Overrated players - Suggestions for Paul

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.

Tom@Charlton-Bayern wrote:

what I'm saying is that other managers shouldn't have the power to do it, ie pointing him out to Paul.

Why not? Paul's always run this game with the aim of it being as true to life as possible. If a player is over (or under) rated and correcting that makes the game more realistic then I'm all for it! If you have an overrated player then it should be seen as a bonus, not something to rely upon. If you buy an overrated player then that's your decision. Ultimately you should expect the player to have a realistic rating. If you disagree with Paul's rating of the player then it's up to you to give him a good case as to why his rating should be different.

very well put Dan...

Is there anyone on here who doesn't have a player who's over rated. Gattuso isn't even a Milan regular never mind an Italy player and he's a 99 99. I have them and so does everyone. Last season I had someone (and Paul told me who) review Julio Cesar, without argument one of the World's top 3 keepers, down during the title run in and it took 3 turns or 1 loss and 2 draws to fix . My view is if we get into reviewing each others players downwards then it'll become a stupid stone throwing free for all. And people in glass houses should say nothing. Anyone here confident every player they have is correctly rated?

i was looking at this and thinking, dan, dont go off on 1 about brazilian players, hows about you look at your own squad, gattuso, vieira and henry, why dont you write in about these and get them down graded then i'll follow by your example

milan baros 9997, think he might be underrated????

As I said .... everyone has one or more so instead of looking at everyone else if we want our own over rated players down graded then let's start by looking at ourselves and then we can look at others.

Ouch! This is becoming personal and it shouldn't be. I've already admitted I have some overrated players.

Quote: "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."

So does everyone. And hence everyone could be affected by the game becoming more realistic. Myself included.

Lee, did I say something to offend you? What's up buddy?

Rob, I don't want to get into a slanging match with you or anyone. But I wish to say that I disagree with your comment about Gattuso not being a regular for Milan. He's played in every league this season (ok there's only been 5 games but it's still a fact). He's also retired from international football but that's beside the point. I agree that Julio Cesar should never have been downgraded. I can't understand why Paul would have done that. Would love to hear the argument put forward for the negative review. As has been pointed out before, Paul's opinion is the only one that counts. That should act as a decent safety net to make sure that players aren't too harshly reviewed down or aren't given too high ratings. That looks like it didn't happen in this particular case.

Please could we keep this on topic. The fact is you can review down each others players. What I'm suggesting won't change that. But I'd like to see more of a consensus opinion put forward to Paul on some players that are overrated with a solid argument why and then Paul can make up his own mind. Starting with unmanaged/personality managed players as a trial first.

NO MORE PLAYER EXAMPLES FOR NOW THOUGH PLEASE. Let's just agree if this is possible to do this or not. Throwing stones doesn't help. If I've thrown any then I apologise, it wasn't intentional. I was just giving examples to back up my opinion that there's an issue here that should be looked at. Given the number of comments and how everyone is suddenly becoming very defensive and personal it's clear to me that there is an issue here. Hopefully we can find a good solution that will result in the game becoming more lifelike. Even if we all suffer a little.

I don't actually think that Paul's opinion of a player should count at all.

To review a player the rules state you should send in compelling evidence.
So you send in your press cuttings, match reports, stats etc and Paul should make a decision based on the information you've given him, and not on his own opinion of the player.

As a manager who's recently had a player massively reviewed down as a result of another managers comparative review of his own player I have to say it's not pleasant.
And then to find out from Paul that he reviewed him down because he'd " never heard of him" was pretty puzzling. The player in question was overrated, but the review down has been hugely over done and now he's a useless piece of crap.

what should hamsik be rated at, someone please tell me, im goin the cinema now, i'll be back in about 3 hours, 50p to someone who gets his ratings spot on to what it is, and i cant get him reviewed any higher, so yea, i have adriano overrated, but i also have hamsik way underrated, just leave peoples players as they are, but, of course, you can review other peoples players if you REEEAAALLLY want to, but i wont be down grading any of my players....

As an International manager I have a right to question the quality of players placed at my disposal. Whilst I would never try to downward re-rate a player at a managed club without first discussing this action with the players manager beforehand, this does not apply to over rated players at reality managed clubs.

I am therefore about to divulge the message I have written to Paul on the back of my International return sheet. Verbatim.

''Hi Paul,

I am dropping P. Cannavaro, Pegolo and Calaio like a stone. They are all utterly over rated and are all given stars? None of them have any full International experience whatsoever with the exception of Cannavaro, who got the nod but was an unused substitute for a friendly 3 years ago.

Strange goings on afoot indeed at Napoli. Perhaps Diego Maradona is back on the coke!''

I now expect Italy to lose all the group games, and Bohemians to suffer in the league as a result.

red buttons yours this week the martin, some light relief for me!

It would be nice if other International managers were to follow my lead and winkle out other over rated players at reality managed or unmanaged clubs, that way I won't be singled out.

I did point out that Dario Silva only had 1 leg a couple of seasons ago.

Lol. If he ever gives me an international side I will gladly do that.

I've asked for the Russians, so will probably drop that useless Arshavin kid...eh Lee?! Lol

if anything my players are under rated i mean some are double winners in real life and should all be 9999 in my opinion

Nathan Tyson is overrated in my opinion, as is Wes Brown.

Wes is managed Dan, by newcomer Ben, let's not draw his players into this eh? He's not even had a turn yet.

Tyson is shit though, I'll give you that

hamsik's 9593!!!! no one guessed, no one cares, im off to bed, and im keeping y 50p, wahoo, and yea, that arshavin lad is shite atm,downgrade him to 8478, it needs to be done!!!!

