How bad is the youth development bug right now?

[Pompeyboyz]

6 minutes ago, Mr U Rosler said:

This a good example. Lost 15 attribute points from age 16 to 18. Played over 100 first team games in this time. He lost more points the next season despite his personality changing to 'professional'.

 

 

Corners -1                           Composure +2                   Work rate -1

Crossing -2                          Concentration -1             Pace -1

Finishing -1                        Decisions -1                       Stamina +1

Longshot -2                         Determination -1

Marking -1                          Flair +1

Penalties -1                         Leadership - 1

Tackling -2                        Off the ball  +1

Technique -1                     Teamwork -1

 

Attribute Changes

Negative = -19

Positive = 4

NEGATIVE -15 CHANGE!!

Did you look at the CA and PA of the player to check that.

From my testing, I do feel there is more change in the attributes, and there maybe things deeper under the hood my results don't show. 

2 minutes ago, Mr U Rosler said:

I guess its the uncertainty of who will and who won't improve with seemingly no rhyme or reason, versus they pretty much all will improve in previous versions.

And from my testing, this will make Youth Only Challenges...... A Challenge 

[Mr U Rosler]

3 minutes ago, Pompeyboyz said:

Did you look at the CA and PA of the player to check that.

From my testing, I do feel there is more change in the attributes, and there maybe things deeper under the hood my results don't show. 

 

Editor use is banned in the challenge and disabled on start up of the save.

Any CA changes will surely manifest in the player attributes?

Edited November 16, 2021 by Mr U Rosler

[Jimbokav1971]

On 12/11/2021 at 16:35, Dagenham_Dave said:

This thread is also a stark example of how bug rumours snowball into 'facts' by certain people. It happens every single year. 

If users genuinely think this is a bug, they need to report it. I'm not far enough into my save to make any assertions on the subject one way or another, but I'd like to think that SI have implemented something in the code that slows down the development of young players based on external factors. I suppose time will tell. 

For what it's worth someone asked me about this in my own thread in the FMCU forum and I didn't know anything about it. I did take it seriously though so I went and had a look in the Youth Only Challenge thread in the CSE forum and saw that a few people were experiencing it. 

I put my save on hold,  and tracked the CA of all of my players, (I'm playing Youth Only in Portugal) between Oct 2029 and May 2030. 

I found that most players were progressing although some were showing little/no change and some even showed a decline in ability. Although I didn't look into all those who declined or stayed the same, everyone I checked I could explain. Either they had been injured or not playing very often, or I had forgotten to set individual training or they had been loaned out and weren't playing much or they had been loaned out to a low level team with poor facilities and although they were playing regularly, the level was really poor. It all made sense to me. 

I'm not saying that there isn't a problem, (because others I trust have said that it doesn't seem right), but perhaps everyone should look at how they might be responsible for some of the poorly developing players before claiming it's a bug. I found loads of mistakes in just the short few months that I tracked. I wonder if everyone else is just better than me, perhaps even delegates the training/individual training to their Ass Man? 

I'm not saying that there aren't faults with the game, (and I'm not even saying this isn't one), but to just assume that you are experiencing a problem just because others have experienced it seems a little..... weak. 

Investigate. Rule everything else out. Prove to yourself, (and then SI), that there is a problem by reporting it as a Bug. They are pretty damn good at responding when enough people raise the same problem. 

[Mars_Blackmon]

19 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

Keep in mind that even though they are getting first team matches, it's at a low level, so while there may be initial improvements, they can only improve so much given where they're playing. For development, it's important that players play at a suitable level. Not saying that's definitely the case with your issue, but it could be a factor. I see you have reported it, but can you upload a save for the devs to look at, please? If you can, please update that thread with the name of the save and the problem players.

Yup, you’ll sometimes get a note about a player’s development saying that he would benefit from a higher level of play while he’s already on your first team and a starter. Unless you are somehow able to loan him up to a league, your option is to move up the pyramid.

[Pompeyboyz]

5 minutes ago, Mr U Rosler said:

Editor use is banned in the challenge and disabled on start up of the save.

Any CA changes will surely manifest in the player attributes?

You would think that 

This is a player I mentioned that was retrained and he lost 14 attribute points in a season but no CA drop

This is the other one retrained, and he lost 6 attribute points over 3 years but gained a CA point. 

[Mr U Rosler]

Ah, i see. 

