Morale vs attributes

Well, there is one thing very important in the forum wich is, when managers share their oppinions about the match engine and other factors in the game.
Lars Harald Hvidsten aka sharald, manager of 1-1-1 Heroes of the Man shared his oppinion about the importance of Morale vs Attributes.
I hope he doesn´t mind to see his post here on the blog, but i think this is important. Here´s what he wrote:

"In my opinion other factors than attributes have much more significance than we think, especially morale. Even the weakest teams in X-1-1 are usually just 10% weaker than the strongest, and that is if all attributes were weighted equally. For those of you that don't read the conf1 thread, I have just disected a few of my recent opponents. Guessing that Defence and Heading are the most important attributes for DEFs, and knowing that almost all DEFs are on 99 on these attributes after one season, the difference between teams on attributes alone are probably 5% or less.

If you do like I do, switch between 5-2-3 for Longball matches and 4-5-1 for passing, you will have three players with lower morale every time you switch. When I play the same formation with the same players for several days, the average morale is 95% or above. If I have three of the players around 70, the average for my entire team is 88%. Now, this is where probability calculations begin to get interesting, 88 is 8% less than 95.

The next step is also quite interesting. If a team is 5% stronger than another, but has changed formation last night and therefor having 8% weaker morale, how much less must morale count to make sure that the attributes are most important? 8 is 60% more than 5... In addition, your gelling will also be 5,5% weaker.

Someone with a higher degree in maths might pull this chain of thought apart, but until then, I think I am correct. Anyway, it gives me more motivation to stay off Longball for a while, at least in division matches."

Thanks for your share, Lars :)