Inter ratings are messed up... Actually SERIE A ratings are bad and not accurate ..

Mark1302
82 posts Park Captain
As a guy who watches Inter games I'm surprised. Who makes these ratings, some twitter guy that bases them on trends? No wonder sancho has 84....

How is JOAO MARIO the same rating as our best player last season Marcelo Brozovic (81)? Literally this guy should be at least 85-86. He is even lower than Politano (82). Fernandinho is 87.

Why the hell did D'ambrosio get only 75 which is less than Santon, De Siglio, Piccini, Zappacosta and Calabria. He was one of the best right backs in Serie A last season. He is 10th best SERIE A right back according to EA.

Barella has less strenght than Sensi...

I'm not even going to argue over Asamoah, but I think he deserved upgrade.

De Roon should be way higher, Zielinski aswell. Pjanic 68 shooting is a joke. Chiesa is 79 while Cuadrado is 83.

HOW THE HELL DID LAZARO GET DOWNGRADE FROM 77 TO 75 After THE BEST SEASON HE EVER HAD?

Comments

  • nicitel32
    1537 posts Play-Off Hero
    because people that make ratings has no clue about how the players perform in real life...
  • Vix14
    424 posts An Exciting Prospect
    They absolutely have no clue. It's not just the Serie A. They mess up a lot of ratings.
  • Tom0307
    147 posts Has Potential To Be Special
    I imagine because of the relative failure of Italian teams in European competitions which is really the only good way we have to compare players in different leagues. Yes you might be amazing in your own league, but when you get into Europe and fail, your league obviously isn't as good as others. Italy is comfortably 4th below Germany and far behind Spain and the Prem because they've done nothing in the Europa League and only Juventus have been runners up a couple of times in the last 4 or 5 years. It's the same reason that the top scorer in the Swiss league isn't a 90 rated because it's all relative.

    I'm not saying Italy is a bad league, but only 1 team has won it for way too long and none of the entrants into European competition have achieved anything in Europe so from EA's point of view, why would they be rated in the late 80s? The national team is in a trough at the moment as well, so again, why would they be rated highly when they aren't playing to the level that others are?
  • 1690_Ulster_FC
    3448 posts National Call-Up
    Tom0307 wrote: »
    I imagine because of the relative failure of Italian teams in European competitions which is really the only good way we have to compare players in different leagues. Yes you might be amazing in your own league, but when you get into Europe and fail, your league obviously isn't as good as others. Italy is comfortably 4th below Germany and far behind Spain and the Prem because they've done nothing in the Europa League and only Juventus have been runners up a couple of times in the last 4 or 5 years. It's the same reason that the top scorer in the Swiss league isn't a 90 rated because it's all relative.

    I'm not saying Italy is a bad league, but only 1 team has won it for way too long and none of the entrants into European competition have achieved anything in Europe so from EA's point of view, why would they be rated in the late 80s? The national team is in a trough at the moment as well, so again, why would they be rated highly when they aren't playing to the level that others are?

    Is this the same German league that has done nothing great in Europe the past few years either?
  • mufcscott__
    509 posts An Exciting Prospect
    Kaka’s Prime only being 91 is what annoyed me most
  • 1690_Ulster_FC
    3448 posts National Call-Up
    Kaka’s Prime only being 91 is what annoyed me most

    There's a ten minute video on Youtube showing Kaka at his best over 6 or 7 years.

    Even after his first injury at Madrid, he still outsprinted Ronaldo up the pitch.
    I'd love to be able to time his fastest sprint on a youtube video to see how fast he was.. I've seen 35kmh being quoted on google, but I feel there's sprints faster than the one they timed.

    He ran from his own box against New Zealand in the 85th minute, up the left wing at full pelt in a few seconds and past 3 players before scoring.. It'll be fun to see his stamina, considering he was constantly sprinting up the pitch in each match.

    I think his passing stat is fine, it's his shooting stat that worries me on his prime.
  • Raider
    3458 posts National Call-Up
    edited September 11
    Mark1302 wrote: »
    As a guy who watches Inter games I'm surprised. Who makes these ratings, some twitter guy that bases them on trends? No wonder sancho has 84....