I think not all attributes are treated equally and their is weighting in terms of their impact on CA. 

[HUNT3R]

28 minutes ago, Mr U Rosler said:

In the interest of balance, I have had a couple of players make decent progress.

I guess its the uncertainty of who will and who won't improve with seemingly no rhyme or reason, versus they pretty much all will improve in previous versions.

More realistic, not wholly against this change, might restart with a slightly higher reputation team.

  

That's not necessarily a bad thing, I agree! More varied development is a welcome addition, if that's what it is.

[Pompeyboyz]

3 minutes ago, Mr U Rosler said:

Ah, i see. 

I think not all attributes are treated equally and their is weighting in terms of their impact on CA. 

Possible the attribute weighting linking to the CA is also linking to the position/role?

But as I have said, I think there is far more going on under the hood this year that's making this tougher. 

[AceAvenger]

39 minutes ago, Mr U Rosler said:

Ah, i see. 

I think not all attributes are treated equally and their is weighting in terms of their impact on CA. 

Yeah different attributes carry different weight based on position.

So if I'm not mistaken, a center-back can lose 8 points for Long Shots and gain 1 for Tackling and still have the same CA.

[Jimbokav1971]

2 hours ago, AceAvenger said:

Yeah different attributes carry different weight based on position.

So if I'm not mistaken, a center-back can lose 8 points for Long Shots and gain 1 for Tackling and still have the same CA.

Cheers @AceAvengerI've been looking for that. 

Do you know if that's accurate for FM22 or is it just carried over from an old issue but we think it's the same? 

[Edit]

It's interesting that GK's are given a 0.00 weighted score for outfield attributes rather than a NA. Do you know who created this? 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Jimbokav1971

[Warg92]

Just wanted to show you this. I got this guy in the youth intake as fourth tier norwegian team. The teams facilities is the worst possible, and this is how he has developed over the last six seasons. He has 143 apps for the team.

[Pompeyboyz]

21 minutes ago, Warg92 said:

Just wanted to show you this. I got this guy in the youth intake as fourth tier norwegian team. The teams facilities is the worst possible, and this is how he has developed over the last six seasons. He has 143 apps for the team.

without seeing the CA and PA from the start to finish, it will be difficult to pull a pure conclusion. If your coach that's giving the summary is poor with JCA and JPA you might be getting a false reading of PA, plus, as @Jimbokav1971 has put in his SAD thread, what is the CA and PA being measured against?  Also what role was the player favoured for and what role were you player him?  Did you do any role specific training as my testing showed retraining took a big toll on a players attributes. 

[AceAvenger]

1 hour ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

Cheers @AceAvengerI've been looking for that. 

Do you know if that's accurate for FM22 or is it just carried over from an old issue but we think it's the same? 

[Edit]

It's interesting that GK's are given a 0.00 weighted score for outfield attributes rather than a NA. Do you know who created this? 

FMScout made that table, you can check out the attribute weighting in the editor too.

It looks like it hasn't changed.

[Prepper_Jack]

1 hour ago, Warg92 said:

Just wanted to show you this. I got this guy in the youth intake as fourth tier norwegian team. The teams facilities is the worst possible, and this is how he has developed over the last six seasons. He has 143 apps for the team.

Depending on his training regimen, that could actually be a decent result. +5 jumping reach is kind of significant. What position was he trained in, and what did your ordinary training schedule consist of?

If you have 1-2 match practices a week, they should be getting decent training in their core abilities, and shouldn't go backwards in it.

[Jimbokav1971]

18 minutes ago, Prepper_Jack said:

If you have 1-2 match practices a week, they should be getting decent training in their core abilities, and shouldn't go backwards in it.

Do you mind if I ask what you are basing that on? 

He's already told us he is playing in the 4th tier in Norway which is 3. divisjon avdeling 1 level and the club he is playing as are Kautokeino who I think start off as non-playable and start the game as amateur, (although could have turned Semi-Pro). 

I think clubs like these only train twice a week, (any type of training), and as soon as you play mid-week I think they drop down to 1 session , (of any kind), per week. I'm far from an expert on training, but using the only 2 sessions per week to do match practice would probably leave you with half a team available for your next game. 

[Miek]

6 hours ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

For what it's worth someone asked me about this in my own thread in the FMCU forum and I didn't know anything about it. I did take it seriously though so I went and had a look in the Youth Only Challenge thread in the CSE forum and saw that a few people were experiencing it. 

