an upgrade for their performances, Di Lorenzo CA and PA after he signed for Napoli.

Don't really know: Actually don't know about Berardi, he always looks like a total beast in the first matches, but injuries and some bad habits (yellow and red cards due to irritation) could affect his next performances. He's always a solid player, but his actual stats could be OK for him. Also don't know about Piatek, he totally needs an upgrade after last season, but beginning of new season holds me from that. Like, cannot understand if he's really good or not.

For the downgrade I'll probably write another post. 
Nice points, I would add some other players that imo deserve an upgrade of CA and/or PA:

-Sebastiano Esposito
-Hamed Junior Traorè
-Luca Pellegrini
-Demiral
-Brozovic
-Fabian Ruiz
-Orsolini

These are the first that came in my mind and I'll probably write others.  

Edited October 16, 2019 by ParanoidBuddha

[Svenc]

Speaking of which; Morata may or may not be a good example of Research overreacting to short-term Performances, possibly even being distracted by Tabloid media and the narratives they present.

His finishing Attributes as to FM 18: 16.

Then this happened, amongst a couple other Things 
 

 

Cue in the many media stories of "relief" when he signed for Atletico, who apparently must be the most stupid top club in Europe, considering that finishing moves is one of the fewer Things Morata has arguably been contributing to his Teams. As of FM 19, his finishing stood at 11. That's a -5 within the space of a single release. That's not a merely adjustment. In particular as to his position, that's redefining what a Player is as to the game.  I'm not suggesting that People should look purely at data where available. Data are merely a tool. They cannot ever replace an eye; or tactical Analysis what may contribute to such data. For instance, did he at all get enough chances to "finish" regularly at Chelsea to begin with? Why? Why not? What happened at Real? But to me, yeah, that's a possible example, as the Adjustment is huge.  (ANd hey, it may well be that his prior Rating was too high). Still, fortunately for his in-game, the Chance matters more than the Player too -- have him at the end of Things in space, and he'll score.  

Edited October 23, 2019 by Svenc

[99]

One youngster that seriously need a revision is Tomás Esteves from FC Porto. In FM19 I guess he has a potential of -6 or -6.5, basically saying that at best he will be terrible. But we have a potential KImmich (with the same playstyle) there. Already a member of our squad at age of 17.

Edited October 23, 2019 by 99

[swansongs]

At best -65 produces a decent Premier League player, based on CA alone.

[pearcey_90]

Not sure who Newcastle researcher is anymore? But I miss the times when they would go OTT on a Newcastle player (looking at Cisse). I’d expect most players who are still there from last season to remain the same at best, with increases for Schar and S.Longstaff. Matty will likely be League 1 quality at best, so will have to wait to January to get bumped up and potential increased. Almiron I expect to be toned down so he’s just pace, hope he remains the same though. Only had one save on last FM, so can’t remember what Joelinton/Krath/ASM were rated as, because Newcastle researcher would have no input on them.

Wonder if Ronaldo will have like the usual one 20, whilst Messi has 8+ 20s again?

[Soviet]

Oh boy the game is not even out and we already have discussions that someone should have 17 and not 18 in Long Throws, backed up by one YouTube clip. I love this community . Personally I think Håland should maybe get a small boost .

Edited October 24, 2019 by Soviet

[Svenc]

1 hour ago, Soviet said:

Oh boy the game is not even out and we already have discussions that someone should have 17 and not 18 in Long Throws, backed up by one YouTube clip. I love this community . Personally I think Håland should maybe get a small boost .

Given that Researchers have the Benefit of adjusting Ratings in the db twice a year, I'd Always go with smaller Boosts, as opposed to complete rerankings in the space of a single release. Football involves a lot of randomness, in particular over a single Youtube clip season. 

This goes doubly so for "Events" that just aren't that ofently to happen, e.g. Goals, direct free kicks, what have you. Forwards in General are the most problematic probably, as how much they score can depend a lot on the System they Play in -- and is going to vary from Season to Season. Fairly random dips, even ridiculous ones, aren't at all unheard of even at the highest Levels. Fans and media then argue of Course they'd suddenly turned rubbish from one Season to the next…
 

Another example why smaller Adjustments may be more sensible. By the time of FM 2014, early 2015, Zlatko Junuzovic was a Player ranked with a 13 in Direct Free Kicks. In the 2014/2015 he made much Headlines by scoring an Incredible 5 kicks from 22 attempts. Subsequently his Attribute was fairly quickly raised to 17 , which is where it still stands IIRC. Yet he actually failed to score but a single one in the league for Bremen in any of the three following Seasons, despite him still taking kicks with some frequency (27 Overall). Naturally, free kick isn't free kick as they're taken from different positions. But there's data available for that too accross the web. And even if the 17 Rating were more correct (dead balls may still be a forte of his, or his Managers who see him in training daily too wouldN't let him kick it) -- this is a good example how results, and the narratives they trigger, can wildly fluctuate between the Seasons, even though Nothing much may have changed.

