Jump to content

Mexican Risers (2009)


Caleb
 Share

Recommended Posts

Re: Mexican Risers (2009)

Sorry to those who bought players off my thread that did not rise. As this is my first time giving a shot at a league I am not too good with, I hope none of you will hate me. Anyway most of the listed players did rise, only the players in the 80s rose about one lesser than predicted. Once again, sorry but I've hoped that these thread still proved helpful to you guys.

Caleb :)

Anyway there were still a decent amount of decent rises too!

Marco Antonio VIDAL 75-->82

Abraham CARRENO 76-->80

Valdez EFRAIN JUAREZ 83-->86

Elías HERNANDEZ 80-->83

Javier HERNANDEZ 78-->83

Darvin CHAVEZ 77-->83

Edgar PACHECO 79-->83

Ángel MIGUEL MARTINEZ 79-->83

Daniel ARREOLA 76-->82

Noé MAYA 75-->83

Víctor Hugo LOJERO 70-->82

Manuel VINIEGRA 73-->80

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Mexican Risers (2009)

I have Chivas de Guadalajara squad made up entirely of Mexican players that took a massive hit in these ratings.

12 players who were rated 86 and above got decreases' date=' while only players who were rated below 83 got increases ...[/quote']

I have them in a GC mate, took the hit as well.

Shocked to say the least. :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Mexican Risers (2009)

I still don't understand how Baez is rated lower than Solis!?!

Solis was one below him, had made one less start and played less minutes, and rose to 87, whilst Baez stayed at 86.

Both have made equal starts this campaign, Baez has proved he is a starter, yet remains one rating lower??

And why on earth has Villaluz dropped??

What have the researchers got against Mexico? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Mexican Risers (2009)

out of interest is the strength of the league measured by international and continental performance? granted mexico havent been great in the WC qualis so far (althought they have a good chance of being in the top 3 by tomorrow morning) but it'd be incredibly unfair to downgrade the league on their CL performance seeing as their 'performance' in that competition was heavily affected by political factors, not footballing factors.

tbh the way how the researchers have been i'm amazed cabanas didnt drop

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Mexican Risers (2009)

I still don't understand how Baez is rated lower than Solis!?!

Solis was one below him' date=' had made one less start and played less minutes, and rose to 87, whilst Baez stayed at 86.

Both have made equal starts this campaign, Baez has proved he is a starter, yet remains one rating lower??

And why on earth has Villaluz dropped??

What have the researchers got against Mexico? :rolleyes:[/quote']

*Slams head on desk* Solis rose +1 LAST Mexican changes, and then THIS Mexican changes he has dropped to 86. Baez meanwhile has remained an 86 but had a position change to CM/RM. So Baez and Solis are equal :)

Villaluz - Havn't got a clue why he has dropped.

The only reason I can see why these ratings are a shambles is because SM might have figured they have over-rated Mexico. That is complete nonsense though, because generally it is a very competitive league with players such as Villaluz, Vuoso, Andrade, Bravo, Baloy, Magallon, Morales, Cabanas, Bottinelli, Medina, Pineda, Araujo and Suazo playing week in week out. The Mexican league is clearly the 2nd/3rd best in the whole of the Americas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Mexican Risers (2009)

Villaluz was a big disappointment for me, I appreciate his side are bottom but thought his caps for Mexico would be more than enough to preserve an 88. He hasn't played the last few for his country so presumably that counted against him (don't think he was in the squad either last time, at least)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Mexican Risers (2009)

*Slams head on desk* Solis rose +1 LAST Mexican changes' date=' and then THIS Mexican changes he has dropped to 86. Baez meanwhile has remained an 86 but had a position change to CM/RM. So Baez and Solis are equal :)

Villaluz - Havn't got a clue why he has dropped.

The only reason I can see why these ratings are a shambles is because SM might have figured they have over-rated Mexico. That is complete nonsense though, because generally it is a very competitive league with players such as Villaluz, Vuoso, Andrade, Bravo, Baloy, Magallon, Morales, Cabanas, Bottinelli, Medina, Pineda, Araujo and Suazo playing week in week out. The Mexican league is clearly the 2nd/3rd best in the whole of the Americas.[/quote']

Solis dropped, did he? I still don't understand how he rose +2 last time.

Villaluz dropping was a massive shock, also have Vuoso in one team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Mexican Risers (2009)

SM needs some explaining to do. Everyone seems dumbfounded.

The Cruz Azul players took a huge hit' date=' even though they finished runners-up in both the 2008 Clausura and Apertura.[/quote']

But Cruz Azul finished bottem of Clausura 2009, so that why they took a huge hit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Mexican Risers (2009)

out of interest is the strength of the league measured by international and continental performance? granted mexico havent been great in the WC qualis so far (althought they have a good chance of being in the top 3 by tomorrow morning) but it'd be incredibly unfair to downgrade the league on their CL performance seeing as their 'performance' in that competition was heavily affected by political factors' date=' not footballing factors.

tbh the way how the researchers have been i'm amazed cabanas didnt drop[/quote']

I believe cabanas Didn't drop because of his NT performance he is still top scorer for the Paraguayan team who is second on the qualifiers, and I believe the mexican league got a huge hit due to their withdrawal from the Libertadores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...