    How is JOAO MARIO the same rating as our best player last season Marcelo Brozovic (81)? Literally this guy should be at least 85-86. He is even lower than Politano (82). Fernandinho is 87.

    Why the hell did D'ambrosio get only 75 which is less than Santon, De Siglio, Piccini, Zappacosta and Calabria. He was one of the best right backs in Serie A last season. He is 10th best SERIE A right back according to EA.

    Barella has less strenght than Sensi...

    I'm not even going to argue over Asamoah, but I think he deserved upgrade.

    De Roon should be way higher, Zielinski aswell. Pjanic 68 shooting is a joke. Chiesa is 79 while Cuadrado is 83.

    HOW THE HELL DID LAZARO GET DOWNGRADE FROM 77 TO 75 After THE BEST SEASON HE EVER HAD?

    juve has hype so cuadrado stays 83, biglia is 82 only because he was 83 before so they gave him a small downgrade, but its much harder for other non hyped players to get upgrades, because EA doesnt watch games and dont even look at statistics, pretty sad if u ask me
  • CeeQue
    10823 posts Has That Special Something
    They are not English nor play in England.
  • mufcscott__
    509 posts An Exciting Prospect
    Kaka’s Prime only being 91 is what annoyed me most

    There's a ten minute video on Youtube showing Kaka at his best over 6 or 7 years.

    Even after his first injury at Madrid, he still outsprinted Ronaldo up the pitch.
    I'd love to be able to time his fastest sprint on a youtube video to see how fast he was.. I've seen 35kmh being quoted on google, but I feel there's sprints faster than the one they timed.

    He ran from his own box against New Zealand in the 85th minute, up the left wing at full pelt in a few seconds and past 3 players before scoring.. It'll be fun to see his stamina, considering he was constantly sprinting up the pitch in each match.

    I think his passing stat is fine, it's his shooting stat that worries me on his prime.
    It’s just the fact that Gurdiola’s Prime is 90 and Kaka’s is 91, like do EA genuinely believe Kaka only deserves to be 1 overall higher that Pep? Lol
  • 1690_Ulster_FC
    3448 posts National Call-Up
    Raider wrote: »
    Mark1302 wrote: »
    As a guy who watches Inter games I'm surprised. Who makes these ratings, some twitter guy that bases them on trends? No wonder sancho has 84....

    How is JOAO MARIO the same rating as our best player last season Marcelo Brozovic (81)? Literally this guy should be at least 85-86. He is even lower than Politano (82). Fernandinho is 87.

    Why the hell did D'ambrosio get only 75 which is less than Santon, De Siglio, Piccini, Zappacosta and Calabria. He was one of the best right backs in Serie A last season. He is 10th best SERIE A right back according to EA.

    Barella has less strenght than Sensi...

    I'm not even going to argue over Asamoah, but I think he deserved upgrade.

    De Roon should be way higher, Zielinski aswell. Pjanic 68 shooting is a joke. Chiesa is 79 while Cuadrado is 83.

    HOW THE HELL DID LAZARO GET DOWNGRADE FROM 77 TO 75 After THE BEST SEASON HE EVER HAD?

    juve has hype so cuadrado stays 83, biglia is 82 only because he was 83 before so they gave him a small downgrade, but its much harder for other non hyped players to get upgrades, because EA doesnt watch games and dont even look at statistics, pretty sad if u ask me

    Biglia should be a 79 rated.. He's done.
    Paqueta should be an 82.
  • Mark1302
    82 posts Park Captain
    Tom0307 wrote: »
    I imagine because of the relative failure of Italian teams in European competitions which is really the only good way we have to compare players in different leagues. Yes you might be amazing in your own league, but when you get into Europe and fail, your league obviously isn't as good as others. Italy is comfortably 4th below Germany and far behind Spain and the Prem because they've done nothing in the Europa League and only Juventus have been runners up a couple of times in the last 4 or 5 years. It's the same reason that the top scorer in the Swiss league isn't a 90 rated because it's all relative.