I put my save on hold,  and tracked the CA of all of my players, (I'm playing Youth Only in Portugal) between Oct 2029 and May 2030. 

I found that most players were progressing although some were showing little/no change and some even showed a decline in ability. Although I didn't look into all those who declined or stayed the same, everyone I checked I could explain. Either they had been injured or not playing very often, or I had forgotten to set individual training or they had been loaned out and weren't playing much or they had been loaned out to a low level team with poor facilities and although they were playing regularly, the level was really poor. It all made sense to me. 

I'm not saying that there isn't a problem, (because others I trust have said that it doesn't seem right), but perhaps everyone should look at how they might be responsible for some of the poorly developing players before claiming it's a bug. I found loads of mistakes in just the short few months that I tracked. I wonder if everyone else is just better than me, perhaps even delegates the training/individual training to their Ass Man? 

I'm not saying that there aren't faults with the game, (and I'm not even saying this isn't one), but to just assume that you are experiencing a problem just because others have experienced it seems a little..... weak. 

Investigate. Rule everything else out. Prove to yourself, (and then SI), that there is a problem by reporting it as a Bug. They are pretty damn good at responding when enough people raise the same problem. 

I'm honestly baffled by the lack of critical thinking in this post, or the one you've quoted. People are not assuming anything but are trying to falsify their feeling that something might be off with youth development. It's pretty common practice in science circles to do so. Also, SI have confirmed that they tinkered with it so based on their track record it's not out of this world to raise the question that something might be off.  

The more people chime in here the more data points we have the faster we can get to the bottom of this. People playing youth only saves are usually not your random FM players but die-hards who have been playing this game for years and understand that injuries, different positional training and training effect development. I assume, maybe to a fault, that these things are taking into account when people post their findings here. 

And can we stop with the 'post it in the bug forum' responses please? This has been raised to SI, they are aware and confirmed they have enough saves to do their own research. Once they've done their research I'm sure they will let us know what their findings were. And that's the million dollar question: Is this a bug or a feature? Only SI can tell. 

[Pompeyboyz]

3 minutes ago, Miek said:

I'm honestly baffled by the lack of critical thinking in this post, or the one you've quoted. People are not assuming anything but are trying to falsify their feeling that something might be off with youth development. It's pretty common practice in science circles to do so. Also, SI have confirmed that they tinkered with it so based on their track record it's not out of this world to raise the question that something might be off.  

The more people chime in here the more data points we have the faster we can get to the bottom of this. People playing youth only saves are usually not your random FM players but die-hards who have been playing this game for years and understand that injuries, different positional training and training effect development. I assume, maybe to a fault, that these things are taking into account when people post their findings here. 

And can we stop with the 'post it in the bug forum' responses please? This has been raised to SI, they are aware and confirmed they have enough saves to do their own research. Once they've done their research I'm sure they will let us know what their findings were. And that's the million dollar question: Is this a bug or a feature? Only SI can tell. 

You do realise that @Jimbokav1971 is one of the very best Youth Only save members here don't you and his words carry a lot of weight when it comes to understanding this. 

[Prepper_Jack]

23 minutes ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

Do you mind if I ask what you are basing that on?

Lots of experience in playing in the lower leagues?

Match practice is a moderate intensity role targeting workout that does a great job exercising core stats. During the season in semi pros, I typically combine this with attacking movement and defensive shape, which not only exercise core roles (though not to the extent that a match practice does), but also increase performance during the upcoming match. For the last session I either use some holistic session based on long term strategy, or teamwork, for the advantage in pressing.

You get three days per week as semi-pro or amateur club. During the season, you usually have two days to train, and one is delegated for the match. I'm not aware of any semi-pro or amateur club I've ever played having only two sessions a week. That said, in Scandinavia they do shorten the season a bit, so one month you do play two matches a week, which limits training, but you do get an extended pre-season to work with, particularly in the lowest divisions. In my current game, as a second division Swedish team (third division elsewhere), pre season started in January or something, and the first match was in June. So, a whole lot of training and friendlies. If you're wondering about injuries, I don't get a lot - usually about 5 a season, usually small ones during the matches, and almost never in training.

Again, even with poor facilities, a player shouldn't regress in core stats, unless they've had major injuries or have been maltrained, or neglected. There should be growth, albeit tepid, but you can get reasonable growth if you manage mentoring groups and personalities well.

