So it's been a really long time since I've been on FOFC, and probably even longer since I've played (I got a way from it, and due to job etc... never really got back into it... until now). I haven't played FOF07 yet, but I plan on purchasing it when my new computer arrives.
However, back on topic, with regards to scouting. A different model from what I've seen in most games (where they rate many attributes) is an online game I enjoy playing called soccermanager.com. I know very little about soccer, but I love playing the game because it is developed as a professional online league... Jim, if you haven't already, I would suggest taking a look at it, it's a different model, but they do some things very well.
Anyway, the way they do scouting is a bit different. Players are rated on a basis of 1-100 but most are very similar (ex: all my starters are between 88-91). Since it is all based on real life players, and their development they have a separate website (
Soccer Wiki for the fans, by the fans) that lists more player info. Here they are given attributes that define the style they play, their "strengths", "weaknesses" and "special attributes". These all essentially have two tiers (a strength for example can be dark green (stronger) or light green (less of a strength)).
On the main website they have player graphs that track a player's rating history (progressions or regressions over time), as well as their game to game "form" history (a game to game performance rating).
I think this puts a greater emphasis on "feel" and production (goals, assists, performance rating), and finding roles and formations that players thrive in, versus looking at the many individual ratings that FOF incorporates that make it very simple to compare players and determine who is actually better at which skills. Each way has it's strengths and weaknesses, but if you haven't explored it at all, I would suggest playing (it's free until you get into advanced features) and exploring the way it works as it is simply put - different.
With regards to scouting the draft, I think one of the big things is not identifying who is more skilled. The depth of athletes is huge, yet not all are succesful. Since I haven't seen the interview phase (I'm excited to see it!) or whatever other changes you made, I think my only feedback is that the focus should be on giving the player a greater focus on why you SHOULDN'T draft a player. What type of risks are inherent with a player (ie: injuries, attitude, immaturity, work ethic, etc...) because those risks are what cause a great "talent" to drop 3 rounds in the draft. It's all about risk analysis really.
I'm not sure if this was on target for this discussion, but were just some thoughts that came to mind. I'm just excited to get back into this game and forum!