Overrated players - Suggestions for Paul

Thanks guys for the international squads, really great and useful to see them. It's pretty clear to me that Brazil is another of Paul's favourites, there's quite a few ratings that look rich to me! (Please see below for some examples). This has reminded me to make this post which I've considered for quite a while.

I've often thought that it must be must easier for Paul to continually review up players than it is to review them down and. Maybe we could have a thread on this forum to try and help him out. The idea being (if successful) we could send him a list of players that would like him to review (but review down). The reasons should be well-argued and preferably we should suggest a new rating for the player. I anticipate that this would only affect the CR. Now I know this may result in some unpopular results (especially when your player gets reviewed down) - I'm sure we all have overrated players in their squads - I know I do! But the aim of the game is to make it as realistic as possible and hopefully this would help. Any one else think this may be worth doing?

Anyway on to those Brazilian examples.

For example FERNANDO HENRIQUE 9999 - 1 cap for Brazil!! (And that was a second-half substitute appearance in a 6-0 win over Haiti!)

CICINHO 9999 who's now 30 and has just 15 caps to his name.

VAGNER LOVE 9999, hasn't played for the international team for three years (maybe he's retired from international football?)

AFONSO ALVES 9997 - just 8 caps and now playing in Qatar. Didn't exactly do great at Boro when he was there either.

FRED 9999 - just 9 caps.

DOUGLAS FREITAS 9999 - has never played international football! Currently playing football in Thailand!

ADRIANO CORREIA 9999 - just 8 caps.

A few Brazilians I've spoken to say that it's well known that young players are often played in the less important internationals to both tie them to Brazil and also to increase their value and visibility in the hope that rich European clubs will sign them. I sure Brazil play more internationals than the average international team, often without their star players too.

Apologies if you own any of these players, I'm just saying it how I see it. And of course Gaz to you. Nothing personal in any of what I've written above.

In addition Napoli, my opponents in Europe this week have some Serie B players with a 97 CR. There must be hundreds of examples out there.

Would love to hear your thoughts on this. And your lists (with reasons) of overrated players.

Dan

Can......


of.......


worms.

True. Huge can of worms! Doesn't mean that it won't improve the game though which is the aim.

Although I can see Dan's reasoning for this and his intentions are good, I just can't see this working.

Even if you don't mean to, you will piss someone off by targeting their players (unintentionally) and getting them reviewed down.

A lot of managers will have bought these players because of their stats, whether they are overrated or not.

At the end of the day there are some glaringly obvious ones, but it is just a matter of opinion who is overrated and who isn't, and only one mans opinion counts in the end.

I know in a review recently a player was compared to another in the game already, suggesting they should be the same. However the outcome was that the innocent manager had his player chopped massively and the original player stayed the same.

Although this was done to make both players more realistic, it is only going to piss people off, having their players chopped from what they bought them for.


I do feel however Paul should review his priority list regarding countries. Although Brazil are a talented naton, they are no longer head and shoulders above everyone else. Countries like Uruguay and Usa should be promoted and others like France and Italy, whose players are massively overated imho, should be more realistically reviewed.


Nice idea Dan, but not sure if and how it could work without turning nasty.

We could just restrict it to unmanaged/reality managed players?

To avoid any bad feeling?

I agree with what your saying on Brazil, When i got the squad i looked through it thinking a lot of players were massively overrated in the squad and some ive never heard of also no Lucio in the squad.

Also i don't agree with how Ramires just jumped straight from 9995 to 9999 he only has handful of caps and has'nt started with flying colours at Chelsea, 9997 would be more realistic but at the end of the day the skills count and some of those 9999 ive got have got shit skills

Fair enough Tom. I didn't buy this bit though:

"A lot of managers will have bought these players because of their stats, whether they are overrated or not."

Yes the game is run on stats. But if you are buying a player you should know what the underlying player is like. If he's a 9999 rated player and plays for Chelmsford then you should expect his rating to drop.

Yes as you say only one man's opinion counts. Hence this would be a list of suggestions with valid arguments for the change.

And yes this may piss people off. But that doesn't mean that players should keep incorrect ratings just to keep them happy. The ratings should be realistic. I have no problem with your example of where a player was chopped massively to bring him in line with another similar player. That's the way it should be - similar players rated similarly.

Personally I feel we should look at all players. But we could always trial my idea on with reality/unmanaged clubs first.

Thanks Gaz for your input (I knew you wouldn't hold back with your view!) I agree Ramires should be a 9997 but didn't want to mention him as I believe he was subject to a deal recently.

And yes you are right about some highly rated players having shit skills. But generally the higher rated players have higher skills and higher ratings certainly affect valuations.

I think it comes down to your values. I have very rarely signed a player based purely on stats.

I agree with Dan's sentiment that the amount of 9999's in the game is far fetched.

One thing I really really disagree with, and am in total agreement with Tom on.