    I'm not saying Italy is a bad league, but only 1 team has won it for way too long and none of the entrants into European competition have achieved anything in Europe so from EA's point of view, why would they be rated in the late 80s? The national team is in a trough at the moment as well, so again, why would they be rated highly when they aren't playing to the level that others are?

    If sancho wasn't English he wouldnt be near 81
    He only got a hugeeee upgrade because he's trendy among plastics that don't watch football
  • Mark1302
    82 posts Park Captain
    Raider wrote: »
    Mark1302 wrote: »
    As a guy who watches Inter games I'm surprised. Who makes these ratings, some twitter guy that bases them on trends? No wonder sancho has 84....

    How is JOAO MARIO the same rating as our best player last season Marcelo Brozovic (81)? Literally this guy should be at least 85-86. He is even lower than Politano (82). Fernandinho is 87.

    Why the hell did D'ambrosio get only 75 which is less than Santon, De Siglio, Piccini, Zappacosta and Calabria. He was one of the best right backs in Serie A last season. He is 10th best SERIE A right back according to EA.

    Barella has less strenght than Sensi...

    I'm not even going to argue over Asamoah, but I think he deserved upgrade.

    De Roon should be way higher, Zielinski aswell. Pjanic 68 shooting is a joke. Chiesa is 79 while Cuadrado is 83.

    HOW THE HELL DID LAZARO GET DOWNGRADE FROM 77 TO 75 After THE BEST SEASON HE EVER HAD?

    juve has hype so cuadrado stays 83, biglia is 82 only because he was 83 before so they gave him a small downgrade, but its much harder for other non hyped players to get upgrades, because EA doesnt watch games and dont even look at statistics, pretty sad if u ask me

    Biglia should be a 79 rated.. He's done.
    Paqueta should be an 82.

    Also lucas fooking lucas leiva(84) is 3 overall's better than brozovic!! Embarrassing really whoever watches serie A knows that brozo is way way better, he already proved that in the world Cup when he played as a CDM and gave freedom to 2 cm's modric and Rakitic and the result of that was the final
  • Raider
    3458 posts National Call-Up
    Mark1302 wrote: »
    Raider wrote: »
    Mark1302 wrote: »
    As a guy who watches Inter games I'm surprised. Who makes these ratings, some twitter guy that bases them on trends? No wonder sancho has 84....

    How is JOAO MARIO the same rating as our best player last season Marcelo Brozovic (81)? Literally this guy should be at least 85-86. He is even lower than Politano (82). Fernandinho is 87.

    Why the hell did D'ambrosio get only 75 which is less than Santon, De Siglio, Piccini, Zappacosta and Calabria. He was one of the best right backs in Serie A last season. He is 10th best SERIE A right back according to EA.

    Barella has less strenght than Sensi...

    I'm not even going to argue over Asamoah, but I think he deserved upgrade.

    De Roon should be way higher, Zielinski aswell. Pjanic 68 shooting is a joke. Chiesa is 79 while Cuadrado is 83.

    HOW THE HELL DID LAZARO GET DOWNGRADE FROM 77 TO 75 After THE BEST SEASON HE EVER HAD?

    juve has hype so cuadrado stays 83, biglia is 82 only because he was 83 before so they gave him a small downgrade, but its much harder for other non hyped players to get upgrades, because EA doesnt watch games and dont even look at statistics, pretty sad if u ask me

    Biglia should be a 79 rated.. He's done.
    Paqueta should be an 82.

    Also lucas fooking lucas leiva(84) is 3 overall's better than brozovic!! Embarrassing really whoever watches serie A knows that brozo is way way better, he already proved that in the world Cup when he played as a CDM and gave freedom to 2 cm's modric and Rakitic and the result of that was the final

    yep Inter is really poorly done, lukaku has 75 pace 64 acc and 84 speed while he was 2nd fastest only behind diego dalot in utd preseason...
  • 1690_Ulster_FC
    3448 posts National Call-Up
    There's very little pace in Serie A this year. RB and LB's are very poor.

