dadde 206 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Riferimento: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Hello guys' date=' who are the best of the Bundesliga risers that have yet to be re-evaluated?I have Ginter, who else?[/quote'] Any answers? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Like_A_Boas 8,954 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Re: Riferimento: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Any answers? http://forum.soccermanager.com/showpost.php?p=2230598&postcount=4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dadde 206 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Riferimento: Re: Riferimento: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 http://forum.soccermanager.com/showpost.php?p=2230598&postcount=4 Thanks, you have a topic for revaluations of the premier league? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
braucieno 3,243 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Top teams tomorrow ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
koplfc 8,423 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Which of the following Leverkusen players are the best value for money, Kiessling, Castro, Kadlec or Toprak SM Tony 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duncan 7,707 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 which of the following leverkusen players are the best value for money' date='kiessling, castro, kadlec or toprak[/quote'] castro :d:d Quote Link to post Share on other sites
filipousis 247 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Respuesta: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 after the generous trades SM is giving, would be a solid option Lars Bender going to 91? I mean hes making the difference in his team... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Nealb 131 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Re: Respuesta: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 after the generous trades SM is giving' date=' would be a solid option Lars Bender going to 91? I mean hes making the difference in his team...[/quote']No, 90 would be about right. Probably about 20% chance he'll rise that much. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
King Leo 1,416 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Which of the following Leverkusen players are the best value for money' date='Kiessling, Castro, Kadlec or Toprak[/quote'] Kiessling will probably get 91 and Castro will remain at 90, still Castro's ability to play in several spots gives him more 'value for money'. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SM Tony 18,601 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Which of the following Leverkusen players are the best value for money' date='Kiessling, Castro, Kadlec or Toprak[/quote'] Kiessling and Castro for the money, even the other two are having good seasons no doubt. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BroodRoosterNL 10,833 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Which of the following Leverkusen players are the best value for money' date='Kiessling, Castro, Kadlec or Toprak[/quote'] Keep them all they'll all be rated 99 by the end of the season :cool:;):mad: On a serious note I'd say Castro and then Kiessling are the best. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
vitor_mfc 3,862 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Soccerwiki was the worst invention ever...seriously As for ratings' date=' SM (or Wiki) whoever it is is MILES to generous with ratings nowdays, you used to have to earn your stripes but nowdays players get up to elevated levels 88+ with no real reason for it.... The old days, system of rating was much more consistant, accurate and kept a sense of realism. I am afraid you dont have to do anything nowdays and you get bumped up to ridiculous levels....numerous examples in Germany and many other leagues[/quote'] I think ratings reviews aren't that bad nowadays, sure there is some discrepancies, and annoying things, but the players ratings are being somewhat accurate, we can't forget there is a constant evolution of the players and the reviews must reflect that. I'm not happy with every review, of course, but they can't please Greeks and Trojans. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
BroodRoosterNL 10,833 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 I think ratings reviews aren't that bad nowadays' date=' sure there is some discrepancies, and annoying things, but the players ratings are being somewhat accurate, we can't forget there is a constant evolution of the players and the reviews must reflect that. I'm not happy with every review, of course, but they can't please Greeks and Trojans.[/quote']If you define accurate as being within 5 points of a serious rating then yes I get your point mate and you are right, its not like all ratings are ridiculous, but the % of ridiculous ratings has definately got bigger and that's not really something I can appreciate (and I think others with me). germlad 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Vincy 540 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Riferimento: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Tomorrow will be re-evaluated : Mainz -Freiburg except (GINTER) and only a few players Eintracht Frankfurt that are (Trapp - Zambrano - Nikolov - Butscher) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rico suave 1,087 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Soccerwiki was the worst invention ever...seriously As for ratings' date=' SM (or Wiki) whoever it is is MILES to generous with ratings nowdays, you used to have to earn your stripes but nowdays players get up to elevated levels 88+ with no real reason for it.... The old days, system of rating was much more consistant, accurate and kept a sense of realism. I am afraid you dont have to do anything nowdays and you get bumped up to ridiculous levels....numerous examples in Germany and many other leagues[/quote'] I don't need convincing as I totally agree....all the time & money that's been wasted on something that's basically useless and which could've been used on improving the actual game instead! germlad 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CASTANHEDA 10 Posted January 9, 2013 Report Share Posted January 9, 2013 Huntelaar 92???? Huntelaar 92???? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SM Tony 18,601 Posted January 10, 2013 Report Share Posted January 10, 2013 Re: Huntelaar 92???? Huntelaar 92???? He has stayed at 91. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
