Scouts are too good. Discuss.

[Martyr1777]

You've misunderstood, i was pointing out that with all hidden mental traits set to positive and all traits set to negative, there was no difference in how good the Scout thinks the player can become.

Obviously the human player can look at those traits however and factor them in themselves.

This, at least partially, explains why the AI is no good at player development and squad building. If the AI doesn't pay any attention to poor personality traits they're never going to have any real success.

[Draakon]

Perhaps one solution could be to limit the accuracy of a scout's take on PA the younger a player is? A person scouting a 30 year-old should be able to judge whether or not the player will develop much further with a fair bit of accuracy. But an 18 y.o. (or younger)? That should be more of a crap-shoot.

Well, this kind of crap-shooting makes scouting pretty useless, doesn't it? What's the point of scouting when it's theoretically impossible to accurately evaluate player potential.

At the moment player age is considered in star value, it's therefore affecting scouting report and scouts evaluation to player. What is annoying for me is that player is evaluated compared to his age in full years. E.g. the day 16 yo player turns 17, his rating will drop by 0,5*. Why? Is he worse player overnight? I understand that stars should represent his PA and it's value compared to current squad and league, but how is 1 day of age difference so influential?

[Ackter]

You mean, like it's theoretically impossible to accurately evaluate player potential in real life?

[Martyr1777]

I understand that stars should represent his PA and it's value compared to current squad and league, but how is 1 day of age difference so influential?

Because it's a computer program and programs don't think like people?

The system calculates based on age, because it's harder for an older player to reach his potential just by having less time to do it. That 1 day may seem like nothing to you or I, but to the machine code it's 1 year, 16 vs 17. it's not that anything is actually changing that quickly, it just changes how the code calculates the data.

[Yallii]

"Scouts should take months and months to find out things"

We're still playing a game here! SI have to find a balance between realism and gameplay. In my opinion they've already leaning too much on 'realism' but what you suggest would really be too much. Backroom staff are in the game to help the less talented managers among us. It should stay as it is.

[Martyr1777]

"Scouts should take months and months to find out things"

We're still playing a game here! SI have to find a balance between realism and gameplay. In my opinion they've already leaning too much on 'realism' but what you suggest would really be too much. Backroom staff are in the game to help the less talented managers among us. It should stay as it is.

Correct me iff I'm wrong.. but we play months and months, years and years, in the game... don't we?

It's not taking more time IRL to play the game. It's just taking more game time to get the information you need. There a huge amounts of game time between transfer windows anyway, plenty of time for scouts to gather information on the players you are interested in.

The only thing it would hurt is if people are scouting half the bloody database looking for those rare gems. If that's all people are doing anyway then just use an editor to find what you want.

[Coentrao]

When most players of the world are regens you just do Mass Scouting, you pick a list of dozens of players and look at the report/attributes and pick the best of the bunch that you want to sign.

Should be harder to find how good a player is and can be, i would also like to have specific assignments to a Scout, saying "hey we need a good target man upfront so go out there and find me one" instead of crawling through a massive list of strikers.

I know it's just a game but i would like to feel more realistic in that department, transfers are too easy since the scouting is so accurate.

[Redfish]

Some people have taken what I am suggesting to mean scouting should be more difficult for the player in terms of gameplay/more fiddly. I don't really see it like that at all. The actual clicks-to-instruction ratio is, for me, really good. I just don't want the scouts to be so effective and for them to be more refined in terms of feedback by having characteristics. For the player it is the same amount of activity.

Right now it's too easy to simple sort players by recommendation and have a look at the top 10, especially with regens.

What I want SI to do is regain that sense of reward for finding good players, and even more importantly, the sense of reward that comes in choosing good players rather than the sense of expectation that you should find them, and the sense that you know he's going to be awesome before he comes because Mr Head Scout said so. And I want it to be a tougher (but not more complex) decision on who would be the best buy. I want gut-instinct to play more of a part. "No scouts, you're all wrong, this three star kid is going to be "the one"" and have a decent chance of being correct rather than knowing I am swimming against the tide by doing this.

And scouts should not see PA. Full stop.

I don't check forums for talented youngsters. I'm sure many here do, and that's fine, but I'm certain that they are in the minority. All the people I play with and know who play have all found out the good players by what happened in their first save generally. And most people I know enjoy the satisfaction of clicking on so-and-so and having that WOAH, who's THIS!? moment.

[Svenc]

Some people have taken what I am suggesting to mean scouting should be more difficult for the player in terms of gameplay/more fiddly. I don't really see it like that at all. The actual clicks-to-instruction ratio is, for me, really good.