[Jimbokav1971]

5 minutes ago, Miek said:

I'm honestly baffled by the lack of critical thinking in this post, or the one you've quoted. People are not assuming anything but are trying to falsify their feeling that something might be off with youth development. It's pretty common practice in science circles to do so. Also, SI have confirmed that they tinkered with it so based on their track record it's not out of this world to raise the question that something might be off.  

The more people chime in here the more data points we have the faster we can get to the bottom of this. People playing youth only saves are usually not your random FM players but die-hards who have been playing this game for years and understand that injuries, different positional training and training effect development. I assume, maybe to a fault, that these things are taking into account when people post their findings here. 

And can we stop with the 'post it in the bug forum' responses please? This has been raised to SI, they are aware and confirmed they have enough saves to do their own research. Once they've done their research I'm sure they will let us know what their findings were. And that's the million dollar question: Is this a bug or a feature? Only SI can tell. 

I think you misunderstood me. Apologies if I didn't explain myself well enough. 

Let me repeat.

I'm not saying that there isn't a problem, (because others I trust have said that it doesn't seem right), but perhaps everyone should look at how they might be responsible for some of the poorly developing players before claiming it's a bug. I found loads of mistakes in just the short few months that I tracked.

My concern is that unfortunately people are lazy, and just because some people play Youth Only saves, (like me), doesn't exempt is from being lazy. 

Rather than coming in here and basically saying "yeah, me too" without providing any context or back-up only serves to dilute the very valid issue that some people are raising, (whether it's defined as a bug or not). 

I want someone to come in here, having done something similar to what I outlined I did, (and you have to remember that I wasn't even aware that the bug existed until someone asked me about it), where they are basically ruling out other things as outside influences. 

I'm looking for more info, more knowledge and more explanations in the hope of this getting resolved. I shared my experience because in searching for human caused explanations instead of a "bug", I found quite a few examples of me making small errors in the grand scheme of things, but big errors in the development of individual players. 

If I'm making those sorts of errors I think it's reasonable to expect that others are too. 

It's too easy for everyone to jump on the band-waggon and while the issue, (if it exists), seems to be restricted to clubs with very low facilities, we have examples in here of people ignoring that and talking as if it's the case for clubs with all level of facility. (It doesn't seem to be). 

I'm a big fan of reporting bugs. I think a lot of people experience them and are just too lazy to report them themselves and rely on others to do so. I was trying to encourage more reporting on this topic. Not less. I just want people to do a little work before doing so. 

[Miek]

3 hours ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

I think you misunderstood me. Apologies if I didn't explain myself well enough. 

Let me repeat.

I'm not saying that there isn't a problem, (because others I trust have said that it doesn't seem right), but perhaps everyone should look at how they might be responsible for some of the poorly developing players before claiming it's a bug. I found loads of mistakes in just the short few months that I tracked.

My concern is that unfortunately people are lazy, and just because some people play Youth Only saves, (like me), doesn't exempt is from being lazy. 

Rather than coming in here and basically saying "yeah, me too" without providing any context or back-up only serves to dilute the very valid issue that some people are raising, (whether it's defined as a bug or not). 

I want someone to come in here, having done something similar to what I outlined I did, (and you have to remember that I wasn't even aware that the bug existed until someone asked me about it), where they are basically ruling out other things as outside influences. 

I'm looking for more info, more knowledge and more explanations in the hope of this getting resolved. I shared my experience because in searching for human caused explanations instead of a "bug", I found quite a few examples of me making small errors in the grand scheme of things, but big errors in the development of individual players. 

If I'm making those sorts of errors I think it's reasonable to expect that others are too. 

It's too easy for everyone to jump on the band-waggon and while the issue, (if it exists), seems to be restricted to clubs with very low facilities, we have examples in here of people ignoring that and talking as if it's the case for clubs with all level of facility. (It doesn't seem to be). 

I'm a big fan of reporting bugs. I think a lot of people experience them and are just too lazy to report them themselves and rely on others to do so. I was trying to encourage more reporting on this topic. Not less. I just want people to do a little work before doing so. 

Gotcha, we're basically on the same page then. Thought you were saying that the issues lie with the users, not SI, just based on your personal experience. 
Hopefully more people post their experiences here and we can unearth some more answers but I think ultimately SI wil need to confirm if the current youth development is functioning as designed or not. 