-JMH- 8,575 Posted January 10, 2013 Report Share Posted January 10, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 I don't need convincing as I totally agree....all the time & money that's been wasted on something that's basically useless and which could've been used on improving the actual game instead! these are the totally clueless comments i expect from people who dont actually understand soccerwiki & see how much soccerwiki has massively improved the game and its database. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
germlad 2,273 Posted January 10, 2013 Report Share Posted January 10, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 ;2400159']these are the totally clueless comments i expect from people who dont actually understand soccerwiki & see how much soccerwiki has massively improved the game and its database. Nothing else was expected, but a desperate attempt to defend and justify SM and Cancerwiki, as always... After all, this is THE No.1 SCOUT OF CANCERWIKI SPEAKING HERE! :rolleyes: The SAD reality everybody sees except you, is that after a year we have Cancerwiki operating, the reviews are getting slower and slower (2 teams per day for now...) and the database is less updated than ever! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
-JMH- 8,575 Posted January 10, 2013 Report Share Posted January 10, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Nothing else was expected' date=' but a desperate attempt to defend and justify SM and Cancerwiki, as always... After all, this is THE No.1 SCOUT OF CANCERWIKI SPEAKING HERE! :rolleyes:The SAD reality everybody sees except you, is that after a year we have Cancerwiki operating, the reviews are getting slower and slower (2 teams per day for now...) and the database is less updated than ever![/quote'] less updated? LESS UPDATED? my god. another piece of top class utter drivel from yourself germlad. look at the amount of players being updated daily, it has increased TREMENDOUSLY...the numbers are there. look at the pages on SM under player changes and soccerwiki under recent changes.... and count them all....it aint just all about the ratings...players that dont have a rating change still need to be looked at for a postion etc. you say slower just 2 teams..but look how much bigger those teams are, plus they have youth sides Schalke II, Stuttgart II etc.... cancerwiki? how intelligent. what on earth....all you do is complain/troll me....please try add something constructive to the threads for once.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
encerrado 199 Posted January 10, 2013 Report Share Posted January 10, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 So, tomorrow we'll have 2 and 1/6 of a team evaluated...? Yesterday 2 teams... Before yesterday 3... What the hell is going on? Do they really have to think so much about Frankfurt and Mainz, they can't finish for once the rest? I don't get it, even Slovenia and Uruguay were faster than this. I'm a recent player, but this has changed quite a bit in the last months... Maybe it's this winter transition. After that extremely calm December we are starving for ratings =p germlad 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
germlad 2,273 Posted January 10, 2013 Report Share Posted January 10, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 ;2399019']KLONARIDIS rated 82Xhaka/Neustader 88 erm slight difference there though isnt there.... people getting wound up over the size of increases when its really about the rating isnt it??? 82 is still very low for a ligue 1 club???? The SM Cheerleader must always defend and justify SM in all cases and respond to everybody criticizes' date=' right?? "82 is still very low for a ligue 1 club" SO WHAT??? The big 5 leagues (including Ligue 1) are full of players 75-80 rated. In your "logic", all these should immediately have an increase, no matter if they play or not?! You just couldn't think of anything else to justify Klonaridis UNJUSTIFIED +4, but you HAD to respond with something, didn't you? "[i']people getting wound up over the size of increases when its really about the rating isnt it???[/i]" SINCE WHEN THE SIZE OF INCREASES AND THE PERFORMANCES AREN'T IMPORTANT?! If that was the case, and it was only... "really about the rating", then i.e. Marseille's Abdullah with more than 800 competitive minutes, shouldn't have got "only" +5, but he should have been at least the same as Klonaridis! But, because the performances and the size of the increase ACTUALLY DO COUNT, AS THEY ALWAYS HAVE, Abdullah got a fair and just +5, to 80. Klonaridis +4 to 82 for playing nothing is not only wrong, it's ridiculous. And ridiculous (actually, MORE ridiculous...) is you too, everytime you attempt to justify SM and "prove" how right they are and how perfect they are doing everything... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
germlad 2,273 Posted January 10, 2013 Report Share Posted January 10, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 ;2400211']please try add something constructive to the threads for once.... I have posted many constructive and/or helpful comments in this forum. After all, the complaints/criticism/comments from the customers SHOULD have been used as feedback from every company (but SM doesn't seem to agree with this...). If you think that constructive is to defend SM and Cancerwiki in EVERY single matter and attack everyone "dares" to complain or criticize something (out of many!) wrong in the game, then you are far from reality. Just go cheer SM for the astonishing achievement of reviewing the next 2 teams... That would be very constructive! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rico suave 1,087 Posted January 10, 2013 Report Share Posted January 10, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 ;2400159']these are the totally clueless comments i expect from people who dont actually understand soccerwiki & see how much soccerwiki has massively improved the game and its database. This is a totally clueless comment from a person who doesn't actually understand & see how much soccerwiki has massively reduced the quality of the game! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
rico suave 1,087 Posted January 10, 2013 Report Share Posted January 10, 2013 Re: Bundesliga Ratings 2012/2013 Nothing else was expected' date=' but a desperate attempt to defend and justify SM and Cancerwiki, as always... After all, this is THE No.1 SCOUT OF CANCERWIKI SPEAKING HERE! :rolleyes:The SAD reality everybody sees except you, is that after a year we have Cancerwiki operating, the reviews are getting slower and slower (2 teams per day for now...) and the database is less updated than ever![/quote'] You couldn't be more right Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.