That yes, being able to random-click the database in the vague hope to find a promising youngster - and not being punished for it is not though. Time management ain't a factor in FM, neither are possible budget (travelling) constraints. On Monday you order a report card on the guy playing in Spain, the guy in Brazil, the US, Scotland, Japan, Venezuela, Chile, South Africa - come Thursday, Friday they're all in, fairly accurate to boot. And this is the resources being available to clubs with the most basic of staff.

Finding a solid player then isn't so much an achievement. Too often, it's the result of busy- and plain guesswork. In particular sides low on staff and budget are given way too much leeway - arguably one of the reasons why it's claimed to be rather easy to rise from the lower leagues to the top by some. Simple tweaks would already alter this a great deal - like report cards taking a week (in-game) to be done rather than a cigarette break. This way players would actually have to ponder rather than random-clicking Gambias Under 19 team in the hopes of finding someone who might click with their 3rd division side.

[Stephanie McMahon's Secret Lover]

Personally I think scouts are useless in FM. Secondly "months to scout a player"???? You got to be kidding me!!! Yeah if the scout is a complete idiot!!!

[Draakon]

Because it's a computer program and programs don't think like people?

The system calculates based on age, because it's harder for an older player to reach his potential just by having less time to do it. That 1 day may seem like nothing to you or I, but to the machine code it's 1 year, 16 vs 17. it's not that anything is actually changing that quickly, it just changes how the code calculates the data.

Yeah, but is it so hard to calculate youngster age in days rather than in years? Should be simple programming.

What concerns realism, it's a balance between realism and gameplay. I completely agree that we could scout for certain type of player. At the moment the game understands what attributes are important to what role, your staff even suggests player role (e.g. playmaker or target man) for you. Next step could be that you could pick the position from tactics screen and assign any scouts to search for player suitable for this role, considering all sliders (creative freedom, mentality etc.) you have set in your tactics. It would help you to find replacements that suit to your tactics that you know is working.

[MaCeR]

Hi, good post by OP. To go further down the same road, why not make the PA star rating hidden for your own team as well.

That way you wouldn´t be too keen to release your youths, because some of them might actually make it and maybe you give them a chance in the first team to see what they can do?

Your coaches would tell you their opinion like before (f.ex. Player x has the potential to be a good player for this club etc.) but you just don´t see the star rating.

[Draakon]

Hi, good post by OP. To go further down the same road, why not make the PA star rating hidden for your own team as well.

That way you wouldn´t be too keen to release your youths, because some of them might actually make it and maybe you give them a chance in the first team to see what they can do?

Your coaches would tell you their opinion like before (f.ex. Player x has the potential to be a good player for this club etc.) but you just don´t see the star rating.

At first - star rating is bound to mentioned sentence. 'Player x has potential to be a good player' means 3*. 'Fairly good player' means 2,5*. 'Useful' means 2* etc. Giving off star rating system wouldn't make real difference, star rating is purely visual display of what scout says anyway.

Now. To your first point - in overall I believe that you should know more about your own players than other players. Even when scouting will be changed more inaccurate, reports about your own youth should be fairly accurate.

[Krald]

To be honest, the day they make scouting harder is the day I start to rely upon third party programs for scouting, I feel there is a nice balance right now in game between ease of finding players and difficulty, if it was made harder I'd be very inclined to just use programs all the time because I want to play this game at a decent pace, I don't have time to listen to scout reports on a player for three months from three different scouts before I buy a player, I want to actually finish a season not be reading scout reports 24/7 to see if they've refined their mind on a player. Even if it's just like a further delay added so that it takes longer before they do the "proper" report I don't feel I'd be super-happy with that.

In my personal opinion this is one of the things that it's a case of realism vs fun. I perfectly understand for some though it's not "fun" to be right about players most of the time. I feel the balance is right as-is.

[Redfish]

To be honest, the day they make scouting harder is the day I start to rely upon third party programs for scouting, I feel there is a nice balance right now in game between ease of finding players and difficulty, if it was made harder I'd be very inclined to just use programs all the time because I want to play this game at a decent pace, I don't have time to listen to scout reports on a player for three months from three different scouts before I buy a player, I want to actually finish a season not be reading scout reports 24/7 to see if they've refined their mind on a player. Even if it's just like a further delay added so that it takes longer before they do the "proper" report I don't feel I'd be super-happy with that.