I really object to people submitting reviews using other peoples players as measuring sticks. Fine, submit reviews with accompanying press clippings etc, then it should be down to Paul.

You shouldn't be able to 'design a player', and the outcome of the review should be accepted. Phone calls to Paul moaning about shit reviews should be outlawed, as well as using other peoples players as yardsticks.

Also agree that if a player is shit in Real life, you should accept that his stats will drop at some stage. We're basing reviews to impove a players stats on real life, so you can't have your cake and eat it

ive got Cudicini 9797 never played for italy but been a good keeper in English leauge prob a 9795 at best and a 9797 if he ever made a full international which is unlikely now at 37

Oh yeah.............and Dans a trouble maker, reputation points down lads

it is a can of worms, but the current set up does work and does allow people to review other peoples players to my knowlege.

Naturally, it uses a dealing, and if I want to use a dealing talking Paul into the fact that Ryan Babel is over the top, then I can. What would happen then is that a pissed off Tom would launch a Kewell based tirade (who's now been slashed again by the way, having turned 32!) in return, and so it would continue.

Of course, unless you tell the manager in question, he wont know who it is, unless Paul details that on the manager feedback.

But seeing as we all struggle to stick to 10 dealings anyway, you'd have to be really motivated to do a negative review, and therefore suggest you would naturally limit your negative reviews to players in your own division...

hence it doesnt really happen.

but the option is there currently.

Reviews should simply be a case of drawing Pauls attention to a players stats and asking him to look again.

Dan@Plymouth wrote:

Fair enough Tom. I didn't buy this bit though:

"A lot of managers will have bought these players because of their stats, whether they are overrated or not."

Yes the game is run on stats. But if you are buying a player you should know what the underlying player is like. If he's a 9999 rated player and plays for Chelmsford then you should expect his rating to drop.

You'd be surprised.

I was under the impression that Paul wouldn't entertain negative reviews?

Maybe I'm wrong.

Actually Babel was reviewed last turn, have you something to tell me Richard?

i've never tried to review somebody elses player. Even Ryan Babel.
Although he would be top of my list if I was that way inclined. Oh, sorry, forgot Lionel Scaloni.

You may be right Tom, it was just the impression I had.

What happened to to him?

and I've never reviewed my player, using someone elses as a yardstick.

Obviously, there's a few that dont agree with me, but that's my stance anyway.

dont tell me Tom...I can feel it coming..

Babel was reviewed and now he's a 160! lol

There's one for you Dan.

You're telling me an intelligent bloke like Jamie, went out and bought Lionel Scaloni because he thought his career was just about to take off?

I doubt it, it was a skills based decision entirely. As it was when I bought him.


Apologies Jamie.

so come on then Tom, did Ryan get the slap or what?

Tom@Charlton-Bayern wrote:

There's one for you Dan.

You're telling me an intelligent bloke like Jamie, went out and bought Lionel Scaloni because he thought his career was just about to take off?

I doubt it, it was a skills based decision entirely. As it was when I bought him.


Apologies Jamie.

I'm not saying managers aren't buying on the basis of their stats, I'm just saying that they shouldn't be surprised if that player's ratings is brought back in line to what they should be.

Dan, can you reply to my PM when you have a minute please mate.

I'm sure thats the case with Jamie, he isn't going to ring up and complain if Scaloni goes down, but what I'm saying is that other managers shouldn't have the power to do it, ie pointing him out to Paul.

quite agree Tom. Especially if he's managed.

For the record Dan, I hate agreeing with Tom...it's like wearing red. Just doesnt come naturally at all.

interesting topic. i think we've discussed this loads, and even only recently about how players ratings compared to years gone by. theres definitely too many 9999s in the game and brazilian ones at that! i preferred the game as it was when you knew what a rating's were worth in the game. dani guiza a 9999? give me a break. one good season at mallorca doesnt make a player a 9999, he's now playing in the mighty turkish league ffs. some of the italian examples are quite shocking. emmanuel calaio, matteo brighi, paolo cannavaro, francesco lodi were all 9797 last time i looked and have about 2 caps between them!

i didnt think you can give negative reviews either rich, its something id never do cos i wouldnt expect another manager to do it to me. its just a bit of a cheap shot in my opinion. though i would agree to some ratings changes for the benefit of the game (including our own players) if we were all on here and agreed and discussed it collectively instead of doing it behind whoevers back. I would hate to hear that Scaloni or anyone has been reviewed down without the manager's knowledge pissing the maanger off and whoever did it doesnt have the courage to own up. the only time i've reviewed a player that isnt my own is with the international management but thats only positive, i wouldnt submit a negative review on any player. i think a lot of players in the game are deliberately sand bagged aswell so that they remain in a youth academy or dont want to be in the first 18 which is a shame. so, what we have now is a load of players overrated and a load more underrated.