Edited October 24, 2019 by Svenc

[dannysheard]

On 16/10/2019 at 12:57, diddydaddydoddy said:

I'd be expecting massive upgrades for Alisson, Adrian, TAA, Robertson, VVD, Matip, Lovren, Gomez, Henderson, Milner, Wijnaldum, Fabinho, Keita, Ox, Lallana, Shaqiri, Mane, Salah, Firmino, Origi 

Not Lovren :)

[zigaliro]

Basicly whole Barcelona squad. They are playing so garbage in the recent times. Well except maybe Ter Stegen and Messi. 

[Marko1989]

58 minutes ago, zigaliro said:

Basicly whole Barcelona squad. They are playing so garbage in the recent times. Well except maybe Ter Stegen and Messi. 

No. English teams like Arsenal are playing garbage over a decade, and they are always overpowered. Take any FM from 2003 - 2019 their players have always been insane, even they had 2 good seasons in last 20 years. ( ofc this is not case just with Arsenal all English teams are favorised and overpowered ) So, just because Barselona is playing one season bad does not mean they need to downgrade their attributes.

[ParanoidBuddha]

4 ore fa, dannysheard ha scritto:

Not Lovren

Few of them are debatable and I hope at least that the ''massive'' is an exaggeration

Edited October 25, 2019 by ParanoidBuddha

[Cedrik]

Most likely (as usual) loads of teams in the EPL will be hugely overrated making the EPL-teams an absolute dominating force in European competitions. And outside the EPL of course Celtic. It is always funny to see that the Celtic researcher likes to work on the database after having a couple of pints. I always feel SI should intervene with situations like that by talking to researchers about their lack objectivity. 

Furthermore one team that definitely comes to my mind is Atletico. I feel they should be downgraded massively, some of their players are just too good compared to their real life abilities. In that perspective I think mentioning Morata, like Svenc does, is a good one. That is indeed a player that should be downgraded a lot. 

 

 

Edited October 25, 2019 by Cedrik

[FrazT]

32 minutes ago, Cedrik said:

Most likely (as usual) loads of teams in the EPL will be hugely overrated making the EPL-teams an absolute dominating force in European competitions. And outside the EPL of course Celtic. It is always funny to see that the Celtic researcher likes to work on the database after having a couple of pints. I always feel SI should intervene with situations like that by talking to researchers about their lack objectivity. 

Furthermore one team that definitely comes to my mind is Atletico. I feel they should be downgraded massively, some of their players are just too good compared to their real life abilities. In that perspective I think mentioning Morata, like Svenc does, is a good one. That is indeed a player that should be downgraded a lot. 

 

 

All the research team work to set guidelines and have their input checked by the Head Researcher.  Bearing in mind that all attributes set are opinion, they, as volunteers, will not appreciate your comments about lack of objectivity.  Comments like this will not be tolerated on the forum so please bear this in mind if and when you post again about the research team

[diddydaddydoddy]

9 hours ago, ParanoidBuddha said:

Few of them are debatable and I hope at least that the ''massive'' is an exaggeration

I do the research for Liverpool and it’s not exaggeration it’s sarcastic humour

[Cedrik]

2 minutes ago, FrazT said:

All the research team work to set guidelines and have their input checked by the Head Researcher.  Bearing in mind that all attributes set are opinion, they, as volunteers, will not appreciate your comments about lack of objectivity.  Comments like this will not be tolerated on the forum so please bear this in mind if and when you post again about the research team

To be quite honest I think it is a bit odd to state that comments like mine are not tolerated. I'm solely giving my personal opinion and in addition I am not using offensive language either. I'm criticizing work from a database, because I absolutely disagree with certain ratings. I think there should be room to do so . 

Secondly, I don't feel it is a weird thing to assume that researchers at times can lack objectivity. I understand it is probably not what people like to hear, especially not people related to SI. However, researchers are also human beings, and if you have a soft spot for a specific club it can create a situation where you see things slightly different than many other people. Even when trying to be as objective as possible. 

[HUNT3R]

2 minutes ago, Cedrik said:

To be quite honest I think it is a bit odd to state that comments like mine are not tolerated. I'm solely giving my personal opinion and in addition I am not using offensive language either. I'm criticizing work from a database, because I absolutely disagree with certain ratings. I think there should be room to do so . 

It's not even criticism. You're downright insulting researchers by stating they can't be objective or that the Celtic researcher must have been drunk when he worked on the database. There's obviously room to criticise - but do it constructively. One very good way is to post in the research/database section with proof to back up claims where you believe ratings are wrong.

5 minutes ago, Cedrik said:

Secondly, I don't feel it is a weird thing to assume that researchers at times can lack objectivity. I understand it is probably not what people like to hear, especially not people related to SI. However, researchers are also human beings, and if you have a soft spot for a specific club it can create a situation where you see things slightly different than many other people. Even when trying to be as objective as possible. 