    There's very little choice for CB's if you want 70+ pace.

    How the [email protected]#k Piatek is only an 80 rated is beyond me. Suso got downgraded yet had 10 assists..and 78 pace ffs.

    Midfield looks decent but very few strikers available for starter squads.
  • DoD_Jester
    26253 posts Player of the Year
    edited September 11
    Ignore me I didn't read a post properly
  • DoD_Jester
    26253 posts Player of the Year
    I like serie a for high end teams once informs start being released, plenty cards that with one or two upgrades will be great(and of course CR7)

    Think for early game though I'll be forced to go EPL or a hybrid, just not enough Italian options to be competitive early doors
  • QuidoFrontiere
    235 posts Has Potential To Be Special
    edited September 11
    Mark1302 wrote: »
    As a guy who watches Inter games I'm surprised. Who makes these ratings, some twitter guy that bases them on trends? No wonder sancho has 84....

    How is JOAO MARIO the same rating as our best player last season Marcelo Brozovic (81)? Literally this guy should be at least 85-86. He is even lower than Politano (82). Fernandinho is 87.

    Why the hell did D'ambrosio get only 75 which is less than Santon, De Siglio, Piccini, Zappacosta and Calabria. He was one of the best right backs in Serie A last season. He is 10th best SERIE A right back according to EA.

    Barella has less strenght than Sensi...

    I'm not even going to argue over Asamoah, but I think he deserved upgrade.

    De Roon should be way higher, Zielinski aswell. Pjanic 68 shooting is a joke. Chiesa is 79 while Cuadrado is 83.

    HOW THE HELL DID LAZARO GET DOWNGRADE FROM 77 TO 75 After THE BEST SEASON HE EVER HAD?

    Man as someone who watched all dortmund matches I confirm Sancho deserves 85 with 85+ passing.

    Edit: but overall agree that EA ratings are mess
  • nicitel32
    1537 posts Play-Off Hero
    tbh i am surprised that sancho is only 84....btw benzema receive an upgrade to an 87..he is rubish,just soo so bad...and lewa got downgrade after scoring 40..this season in bayern he is on fire....chielini 68 pace is way to high in comparison with other cbs
  • Invincibility
    3464 posts National Call-Up
    All these low ratings.. Pure for the likeness of specials incoming the whole year.. Wonder if we will see more promo's this year then 19
  • Diggy
    13619 posts Has That Special Something
    Ratings are only for SBCs they have little other relevance
  • nicitel32 wrote: »
    tbh i am surprised that sancho is only 84....btw benzema receive an upgrade to an 87..he is rubish,just soo so bad...and lewa got downgrade after scoring 40..this season in bayern he is on fire....chielini 68 pace is way to high in comparison with other cbs

    You think Benzema is rubbish after 21 goals and 7 assists in 36 league games and 4 goals and 2 assists in 8 games in the Champions league in a relatively poor Real team. Grow up. :D

    However, on the topic of Serie A ratings, some of them are seriously underrated. It's a pity EA don't pay more attention to the league.
  • Alex_cr
    4864 posts Big Money Move
    Serie A ratings do look a mess but it’s quite hard to argue against Sancho at 84.
  • JWNYsg
    697 posts An Exciting Prospect
    SMS 85 and Ciro 86. Go Lazio
  • CFCHenri
    3398 posts National Call-Up
    Tom0307 wrote: »
    I imagine because of the relative failure of Italian teams in European competitions which is really the only good way we have to compare players in different leagues. Yes you might be amazing in your own league, but when you get into Europe and fail, your league obviously isn't as good as others. Italy is comfortably 4th below Germany and far behind Spain and the Prem because they've done nothing in the Europa League and only Juventus have been runners up a couple of times in the last 4 or 5 years. It's the same reason that the top scorer in the Swiss league isn't a 90 rated because it's all relative.

