retired_cglittergirl1967

Your totally missing the point. I wasn't trying to manage i was doing an experiment and i didn't change anything apart form moving the players around.

If you stoped to think you would have realized that the manager was the same for the good team and the crap team but yet the results were the same for both. Yes the good team underperformed but the crap team should have done allot worse considering there all in positions they don't have the skills for.

retired_bryanz_babydoll

My point is this: Arsenal should be performing better than 1.3 points per game, whatever the opposition.

Therefore, if you showed me a stat saying Arsenal got 40+ points from 18games, with both the 'good' and 'bad' team I would agree with you about individual poisitions/skills not mattering.

However all you have shown is too sets of poor results, as you say the good team underperformed, perhaps the bad team performed as expected or even overperformed?

I would be interested if you 'went on holiday' having pre-selected your prefered side (good and bad) and then compared the two seasons.

retired_cglittergirl1967

I thought of that but i'm not sure if will work because even if i click keep the same team my assistant is bound to replace any injured/tired players with players more suited to the position. It could mean the 2 teams end up the same after a few games. I might try anyway.

retired_bryanz_babydoll

Ye thats a fair point, but I think it works that whenever they are fit, the assistant has to pick the team you select. I would be surprised if Arsenal with Walcott and Eduardo at CD and say Clichy and Senderos at CF were up to much!

The other thing is most Arsenal players are v.good on the ball, therefore there adaptablity potential might be a little higher than normal teams.

retired_cglittergirl1967

Ok i'll try it with another team but my point was the players should play to there individual skills and if you look at the team i picked they don't have the skills suited to the positions i played them in.

Maybe it was a freak set of results but i did the same test with champ manager and the difference between the good and crap team was a massive 1.7 goals per game and 1.6 points per game, and that was over only 10 games. I only continued the test longer with FM because i was convinced the results had to change but they didn't.

retired_val_pal

Surely Gallas at RB and Walcott up front would have been a better choice...

retired_asoto20

Yep, sure but that really goes down to my managing decisions, and they might have been bad. To try to defend it, i wanted a good header up front, and walcott dosent fit the bill.And i got the striker injured before the RB...

retired_asoto20

Good point!

You might wanna do this test with a lower ranked team. If your conclusions are right so far, this should happen with any team,no?

burntmonkey

Why don't you try to put the keeper upfront and a striker in goal? Maybe that might speak sometime for itself.

retired_cglittergirl1967

I left keeper in correct position as i presumed that no matter how bad the engine was that the goalie would play to his stats.