 

[Warg92]

10 hours ago, Prepper_Jack said:

Depending on his training regimen, that could actually be a decent result. +5 jumping reach is kind of significant. What position was he trained in, and what did your ordinary training schedule consist of?

If you have 1-2 match practices a week, they should be getting decent training in their core abilities, and shouldn't go backwards in it.

I am not good at setting up training schedules, so my ass. man does all of that, and he is really bad as well. I use and Advanced Forward, so that has been his main focus.

10 hours ago, Jimbokav1971 said:

Do you mind if I ask what you are basing that on? 

He's already told us he is playing in the 4th tier in Norway which is 3. divisjon avdeling 1 level and the club he is playing as are Kautokeino who I think start off as non-playable and start the game as amateur, (although could have turned Semi-Pro). 

I think clubs like these only train twice a week, (any type of training), and as soon as you play mid-week I think they drop down to 1 session , (of any kind), per week. I'm far from an expert on training, but using the only 2 sessions per week to do match practice would probably leave you with half a team available for your next game. 

There was a bug in the first release of the database, so every team that is promoted in to the lowest playable tier turn semi-pro, so we have been a semi-pro team all the way. One other thing to notice, (and I have no idea if this makes a difference), is that the season I am in now is the first season that I have been able to give the players proper contracts. Before this I could only offer money per appearance, no weekly wages. But the contract is still called semi-pro.

There are two sessions each week, three in pre season.

 

In the spoiler below I have posted pictures of every player that has been a regular, for me for at least two seasons.

Spoiler

This guy is the only one with a Professional personality in the team.

 

 

I have no idea why jumping reach is the attribute that grows the most.

 

 

[Mr U Rosler]

Started a new youth challenge with Scarborough, played 6 months, here are the CA on the 1st day vs after 20 league games.

A JACKSON 52 TO 48. -4 POINTS

N CARTMAN 57 TO 52. -5 POINTS

K WELEDJI 54 TO 53. -1 POINTS

L MALONEY 52 TO 50 -2 POINTS

J CADMAN 41 TO 36. -5 POINTS

B GOODA 52 TO 49. -3 POINTS

D COGILL 56 TO 54 - 2 points

T HUDSON 50 TO 50

W THORNTON 52 TO 53 +1

J DAY 59 TO 54 -5

 

So after a promotion to a higher division, having no coaches to a full coaching team, the whole team is getting worse and worse instead of better.

How is that not broken?

 

[HUNT3R]

30 minutes ago, Mr U Rosler said:

Started a new youth challenge with Scarborough, played 6 months, here are the CA on the 1st day vs after 20 league games.

A JACKSON 52 TO 48. -4 POINTS

N CARTMAN 57 TO 52. -5 POINTS

K WELEDJI 54 TO 53. -1 POINTS

L MALONEY 52 TO 50 -2 POINTS

J CADMAN 41 TO 36. -5 POINTS

B GOODA 52 TO 49. -3 POINTS

D COGILL 56 TO 54 - 2 points

T HUDSON 50 TO 50

W THORNTON 52 TO 53 +1

J DAY 59 TO 54 -5

 

So after a promotion to a higher division, having no coaches to a full coaching team, the whole team is getting worse and worse instead of better.

How is that not broken?

 

As I've posted earlier in the thread - can you upload your save (you did post in the thread in the bug tracker) so that SI can take a look?

[Mr U Rosler]

16 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

As I've posted earlier in the thread - can you upload your save (you did post in the thread in the bug tracker) so that SI can take a look?

Done 

Its in the beta sub forum.

[HUNT3R]

44 minutes ago, Mr U Rosler said:

Done 

Its in the beta sub forum.

Thanks. It's a pity it's not the same save as the issue you reported, but this should still help SI.

[Mr U Rosler]

2 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

Thanks. It's a pity it's not the same save as the issue you reported, but this should still help SI.

Hi, it is the same saves. Day 1 and 6 months later. 

[HUNT3R]

2 minutes ago, Mr U Rosler said:

Hi, it is the same saves. Day 1 and 6 months later. 

I know. You initially reported an issue with development with a screenshot of a player at Stalybridge which, I assume, is a different save.

[Mr U Rosler]

1 minute ago, HUNT3R said:

I know. You initially reported an issue with development with a screenshot of a player at Stalybridge which, I assume, is a different save.

Ah, you want that one as well?

[HUNT3R]

1 minute ago, Mr U Rosler said:

Ah, you want that one as well?