    I'm not saying Italy is a bad league, but only 1 team has won it for way too long and none of the entrants into European competition have achieved anything in Europe so from EA's point of view, why would they be rated in the late 80s? The national team is in a trough at the moment as well, so again, why would they be rated highly when they aren't playing to the level that others are?

    Juve has been in the finals how many times in the past five years? AS Roma were in the semis 2 CL seasons ago. Also we’re talking about 1 league and it’s top players from last season compared to other players in the same league who were average to poor, no idea why you brought other leagues and CL into it. Lazaro came from the Bundesliga and got downgraded.....
  • Alex_cr
    4864 posts Big Money Move
    CFCHenri wrote: »
    Tom0307 wrote: »
    I imagine because of the relative failure of Italian teams in European competitions which is really the only good way we have to compare players in different leagues. Yes you might be amazing in your own league, but when you get into Europe and fail, your league obviously isn't as good as others. Italy is comfortably 4th below Germany and far behind Spain and the Prem because they've done nothing in the Europa League and only Juventus have been runners up a couple of times in the last 4 or 5 years. It's the same reason that the top scorer in the Swiss league isn't a 90 rated because it's all relative.

    I'm not saying Italy is a bad league, but only 1 team has won it for way too long and none of the entrants into European competition have achieved anything in Europe so from EA's point of view, why would they be rated in the late 80s? The national team is in a trough at the moment as well, so again, why would they be rated highly when they aren't playing to the level that others are?

    Juve has been in the finals how many times in the past five years? AS Roma were in the semis 2 CL seasons ago. Also we’re talking about 1 league and it’s top players from last season compared to other players in the same league who were average to poor, no idea why you brought other leagues and CL into it. Lazaro came from the Bundesliga and got downgraded.....

    Of course other leagues and European competition have to come into it. Players can’t just be rated in line with there own league.

  • What to expect from a company that doesn't know how to put a Scudetto on a jersey when you win the championship ?! It is already so much that they know the names of the Serie A teams ... Figured the values ​​of the players ... #notforeveryone
  • Tom0307
    147 posts Has Potential To Be Special
    CFCHenri wrote: »
    Tom0307 wrote: »
    I imagine because of the relative failure of Italian teams in European competitions which is really the only good way we have to compare players in different leagues. Yes you might be amazing in your own league, but when you get into Europe and fail, your league obviously isn't as good as others. Italy is comfortably 4th below Germany and far behind Spain and the Prem because they've done nothing in the Europa League and only Juventus have been runners up a couple of times in the last 4 or 5 years. It's the same reason that the top scorer in the Swiss league isn't a 90 rated because it's all relative.

    I'm not saying Italy is a bad league, but only 1 team has won it for way too long and none of the entrants into European competition have achieved anything in Europe so from EA's point of view, why would they be rated in the late 80s? The national team is in a trough at the moment as well, so again, why would they be rated highly when they aren't playing to the level that others are?

    Juve has been in the finals how many times in the past five years? AS Roma were in the semis 2 CL seasons ago. Also we’re talking about 1 league and it’s top players from last season compared to other players in the same league who were average to poor, no idea why you brought other leagues and CL into it. Lazaro came from the Bundesliga and got downgraded.....

    Yeah exactly, one team and one other team got halfway to the final. What other successes are there in the Champions League or Europa League? Why would Inter players get the same ratings as City, Liverpool or Barcelona players when they've only just got back into the Champions League so obviously aren't at their level yet?

    You have to bring up other leagues and the Champions League because like I said that's the only way to measure quality of players against other leagues. If someone bangs in 30 goals in the Austrian League, it doesn't make them a 90 rated because chances are they won't be as effective in Europe against better opposition. They'll be rated highly within their own league but when you play in the Champions League the ratings are all put into perspective against the like of Barcelona and Bayern etc. Aside Juventus, Italian teams don't deserve the upper 80 ratings because as good as they may within Serie A, they don't produce in Europe and there are many teams ahead of them who do deserve the higher ratings.
Sign In or Register to comment.