Interesting reading, I don't agree with the reviewing of other peoples players though it definately is possible to do. Also the comparing of another player is sometimes the only way to get the review that you think is required, you don't go out to get the other player downrated as you're using him as a yardstick to get your player a higher or similar rating.

There are loads of overrated players in the game but i think that Paul will rarely get time to do them so how do they get reviwed?

Its a very touchy subject when it comes to our own players, maybe we could have a player review section on the forum where we can discuss players ratings, using all of our collective football knowledge?

If a player has a very high CF rating but in real life he's actually got the footballing ability of myself then he deserves to be re-rated.

the entire santos team? has anybody seen it?

oh. my. god.

its littered with 9797s and 9999s that for the life of me are about as recogniseable as the made up names found on pro evo every year.

who manages santos again?

Just thought I raise this topic again, rather than start a new one.

Not sure if anyone spoke to Paul about the overrating of players, but it seems he is beginning to do something about it.

I have noticed over the last couple of turns that a lot of unmanaged/reality managed players have been cut down to a much more realistic level.

It seems that the rating system has gone back to its original state, where a standard rating for a premier league regular, non international is now 92 again.

Any rating above that requires a number of caps.

I do agree that this needed to be done, but the main concern still remains Paul's view of International teams.

The world rankings have changed many times since the game started, with Germany, Brazil, France, Italy an Spain all winning the World cup at some stage.
Appreciate it is difficult to keep up with changing world ratings but I feel it is imperative only a handful of players remain with 9999.

Just wondering if any other managers had seen any significant changes recently, within their own team or others around them?

All for the better I think?

basically what were saying is that Matt (hull) had a shit load of massively overated players with some of the most rediculous stats imaginable and paul has taken the opportunity to bring them to a more realistic level.

my two favourites were:

per kroldrup - the guy who david moyes publicly said
' he's the only centrehalf iv ever seen that deosnt like to head the ball' - 8 heading

Sandro -

no one had ever seen this guy play and not only had 8 tackling, he had a ts of about 120 pt cr of something like 99 95 and lets be honest were still no wiser who he is or what does and hes been in england for about 6 months.

.......nearly forgot about hendry thomas.

paul has appeared to have corrected these, but not sure how they got so high in the first place.

i agree tom. the game is shaping up nicely, but i dont think paul should stop there. i'd like him to, if he can, keep an eye on the ratings of the top players of each country in the game, and also real life international squads (and maybe the under 21s). this really only needs to be the top end countries, not the slovenia's and slovakia's of this world.

i think there should only be 20-30 9999s in the game. only the true world superstars. which means the only englishman would be wayne rooney. even thats questionable (prior to that overhead kick anyway).

i agree about paul's view on national teams. i mean...since the game started in 1990 we now have double the amount of european nations for starters. i also think paul's view on certain leagues needs re-clarification. i mean...russia is actually a much better league than holland and portugal these days. maybe even france. but its pretty tough to get a player reviewed above a 92cr playing out in siberia. the turkish and ukrainian leagues are on the up aswell.

maybe paul could do with looking at the A, B and C categories. i still maintain that Uruguay's players need to be rated better than they are at present. and Portugal;s should be weaker. France should be grade B now aswell. maybe the grading of players should even be dependant on the league they are in, instead of the country they represent...or atleast a combination of the two? i mean, the likes of Hamsik is one example of a player that would benefit from this...he plays for a C grade country, but playing in an A grade league....which should mean he's rated better.

but i have noticed paul addressing a lot of the over rated players in the game and thats a great starting point. one step at a time i guess.

Surely the rating of a player shouldn't be dependent on which league they play in or the country they represent, it should be based on their individual ability on how they can play football?

I don't think the PT/CR ratings are as important now in the game as they used to be, mainly because using the swapbid to bring a player is alot harder to do now then when i first started playing the game.

I have Fernando Llorente who is rated as a 9999, which as good a striker he is he probably doesn't warrant this but his TS of 108 may well be lower than what it should be with him being one of the leading scorers in La Liga and also a full international? His PTCR ratings are good for me to try and swap him out (which i wouldn't anyway!) but it is his TS which i use as one of the things when selecting my team.

Well, i guess paul has to base a players PTCR with some criteria, as much as i agree with what what you say that it should be just based on his ability. the way the current ratings guide is currently set out grade B and C countries shouldn't actually ever have a player become a 97cr. they're either 95 or 99. ( https://2img.net/h/i181.photobucket.com/albums/x263/stu_foz/page3.jpg ). which, to me, is a little silly. it means a player in those categories are, supposedly, either dynamite or dog turd. one example i could give off the top of my head is alex song of arsenal being a 94cr for a fair while now, he'd be 97cr by now if he was anything other than cameroonian. so, yeah, on that basis why should alex song only be a 94cr just because he is cameroonian? and the same for hamsik earlier in this thread. so, i agree with the notion a player should be based on his ability. have to say that i'm often put off from buying players outside the major nations because its just too hard to review them to a decent level, usually because of their nationality and the difficulty in getting them reviewed up, skills aswell as rating.

regards llorente....his skills are pretty low for a 9999 arnt they? typical of a 97cr really. maybe each CR level should have a minimum amount of skills? or maybe even there should be a range for each level. i.e....94CR 85-95 skills 95CR 95-105 skills 97CR 105-120 skills, 99CR 120+. it would make each CR level more defining anyway, though i guess i'm just being tediously pedantic.

and yes, skills are the only thing that count when selecting your team, but it'd be better that when your opponent see's a 9999 on your team sheet that they know they're up against something superb, instead of a player that is, effectively, a 9797 skills wise.