In my personal opinion this is one of the things that it's a case of realism vs fun. I perfectly understand for some though it's not "fun" to be right about players most of the time. I feel the balance is right as-is.

But Kraid, what is stopping you going right on ahead and buying the player anyway? You've got a bit of scouting saying he is pretty decent, you can see for yourself he looks good, his recent in-game performance has been good. Nothing is stopping any player simply going "thats enough for me!" and slamming some cash down on the table. Heck, if I see a player has got 20 pace and 20 acceleration but most of his stats are hidden but there are bids for him, I'd put in a bid before having all the info.

What is frustrating is the lack of scope to be wrong and this in turn harms the joy of being right

"Skill" in the transfer market has been diluted somewhat and the scouting system is far more than an advice system and more like a simple "this is the right move" in my opinion.

Choice is what makes FM, a most games, interesting. The hyper-talents of the scouts are diminishing the involvement I have in that choice and how much it is about my ability to spot a good player.

Let's try an analogy. It is as though you knew, before each game, that if you let your assistant manager take the reins, you'd have an even or better chance of winning than if you were there, because he's can see things you can not see and can make decisions using deeper understandings of the mathematics behind the representation that YOU see. Would that not make a frustrating game? Your assistant, rather than giving advice, is simply right, and to now follow his lead is to hinder yourself. This would make my tactical decisions feel unworthy.

I feel right now its the same with scouts. Scouts can be mistaken, but its far too rare and a good scout on a three match report is always going to know. It's taking away the thrill I get of spotting a good player, of making that decision on what I can see.

Does that make sense?

[x42bn6]

Do not turn this into another "replace PA" thread please (warning for everyone).

The actual PA doesn't need to come into a scout report at any point. It should work like it does in life - ability based on age and attitude.

People have talked about scouts not being able to see PA. This is alright, but how on Earth then do you determine an important factor that determines how good they will become in the future? It is clearly not ability and age, otherwise your youth striker who scores 50 goals per season in the youth leagues by virtue of being big, strong and quick would be THE player to sign in the future.

Therefore there is some discriminant that allows us to project the future, and that this discriminant is visible right now. It will be a rough estimation given we can't see the future, but there is something.

Let us take Ravel Morrison, a Manchester United youngster. The kid is ridiculously good when he has his head screwed-on properly. I, as well as many other Manchester United supporters, see Morrison as more "talented" than others in his youth team, more than just ability and age. In terms of "current ability", I'd argue he is behind Ryan Tunnicliffe and Paul Pogba, two other midfielders in the same team, but he has more "talent" than both. To me, this suggests that "talent" is the discriminant - it is an attribute that allows me to distinguish between Morrison and Tunnicliffe.

Tunnicliffe has a very good attitude - extremely driven and determined, and as a result, although he is perhaps not as talented as others in his team, he is more likely to have a good future than Morrison, whose past is somewhat wayward.

To me, this suggests that "talent" does not equal "potential", because for all his talent, Morrison may never fulfil it, while Tunnicliffe could become the next Keane or Gerrard, despite the fact he's not got talent oozing out of his brains. We cannot see what will happen to Morrison nor Tunnicliffe - they are too young for us to project the future upon, although we have a rough idea of ranges. But what we can see right now is that Morrison is more talented than Tunnicliffe, in addition to the various strengths and weaknesses in their attributes and personalities.

At the end of the day, I think this is more realistic, too - when we see youth fixtures, we see some players as more talented than others, but we generally don't try and predict where they will turn out to be in the future, because talent nor current ability is the whole picture. We see an extremely talented youngster or a youngster with the talent of Paul McShane's left foot.

So on scout reports, I would argue it should say something like:

"Ravel Morrison is an extremely gifted footballer, whose talent is amongst the best in the country. However, there are serious question marks over his attitude and temperament, and is inconsistent at youth level. If he were to fix his attitude, he has a very good chance of becoming a top Premier League footballer in the future."

"Ryan Tunnicliffe is a solid, dependable youngster. His talent is average amongst his peers, but makes up for it with an outstanding attitude and ethos on and off the pitch. Tunnicliffe is likely to have a solid professional career, but if shaped correctly, could become a solid midfield lynchpin for a top Premier League side."

"John McShane is a poor youngster. His talent is off the scale in the wrong direction. His attitude is shocking, on and off the pitch. It is unlikely we will see McShane in the professional leagues a decade down the line, but if he doesn't fix his attitude, he won't even be a footballer in the near future."

