TactiQ
Sign InGet Started
TactiQ
Football Intelligence
Founding Beta

TactiQ is built around Player & Club Data, Match Intelligence, Predictive Modeling, and Research & Visualization — understand the system, not the surface.

Core
Club football as the permanent base
Launch
World Cup as the launch amplifier
Transparency
Public roadmap and visible system progress
The standard
Methodology →

Every score is deterministic, evidence-gated, and confidence-labelled. Football intelligence should be explainable — not a black box with a number on the front. The methodology is part of the product, not a legal page.

Deterministic scoringMulti-agent consensus gatedPublication gate active
Core
PlayersClubsMatchesWorld Cup 2026Roadmap
Product
CompareRankingsForecastMethodologyMembership
Legal
PrivacyTerms© 2026 TactiQ. All rights reserved.
Player Profile

Loading player profile...

Pulling current player details into TactiQ.

Player Profile

Sead Kolasinac

TactiQ Score, per-90 performance stats, and multi-season form — with direct routes into compare and rankings.

Current Team
Atalanta
Position
Centre Back
Date of Birth
Jun 20, 1993 (32)
Jersey Number
#23
League
Serie A
Back to PlayersCompare PlayerOpen RankingsView Methodology
Sead Kolasinac
Sead Kolasinac
Current profile snapshot
Current Team
Atalanta
Position
Centre Back
Date of Birth
Jun 20, 1993 (32)
Jersey Number
#23
TactiQ Score
67.3
67% confidenceCalibrating
TactiQ Score v2
67.3
Calibrating
Form Score
61.5
Confidence
67%
Role
center_back
League
Serie A
Per 90 minutes
Goals
—
Assists
—
Key Pass
—
Tackles
2.08
Rating
6.60
Multi-season trend
AI Analysis
Generated May 6, 2026

A Serie A center back sitting at 50.04 on the FQ scale — squarely in the typical performer range — whose evaluation is heavily constrained by missing sub-score data across all dimensions. With 1,054 minutes across 16 matches this season, the sample is modest, and a confidence rating of 0.63 signals that conclusions should be treated as provisional. The most distinctive feature of this profile is not what the data shows, but what it cannot: all role-critical sub-scores are null, making a full positional read impossible.

Why this score

The FQ score of 50.04 reflects a combination of below-baseline raw output and severe data gaps — most critically, the absence of a defense sub-score, which is the primary evaluative dimension for a center back. Without it, the score is driven largely by the available per-90 data (2.05 tackles, 6.6 average rating), which point to a mid-to-low baseline contributor rather than a reliable starter.

Form Trajectory

Form score of 48.69 sits just 1.35 points below the FQ score of 50.04 — within the ±5 stable band — indicating no meaningful upward or downward momentum. This is a flat trajectory at a below-average baseline, not a recovery or decline story.

Similar Profiles
Players with comparable scoring profiles in the same role
Adam Dźwigała

Nearly identical FQ score of 50.11 places Dźwigała in the same typical performer band; the key difference is whether Dźwigała's profile carries more complete sub-score data that better explains his positioning.

Compare →
Rankings
See where this player sits across all scored players.

Top 50 players by TactiQ Score — filter by position, form, and confidence.

Open Rankings →
Compare
Put this player next to another and find the real edges.

TactiQ Score, form, confidence, and season stats compared side by side — instantly.

Compare Player →
Methodology
Understand exactly how this score was built.

Every TactiQ Score is deterministic and traceable. Read the full methodology behind the numbers.

View Methodology →
Latest available season snapshot

Live statistics currently available for this profile

6 metrics surfaced
Appearances
18
Minutes
1217
Rating
6.58
Tackles
27
Successful dribbles
5
Clean sheets
6
Current indicators
What the live season sample is surfacing right now
Defensive activity
27 tackles indicate active intervention volume in the current season sample.
Strengths
Where this player is genuinely above baseline
No clearly elite traits identified in current data.
2 Seasons Ago
TQ 67.6Form 68.0
Previous
TQ 68.7Form 68.7
Current
TQ 61.0Form 61.5
Per 90 minutes
Goals
—
Assists
—
Key Passes
—
Tackles
2.08
Rating
6.60
Omar Federico Alderete Fernández

Alderete Fernández scores 49.62, fractionally below this player, suggesting comparable overall output levels; contextual league and role factors may differentiate their actual defensive contributions.

Compare →
Kevin Diks

Diks leads this comparable group at 50.48 and likely operates in a slightly different positional or tactical context, making him a useful ceiling reference within this narrow score band.

Compare →
Watchpoints
Real gaps relative to this player's role
Defensive measurability

All sub-scores — including the defense dimension central to center back evaluation — are null. Tackles, interceptions, duels won, and aerial dominance cannot be assessed, meaning the player's core positional responsibilities are unverifiable from this dataset.

Output volume

With only 1,054 minutes logged across 16 matches, this player is not a guaranteed starter. Limited minutes reduce statistical reliability and contribute to the 0.63 confidence rating, which sits just at the threshold of meaningful interpretation.

Reading the score

What each number means

TactiQ Score

A 0–100 measure of overall quality. Combines statistical output with league difficulty, multi-season weighting, and a consistency factor. Target range for strong players: 70–85.

Form Score

Weighted toward recent matches. Can diverge from the TactiQ Score when current form is meaningfully stronger or weaker than the multi-season average.

Confidence

How much evidence supports this score. Lower confidence means thinner data — fewer seasons, fewer appearances, or gaps in coverage. A provisional score is real signal with appropriate caveats.

Methodology

TactiQ Scores are deterministic — given the same evidence, they produce the same output. The evidence packet system, confidence labels, and publication gate are all explained in full.

Read the full methodology →