It's the one they wanted, since that was the one you reported, so it will definitely be useful. I posted at the bottom of page 2 (of this thread) but you may have missed it.

[Mr U Rosler]

9 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

It's the one they wanted, since that was the one you reported, so it will definitely be useful. I posted at the bottom of page 2 (of this thread) but you may have missed it.

Ok, will upload that. 

[Fettucine_Alfredo]

So many people talk about a problem in youth development. People who are used to FM, they know what to expect from youth and how to get them there. To me if so many people of this profile report a problem, it's worth looking at. It's not like they are mad because their players don't get a +8 in 1 season. They have played before.

Immediately denying it won't bring any good to anyone (but SI of course)

[HUNT3R]

3 minutes ago, Fettucine_Alfredo said:

So many people talk about a problem in youth development. People who are used to FM, they know what to expect from youth and how to get them there. To me if so many people of this profile report a problem, it's worth looking at. It's not like they are mad because their players don't get a +8 in 1 season. They have played before.

Immediately denying it won't bring any good to anyone (but SI of course)

Whether anyone denies it or not - SI have acknowledged this and it's under review. They are actively working to balance this more. The uploaded saves will definitely help, whether they show evidence of an issue or not. Top level players and lower league players need to be checked. What level the club is and what facilities they have need to be checked. How much training, the quality of the coaches and whether they had match (and especially first team) minutes need to be taken into account. Mr U Rosler's (and others') saves will help and will save time covering all those bases.

[Dagenham_Dave]

2 hours ago, Fettucine_Alfredo said:

So many people talk about a problem in youth development. People who are used to FM, they know what to expect from youth and how to get them there.

Yes, but if the way youth development has changed in the game by design, previous knowledge becomes more redundant. 

[BrightLad5]

Has a Youth Development bug been confirmed? Or is it a case that, in FM22, players now require things like better training/facilities/coaching etc to develop

It was relatively easy to develop players at poor facility/standard clubs on past FMs so maybe this is more a case of realism kicking in this year and it being more varied and difficult by design?

 

Would like to know if we have got a definitive bug though. In the previous FM Beta a year or so ago there was a very obvious Youth/Newgen bug which was rectified 

[HUNT3R]

4 minutes ago, BrightLad5 said:

Has a Youth Development bug been confirmed? Or is it a case that, in FM22, players now require things like better training/facilities/coaching etc to develop

It was relatively easy to develop players at poor facility/standard clubs on past FMs so maybe this is more a case of realism kicking in this year and it being more varied and difficult by design?

 

Would like to know if we have got a definitive bug though. In the previous FM Beta a year or so ago there was a very obvious Youth/Newgen bug which was rectified 

Just 2 posts up  -  SI have confirmed that there's a bit of an issue, which they are currently balancing.

[BrightLad5]

49 minutes ago, HUNT3R said:

Just 2 posts up  -  SI have confirmed that there's a bit of an issue, which they are currently balancing.

Thanks HUNT3R. Apologises for missing that post. I wonder if any fixes will be save game compatible?

[HUNT3R]

Just now, BrightLad5 said:

Thanks HUNT3R. Apologises for missing that post. I wonder if any fixes will be save game compatible?

Very sure it will be. It's almost always only rule changes and database changes that aren't.

[ViG1980]

Maybe out of scope for this thread for this but if there is an issue with development (and subsequently regression), has anyone looked at what happens to those players at the tail end of their careers. Historically, players in FM get old reaaaallly fast when, in reality, I think more and more players are just as good in their mid 30s as their mid 20s, albeit good in different ways. Not sure FM has ever done a good job of replicating that! Once they start to get old, physical attributes fall off a cliff and players become pretty useless.

[pow4h]

Thats very intereting topic.

I also noticed slower development than in previous FM's but I want to show you how developed my goalkeeper after 2 seaons of game.

He is now 21 yr so 19 yr at start of game.

In first season he played 6 matches in first team and second season 31 matches. League is polish highest league and training facilities 12/20.

 

 

So I think its not so bad but other young players dont improves so fast (but they dont play so often in first team) so I think its slower than previous 

[joekim87]

Don't know if this is related but I have training emails for the U18s ticked but I don't get no emails... Anyone else have this problem?

[Trugdish]

I get all the arguments of more realistic development but doesn't this just seem abit boring?