By removing the binding of a scout report to PA, and binding it instead to this discriminant "talent", we can have "um" or "ah" scout reports that leave open the possibility of them becoming very good or suggesting a plausible maximum future. They can have a rough estimate of where they will turn out on average too.

[Draakon]

Redfish, you seem to forget that good scout (lets forget this assman comparision now) is hired for simple reason - he is (or should be) better evaluator of young players than manager. That's what he's paid for. If he is world class scout (20/20) he should be almost always correct, especially when scouting player over some months and following few matches.

Don't forget that the whole point of scouting is to see what attributes are not telling you. Hidden attributes, PA, injury proneness. It's all there. I think today manager's biggest task is to choose between good prospects that scouts offer to him, and, of course make a decision based on what type of player he needs more - IRL Zlatan is a world class striker, but he just didn't fit into Barcelona's game. So, there you see a difference between player ability and how useful a player can be for a club.

Another example from Bundesliga (as I've followed it most closely this season). Cisse for Freiburg and Gekas for Frankfurt have had excellent season individually speaking, scoring plaenty of goals in the league. Should Bayern sign them? There's no actual proof that they'd be so good in different club, different environment. I personally feel that Luiz Gustavo played way better in Hoffenheim than he does now in Bayern. The point is that considering all influences (tactics, club stature, pressure, dressing room atmosphere, player types, mentality, striker partnerships, favorite personnel etc. etc.) there are many things that actually affect player performance on the pitch and even when he is good player attribute-wise, there's no certain guarantee that he performs as good on the pitch.

Now, on the other hand, perhaps I just like to think so. Because there are voices in the crowd that say: "FM ME is too simple and straightforward, buy some good players, run proved tactics and titles will come"

[TsunamiSpurs]

If SI just added the option of removing the Report Card Only scouting, I think that would be enough.

The report card is fine, becuase a scout can still view a player whilst training or videos etc, however the information that the card generates should be very limited, and inaccurate depending on the scouts ability.

[Draakon]

In addition to what x42bn6 just said - in case PA is to be removed from scout reports, it should be removed from the game completely.

Given the fact that we have 17 yo with good CA, well balanced attributes and right attitude and personality, we could assume that sky is the limit. When he has good CA at age 17, it means he's talented. When he has right attitude, then you can safely assume that with world class coaches and good training he will gain in all attributes he's trained and becomes world class player, unless injuries break his development.

That would mean complete replacement of current PA and scouting system. Evaluation of the youngsters should be based completely on age, CA and mental attributes as today. Mental attributes should be linked with training progress (professional, determined, ambitious players just improve faster than others) and that's it.

[x42bn6]

In addition to what x42bn6 just said - in case PA is to be removed from scout reports, it should be removed from the game completely.

Given the fact that we have 17 yo with good CA, well balanced attributes and right attitude and personality, we could assume that sky is the limit. When he has good CA at age 17, it means he's talented. When he has right attitude, then you can safely assume that with world class coaches and good training he will gain in all attributes he's trained and becomes world class player, unless injuries break his development.

Not really, as there are plenty of players at youth level who are just very good at youth level because of their size or speed. While having a high level of ability at a young age is always going to help your development (CA and PA are likely correlated, after all), it is not the whole story. "Talent" comes into play - something beyond just current ability.

[SiN8]

Not really, as there are plenty of players at youth level who are just very good at youth level because of their size or speed. While having a high level of ability at a young age is always going to help your development (CA and PA are likely correlated, after all), it is not the whole story. "Talent" comes into play - something beyond just current ability.

Just give scouts less bias towards physical ability when judging youth. Let's say two players are 100 CA, one with better technical abilites and the other physical. A scout, without looking at PA and assuming hidden attributes are the same, will more likely recommended the first player. Doesn't seem like a problem at all.

[Coentrao]

What is frustrating is the lack of scope to be wrong and this in turn harms the joy of being right

It's basically this, it's too easy to have success on the transfer market, it should be harder to tell if a player it's going to be good or not, IRL there are a lot of flopped transfers and in FM just as long as you have the minimum of common sense it's impossible to "fail" in the transfer market.

[Martyr1777]

It's basically this, it's too easy to have success on the transfer market, it should be harder to tell if a player it's going to be good or not, IRL there are a lot of flopped transfers and in FM just as long as you have the minimum of common sense it's impossible to "fail" in the transfer market.

Even more so when you factor in the lack of the AI to be successful in the market do to having the wrong key's to AI determining a players quality.

We have no uncertainty in our own selections and the AI regularly picks up very poor players. So it becomes simply having the scouting knowledge to find the best players and the money to spend on them and you'll always have the best team.

