some managers speculate that this can be an advantage.
To me only one of these two statements is true, but I don't know which one:
- global quality (q% or number of stars) matters, then when grey skills go low you need to keep white skills up in order to keep a good average (one can say you could also inefficiently train the grey skills).
- grey skills don't matter, and the global quality value/star is not representative of the actual quality of the player. In this case we are all victims of an illusion when we use stars/q% to evaluate players