Accessibility
Home
Players
Evolutions
Squad Builder
SBCs
Draft
Squads
Market
News
Packs
Objectives
Token Tracker
More
Language
Platform
Theme
EA Tax Calculator

TOTS Jota Review


If you follow these reviews then you would have heard me raving about NumbesUp Jota at some point in time.  I am relentless about him, I accept and realize that.  The Liverpool frontman has been a mainstay in my squad week in and week out as one of the most consistent performers for me in FIFA 22.  The qualities with NumbersUp Jota that always bring me back is both his ability to create and finish chances in front of goal.  The Portuguese frontman is one of the most clinically reliable cards that I have used this year and I was hoping the TOTS version would only expand on these qualities.   In truth, TOTS Jota was in my review plans weeks ago (or at least I was hoping he was getting one) as I couldn’t wait to get my hands on an improved version.  There was a lot of uncertainty with the chemistry style as a HAWK seemed the most effective, but I have also heard some shouts for leaving it BASIC, which I eventually went back and tested after the review.  Then, as I stated in my Min Son review, it was a return to the seldom used 4-2-3-1 this weekend with Diogo leading the front of the line as the lone striker.  The stage was set, the lights were bright, and Jota was the ‘lad from Portugal’ all weekend long in the following squad:   

Starting Formation:


 
In-game Formation:
 


 

Overall

Rating: 7.5/10
Pace Rating: 8.5/10
Dribbling Rating: 9/10
Shooting Rating: 10/10
Passing Rating: 7/10
Physical Rating: 7.5/10
Defending Rating: N/A

Might get some pushback on this one and already in the Min Son comments I saw some suggestions about his quality… but for me, this version of Jota didn’t deliver the way that I thought he would.  I was so concerned that I might have got this wrong that I even rebought Jota for FUT Champs Qualifiers this week and applied the BASIC style as some suggested, even played him in more familiar formations like the 4-2-2-2 and 3-5-2, but the results were the same.  If you can’t tell by now I was really fighting with the evidence in front of my eyes and even went as far as bringing NumbersUp Jota back into my squad for a few matches and came to the same conclusion… the NumbersUp version performs better than the TOTS… there, I said it.

 

Main Statistic – Shooting

Shooting Rating: 10/10
Weak Foot:
★★★★★

There is one thing that hasn’t changed with TOTS Jota… he bangs the goals in for fun.  The card is clinical and the 5 STAR WEAK FOOT is one of the most potent I have used.  The 98 FINISHING, 99 SHOT POWER, 93 LONG SHOTS & 87 VOLLEYS are accurate and potent… blistering the back of the net whenever the Liverpool man is in space.  One thing I loved about this card is how often he would find space for the final pass given his 99 POSITIONING… while the result was a ton of tap-in finishes, the positions he picked up were fantastic.  If you are looking for a finishing product striker then I would never deny how class both versions of Jota are in front of goal.

 

Main Attribute – Height

Size: 178 cm | 5’10
Pace Rating: 8.5/10
Dribbling Rating: 9/10
Physical Rating: 7.5/10
Skills: ★★★★

The size and build of this card are what allow the all 90+ Dribbling statistics to flourish.  However, I still felt like the 96 AGILITY & 95 BALANCE could have been more responsive and crisp in the box… but maybe more than anything the 99 ACCELERATION was the biggest let down for me since trying this card.  That noticeable pop of pace that some cards have (NumbersUp Jota included) just doesn’t feel the same for TOTS Jota and regardless of chemistry style, I couldn't make it happen.  In truth, the 96 SPRINT SPEED was not breathtaking either and I really struggled to create goals when Jota was isolated on the ball.  It was in these secluded moments on the ball that the size of Jota became more of hindrance and the 85 STRENGTH didn’t stand up against the test of the highest level defenders you will come up against match after match.  

 

Value/Coins & Good vs. Bad

Value/Coins Rating: 5/5
Good vs Bad Rating: 4/5

I didn’t love this card. It was a massive let down given my excitement to try him.  But it is insane that he is still only 190k given the statistics that he has.  The clinical nature alone is worth 200k and then you have everything else as a bonus.  I guess in terms of the FIFA 22 market 200k is starting to get on the expensive side, which in itself is ludicrous, but I still think you wouldn’t be upset with the goals for coins if you decide to pull the trigger on this card.

The contrast in passing between Jota’s inconsistent 86 SHORT PASSING and the masterclass that TOTS Son put on this weekend was staggering.  The breakdown in simple plays was getting into controller throwing levels (which I could never afford but often think about) as Jota just couldn’t find the proper angles or pace of pass to keep the momentum of moves going in the right direction.  In this sense, the 4-2-3-1 was maybe the perfect formation as it really exposed this issue, which I have since noticed less in the 3-5-2 and 4-2-2-2.    

 

Closing Words

In the end, I think TOTS Jota suffered as much from my expectation of his brilliance as from some of the issues I encountered in the review.  In fact, I see a lot of quality reviews for this card and some are experiencing extreme success. After close to 1200 matches with NumbersUp Jota (at least 100 since his last update), I feel like I stand in a safe space of saying that it performs better than the TOTS version.  I have spent way too long contemplating why this happened so I could pass on the information for this review and have come to the educated conclusion that I simply have no idea.  What I have accepted is that many will not agree with this review, but after multiple formations and chemistry styles, it is the only way I could write it. Go easy in the comments.  Hoping you are safe and well.  Cheers for reading.  
 

 

Game Stats:
 

 

 

Game Highlights:

 

Latest Articles on FUTBIN
Top Rated
New
Controversial
Show comments