Again, you're saying researchers can't be objective. Firstly, they have guidelines to help them rate players. Second, it's their job to be objective. Third - they have head researchers etc who all do checks and double checks to make sure the database and player ratings are within guidelines and fair.

The researchers put an awful amount of work into watching players and getting players in-game to reflect (as close as they're able to) their real life versions. Fraz was completely correct when saying the researchers will not appreciate these last 2 posts  and it stops now. By all means, if you have an issue with some of the research when the beta is released (or even at game launch) drop by the research section with a well constructed post about what should change and importantly - why.

[Svenc]

34 minutes ago, Cedrik said:

Secondly, I don't feel it is a weird thing to assume that researchers at times can lack objectivity. I understand it is probably not what people like to hear, especially not people related to SI. However, researchers are also human beings, and if you have a soft spot for a specific club it can create a situation where you see things slightly different than many other people. Even when trying to be as objective as possible. 

What else would you Downgrade? His finishing (as a Forward) alone went -5 within the space of a single release. My Point wasn't so much whether his Ratings were Right (both before and after). However I've personally just been questioning such huge changes made in such a short period of time, in particular considering how well recorded it is how much random **** can happen in the space of a single Football Season (including a CL Finalist of a Season and a half Prior suddenly sitting dead last in the table midseason -- and the current World Player Of The Year apparently having forgotten how to kick a ball).

Edited October 25, 2019 by Svenc

[Cedrik]

6 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

It's not even criticism. You're downright insulting researchers by stating they can't be objective or that the Celtic researcher must have been drunk when he worked on the database. There's obviously room to criticise - but do it constructively. One very good way is to post in the research/database section with proof to back up claims where you believe ratings are wrong.

I indeed stated that, however I wouldn't interpret it as an insult. At most a bit of mockery to get my point across. However, if it was taken as an insult, my apologies, that was not the intention. 

10 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

Again, you're saying researchers can't be objective. Firstly, they have guidelines to help them rate players. Second, it's their job to be objective. Third - they have head researchers etc who all do checks and double checks to make sure the database and player ratings are within guidelines and fair.

The researchers put an awful amount of work into watching players and getting players in-game to reflect (as close as they're able to) their real life versions. Fraz was completely correct when saying the researchers will not appreciate these last 2 posts  and it stops now. By all means, if you have an issue with some of the research when the beta is released (or even at game launch) drop by the research section with a well constructed post about what should change and importantly - why.

I would suggest to re-read my post, I say that researchers can at times lack objectivity. The use of the words can and at times should emphasize that it is a possibility that can occur occasionally. You are subsequently stating that I say that researchers are never objective and can't be. This is not true and with that you're twisting my words. There are plenty or researchers who do a wonderful job.  

[XaW]

31 minutes ago, Cedrik said:

I indeed stated that, however I wouldn't interpret it as an insult. At most a bit of mockery to get my point across. However, if it was taken as an insult, my apologies, that was not the intention. 

I would suggest to re-read my post, I say that researchers can at times lack objectivity. The use of the words can and at times should emphasize that it is a possibility that can occur occasionally. You are subsequently stating that I say that researchers are never objective and can't be. This is not true and with that you're twisting my words. There are plenty or researchers who do a wonderful job.  

What @HUNT3R is telling you, is that instead of some random anecdotal statement that team A is too highly rated, you should post in the correct research thread explaining why you think the ratings are wrong, or what should be changed. Since SI uses soak tests (1000s of simulations without user input) and look at the results they apparently have the expected results they are going for in general. Of course, there are variations due to injuries, transfers, etc, but in general it seems things are going as SI want. So if you claim team a is always doing much better than expected you need to show proof. If team A does better in a single save, then it could be variation, but if everyone see that the same team overperform then it might be something there for SI to investigate.

So if you have any sort of evidence of what to change, then typing in this thread won't get you far, at least with the (unintential?) tone you appear to have. It might be that it's harder to understand you meaning, but you don't come across as constructive with things like "SI should intervene with situations like that by talking to researchers about their lack objectivity". 

[FrazT]

OK- lets get back onto the topic.

[swansongs]

It's difficult to get every team performing as you'd expect (or anticipate, we're predicting the future here) even with extensive testing because minor changes to the match engine can have massive knock-on effects for individual players/managers/teams. Pinning down the specific problems isn't always an easy task, and in my opinion the more player input we get the better. The bugs/data forums never tend to be busy outside the biggest sides and I'd love to see someone go to the effort of posting a few paragraphs of opinions/criticism of the Swansea data with no "proof" at all, as long as it's polite.

[Soviet]

And that's why you start in lower leagues and by the time you get to the top the world is full of newgens and you just witness your own amazing version of the footballing reality.

[Boycott]

I wholeheartedly agree with Juan Mata being long overdue a downgrade. He's one of the best players in the league every year on FM despite the fact in real life Mata hasn't been on that level since he left Chelsea. In 5 and a half years at United he's been inconsistent and not always a regular starter.