young v old

[waynecollins8]

Hi

just want to know do older players aged 28+ who are 5 stars perform better than young players say 18yr old-22yr old 5 stars?

Thanks Alot

[Dman2pt]

Performance have nothing to do with age or quality.

[Mo Avengers]

No they dont hun but the younger ones train quicker !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[lashawn246810]

Always pick the younger players, that way you don't have to think about retirement for a while

[Celtic]

Too many young good players are draining my budget. Will have to sell some.

[lashawn246810]

my budget is very low but since i won the cup and im going to win the league that is going to give me a good amount of money to start the next season

[andrewh]

Performance have nothing to do with age or quality.

If quality has nothing to do with performance, what does it measure?

[RJSlow]

If quality has nothing to do with performance, what does it measure?

It just means that they may be skilled and have talent, but when they get on the field they can't produce. Think of ratings as how they display their quality on the field. A 3* with 9 ratings is showing off all there skill on the field to the maximum, but a 5* player with 6 ratings is a stud who doesn't seem to perform to his maximum on the field. This is where you would want the 3* player

[andrewh]

It just means that they may be skilled and have talent, but when they get on the field they can't produce. Think of ratings as how they display their quality on the field. A 3* with 9 ratings is showing off all there skill on the field to the maximum, but a 5* player with 6 ratings is a stud who doesn't seem to perform to his maximum on the field. This is where you would want the 3* player

My impression had been that quality/stars measured current skills (which would translate to immediate results on the field) and that value took quality/stars into account but also added in this potential for future growth (fast training) and how long it may be applied (age).

But instead I am hearing that quality and stars are about a potential that may be realized (fast training) or may not be realized (turns out to not be a fast trainer or despite high skill levels does not produce on the field)? And that on field performance can only be determined by actually playing a player and can't be estimated by any of the numbers observable for transfer listed players? This would be difficult to manage with. Maybe quality is still the best indicator of on field performance, but it is just not guaranteed?

[Buffs Mad]

Yep, Quality is not Performance, value is not performance, wage is not performance, and individual 'player factors' are not performance either, formations are not performance (ratings aren't accurate for performance either).....and performance is not = WIN. These things are good yardsticks but not guarantees.

Its a simulation that puts all these things in the mix and churns out a result.