[Draakon]

So it becomes simply having the scouting knowledge to find the best players and the money to spend on them and you'll always have the best team.

Well isn't this a case IRL too?

[Martyr1777]

Well isn't this a case IRL too?

Nope.. because you never know just what you are getting irl because it's not as straight forward as numbers like we get. But what we get in game is all very straight up, easy to get, and we don't even have to try.

[Romanista.]

completely agree with this 100 percent. it is simply ridiculous that you can see how good a 15 year old is even though he hasnt even played 1 match in the game.

[Draakon]

Nope.. because you never know just what you are getting irl because it's not as straight forward as numbers like we get. But what we get in game is all very straight up, easy to get, and we don't even have to try.

To be honest, it is. It is purely a question whether you implement the scale of evaluation IRL or not. Let's pretend I'm ManU manager. Only thing I have to do to get similar results I get in FM is to ask my scouts to rate all my players in 5 star scale within my team and Premiership and then evaluate all scouted prospects on the same scale.

Yes, there will be some 2,5* rated players that I feel are more useful to my team than players that are rated with 3* by my scouts. But it happens in FM same way too. But I'm pretty sure every really good talent would be rated 4-5* by my world class scouts, so all I have to do is to list them by star rating and then concentrate solely to ones my scouts have picked up for me.

[Schotsmannetje]

I agree with everything that has been said in the opening post. Basically, what it comes down to is that when a scout has a JPA and JPP of 17+, a report card is always going to give a good enough indication of whether a player is going to be a good addition to the team or not. I agree that there should be a bigger 'flop margin'.

But I have two other points of criticism about the scouting system. Something that I miss in FM but happens a lot in real life is that when players get scouted, they aren't only judged on ability, potential and character, but also on the style of play they are used to. Are they used to playing in a 442 or a 433 formation? Are they used to closing down a lot? Is a defender used to playing with a high or deep line? Is a striker used to drilled or floated crosses? Is a midfielder used to short or direct passing? Is a winger used to playing in a wide formation or a narrow formation? I know plenty of real life examples in which a player was judged good enough, but not bought because they expected him not to be able to adapt to the style of play. And we have seen plenty of examples of footballers whom failed at a club, because they couldn't adapt. For example Diego Forlan at United, Shevchenko at Chelsea, Zlatan at Barca (although other issues were involved there too obviously). I must add that this is of course different for younger and older players. I think Ryan Giggs and Paul Scholes would find it much harder to adapt to a different style of play then for example Jack Wilshere. Arsenal IRL scouts players on the ability of adopting a new style of play (their style of play). This is simply not present in FM, but should be in my opinion.

The second point is: When I send my scout away to scout a certain player, he always comes back with a full report as if he's always sure of himself. Just once in a while I would like to receive the message: You know what? I don't really know what to think of him. Maybe you should have a look. And then beneath that message would be the option to visit a game of that player, the same way it is done as when you manage an international team.

[Schotsmannetje]

Well isn't this a case IRL too?

Nope, sometimes players can't adapt to your style of play, or to the country they live in, or to the physical violence of the competition you play in (Shevchenko).

[Coentrao]

The thing is that even Manchester United will sign a Bebe or Manucho from time to time.. in FM you just don't flop like that normally.

[Martyr1777]

To be honest, it is. It is purely a question whether you implement the scale of evaluation IRL or not. Let's pretend I'm ManU manager. Only thing I have to do to get similar results I get in FM is to ask my scouts to rate all my players in 5 star scale within my team and Premiership and then evaluate all scouted prospects on the same scale.

Yes, there will be some 2,5* rated players that I feel are more useful to my team than players that are rated with 3* by my scouts. But it happens in FM same way too. But I'm pretty sure every really good talent would be rated 4-5* by my world class scouts, so all I have to do is to list them by star rating and then concentrate solely to ones my scouts have picked up for me.

Except in FM I give little attention to their star rating other then the PA. IRL PA is mostly a crap shoot, you can have a pretty good idea but never really know. More important for me are the attributes, normal and hidden. We get info in game about a youngster being injury prone, really? How many times as a 15 y/o actually played, how many times has he been injured? I've had players on my team that are told to be injury prone but never got injured in 1 1/2 seasons with me, so how'd they know he's injury prone, or is he really? That's the difference between irl and the game... or the normal attributes... 'wow a 19 pace, one of the fastest players in the world'. IRL managers don't have such an easy way to determine that. They can watch all the video they want but it's not measurable like that on the pitch. Nor do players across the world get timed sprints to measure it, even if they did that doesn't transfer to the pitch 100%.