 

I like the idea of developing players low down, progressing as the club progresses, seems like now players will only reach their potential, or even progress as a decent rate at a top club

 

Just takes the fun out of it

[Mars_Blackmon]

On 30/11/2021 at 11:53, Trugdish said:

I get all the arguments of more realistic development but doesn't this just seem abit boring?

 

I like the idea of developing players low down, progressing as the club progresses, seems like now players will only reach their potential, or even progress as a decent rate at a top club

 

Just takes the fun out of it

No, because the second statement isn't true.

[ViG1980]

Slower development is much better. I hate the fact that players used to peak at 22 and I’d be wanting to sell 28 year olds. I’d even argue that the development cycle still isn’t slow enough. You’d almost want 2 phases where certain skills (on average) only start to develop later. Players at 31 can be just as good as they were at 25, they’re just a different type of player. 
 

Phase 1 would be around match intelligence (situational experience) and phase 2 would be more around overall game experience (smarts). Not sure if that makes sense but look at a player like Modric. Always creative but in his younger days he was quick off the mark and creative. More of a risk taker. Now he’s impossible to get the ball off and just super intelligent off the ball. 

[kepz]

On 30/11/2021 at 08:53, Trugdish said:

Just takes the fun out of it

maybe go play FIFA career mode 

[Ripamaru]

On 14/11/2021 at 09:32, Scoham said:

Don’t know the story of that player but not everyone IRL gets better every year from age 16 onwards. Injuries, attitude, facilities, how they fit with he manager/coaches/club/team mates, life outside of football etc can all have an impact.

There are plenty of examples of players who were very promising but never made it. Some don’t improve, some get worse and fall down the leagues - it may be that they didn’t keep themselves fit (physical decline) and that led to them not maintaining their technical and mental attributes.

Players irl don't develop in a linear fashion. Some guys grow leaps and bounds from 16 to 21. Some really promising ones dont develop at all or regress. Not just that age range either. In my experience the biggest leap most successful players make is from 23-26.

Take Salah for example. He couldn't crack Chelsea's first team at 21-22. Went on loan. Salah grew a little at Fiorentina age 22 (9 g+a), then made big leaps at Roma age 23 (20 g+a), 24 (26 g+a), before he exploded at Liverpool at 25 (42 g+a).

Or Frank Lampard who never had more than 10 PL g+a until he made big leaps at 25 (15 g+a) and 26 (31 g+a).

Bruno is another one though he started blowing up a bit earlier. Never had more than 9 g+a through years with Udinese and Sampdoria. Then at 22 at Sporting (19 g+a) and 23 (33 g+a).

There are plenty of examples of guys who didn't blow up til much later also.

People seem to have this strange idea after seeing freaks like Mbappe and Haaland that star players develop that early. That is extremely rare. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mars_Blackmon]

On 01/12/2021 at 21:24, ViG1980 said:

Slower development is much better. I hate the fact that players used to peak at 22 and I’d be wanting to sell 28 year olds. I’d even argue that the development cycle still isn’t slow enough. You’d almost want 2 phases where certain skills (on average) only start to develop later. Players at 31 can be just as good as they were at 25, they’re just a different type of player. 
 

Phase 1 would be around match intelligence (situational experience) and phase 2 would be more around overall game experience (smarts). Not sure if that makes sense but look at a player like Modric. Always creative but in his younger days he was quick off the mark and creative. More of a risk taker. Now he’s impossible to get the ball off and just super intelligent off the ball. 

I think it would be a bit slower if injuries were at a realistic rate. I would love to see mentals and maybe even technicals improve well into the 30's.

[Mr U Rosler]

SI have acknowledged there is a bug and are working on it.

I don't believe its related to the pace of development generally or the age range for development but relates specifically to entire lower league squads losing attributes under certain circumstances. Likely related to poor facilities although i personally suspect there is a league reputation issue in some instances.

I have started another Academy Challenge, this time with Stockport, i'm up into League 2 after first season and will be pumping cash into the training facilities which I hope circumvents both the above issues. Will be tracking the progress of my youth prospects very closely.  

 

[Pompeyboyz]

New patch is out and hopefully you'll be seeing better progression now. 

[Trugdish]

On 02/12/2021 at 05:43, kepz said:

maybe go play FIFA career mode 

Strange comment, I've been playing Football Manager/Championship Manager for the past 21 years

[pow4h]

Any tests after patch?

Is it somehow improved?