Picking players IRL is FAR more difficult then it is in game. It doesn't take me more then 30 seconds to think, 'this guy is better then my top guy at that position and fits my scheme'. IRL that would take 2-3 months AT LEAST to be that sure on something. The only thing stopping me from taking a mid/low table second division team, getting promotion the first season and winning the first division then second season is the money to buy the players because finding the right players is a cake walk. That's not the case IRL...

Not to mention that the AI isn't smart enough to compete for high skilled value players, so we can always get them without competition.

[Ackter]

I've been looking in to this recently - the higher the quality of your players are, the much harder it is for your scouts to give you a good reading.

For example, a 3* player at a top club could be anything from 130-170 PA, and that's quite a large difference.

However, if you then add the scout's description (good signing, fair signing, quality signing etc) it becomes pretty easy to tell which one to get.

[x42bn6]

Just give scouts less bias towards physical ability when judging youth. Let's say two players are 100 CA, one with better technical abilites and the other physical. A scout, without looking at PA and assuming hidden attributes are the same, will more likely recommended the first player. Doesn't seem like a problem at all.

Not true either, because there are many tricky players at that level who never develop further, because it's all they know. Look at freestyle footballers, for example - extremely technical, but not good for a football team.

There is more to a player's future possibilities than current ability.

[Svenc]

To be honest, the day they make scouting harder is the day I start to rely upon third party programs for scouting, I feel there is a nice balance right now in game between ease of finding players and difficulty, if it was made harder I'd be very inclined to just use programs all the time because I want to play this game at a decent pace, I don't have time to listen to scout reports on a player for three months from three different scouts before I buy a player, I want to actually finish a season not be reading scout reports 24/7 to see if they've refined their mind on a player. Even if it's just like a further delay added so that it takes longer before they do the "proper" report I don't feel I'd be super-happy with that.

The balance is off - what many FM players (even longterm, probably) don't know since it's not being communicated in any manual: The player is able to order a scouting report on hundreds of players of his own choice via just clicking twice. Just like selecting and deselecting items and files in the Windows explorer, shift and alt are the comfort keys to selecting and deselecting multiple items at once.

Granted, with the most basic of staff it will take a while to get the report cards done. But it's still possible to get solid information on 30+ players in the space of just three weeks. Couple this with the many useful filter functions on offer and you get the idea - report cards, as they stand now, are too powerful as the entry-level requirements (time, budget, staff) needed to properly scout this quickly are too low.

[Ginga-Assassin]

First of all, great OP, this is a subject I've felt is more unrealistic than most in FM.

I think a scout's assessment of how Injury-prone a player is should be strongly influenced by a player's injury history. This is really the only way we can judge a player's injury-proneness IRL. We can deduce from the fact that he hardly has a run of games anymore that Fabio Aurelio is pretty injury-prone, this is the sort of thing I'm on about. Obviously this system would make it near-impossible to deduce with any degree of accuracy at all, how injury-prone a player in his teens is, as he hardly has enough of a playing history to be judged at all. But this would add to the realism IMO, it's always a gamble signing a young player, as they're often unproven and inexperienced.

Also, gotta agree with the restructuring of a club's scouting system thingy. I'm not familiar with other club's scouting set-ups IRL, but I know for a fact that Liverpool have a "Head of Scouting" if you will, in Damien Comolli. This is exactly the type of set-up I think should be available.

[Krald]

I feel right now its the same with scouts. Scouts can be mistaken, but its far too rare and a good scout on a three match report is always going to know. It's taking away the thrill I get of spotting a good player, of making that decision on what I can see.

Does that make sense?

You're entitled to your own opinion and I respect that, I feel it's alright though as-is, there's a hidden "consistency" stat and oftentimes I've been recommended a player, he hasn't played a massive amount of games, so I've not been able to look at his ratings there, I get him, and turns out he's a complete dud, can't get any form of consistency going and barely contributes to my team. Also there's things like adaptability, all in already, there's plenty of conditions where players can perform worse than the scout reports given.

[Svenc]

As a side note - side note because this is an assassment not directly related to scouting: FM's player database is huge, but as a side-effect I think that there are too many good players for too few clubs actually competing for them. Whether this is primarily related to research, regen algorithms, manager AI or all of those I don't know. But for example, whilst the AI DOES recognize when a club has just released a promising youngster playing in Turkey's U21 squad, often times you seem to end up as the only manager actually making a bid proper.