## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l} \hline
**NSIFT** & **Weight** & **CMJ** & **505 COD test** & **Illinois Agility Test** \\
**Items** & **r** \(\mathbf{\mathrm{and}}\)**\(\mathbf{p}\)** & **r** \(\mathbf{\mathrm{and}}\)**\(\mathbf{p}\)** & **r** \(\mathbf{\mathrm{and}}\)**\(\mathbf{p}\)** & **r** \(\mathbf{\mathrm{and}}\)**\(\mathbf{p}\)** \\ \hline I1 & r = 0.20, \(p=0.07\) & r = 0.27, \(p=0.01\) * & r = \(-0.20\), \(p=0.06\) & r = \(-0.27\), \(p=0.01\) * \\ I2 & r = 0.05, \(p=0.64\) & r = 0.31, \(p=0.004\) * & r = \(-0.28\), \(p=0.01\) * & r = \(-0.38\), \(p=0.001\) ** \\ I3 & r = 0.07, \(p=0.48\) & r = 0.26, \(p=0.02\) * & r = \(-0.25\), \(p=0.02\) * & r = \(-0.38\), \(p=0.001\) ** \\ I4 & r = 0.08, \(p=0.45\) & r = 0.28, \(p=0.01\) * & r = \(-0.33\), \(p=0.002\) * & r = \(-0.39\), \(p=0.001\) ** \\ I5 & r = 0.01, \(p=0.89\) & r = 0.28, \(p=0.01\) * & r = \(-0.25\), \(p=0.02\) * & r = \(-0.43\), \(p=0.001\) ** \\ I6 & r = 0.16, \(p=0.14\) & r = 0.25, \(p=0.02\) * & r = \(-0.14\), \(p=0.20\) & r = \(-0.40\), \(p=0.001\) ** \\ I7 & r = 0.04, \(p=0.70\) & r = 0.18, \(p=0.10\) & r = \(-0.09\), \(p=0.42\) & r = \(-0.36\), \(p=0.001\) ** \\ I8 & r = 0.15, \(p=0.18\) & r = 0.26, \(p=0.02\) * & r = \(-0.24\), \(p=0.02\) * & r = \(-0.25\), \(p=0.02\) * \\ I9 & r = 0.10, \(p=0.36\) & r = 0.19, \(p=0.09\) & r = \(-0.19\), \(p=0.09\) & r = \(-0.20\), \(p=0.06\) \\ I10 & r = \(-0.11\), \(p=0.29\) & r = \(0.20\), \(p=0.07\) & r = \(-0.30\), \(p=0.005\) * & r = \(-0.39\), \(p=0.001\) ** \\ I11 & r = 0.01, \(p=0.93\) & r = \(0.30\), \(p=0.05\) * & r = \(-0.26\), \(p=0.02\) * & r = \(-0.34\), \(p=0.002\) ** \\ I12 & r = 0.01, \(p=0.87\) & r = 0.06, \(p=0.54\) & r = \(-0.22\), \(p=0.05\) * & r = \(-0.16\), \(p=0.13\) \\ I13 & r = 0.09, \(p=0.42\) & r = \(0.30\), \(p=0.005\) * & r = \(-0.18\), \(p=0.10\) & r = \(-0.30\), \(p=0.06\) \\ \hline \end{tabular} Note. – NSIFT: Nomination Scale for Identification Football Talent: (I1) Interprets the coach’s instructions correctly; (I2) Usually anticipates play; (I3) Generally, makes the right decision; (I4) Executes skills very quickly; (I5) Able to read the game clearly and quickly; (I6) Has good positional sense; (I7) Knows where their teammates are on the pitch; (I8) Makes an effort in matches and training; (I9) Keen to learn and develop; (I10) Able to concentrate in matches and training; (I11) Posseses a winning mentality; (I12) Has a positive attitude; (I13) Willing to take on responsibilities. * Denotes significance at \(p<0.05\) and ** denotes significance at \(p<0.01\).  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Correlation analysis involving each item from Nomination Scale for Identifying Football Talent questionnaire and weight, CMJ, 505 COD test, and Illinois Agility Test (\(n=80\)). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l l} \hline
**Physical Fitness Test** & **NSIFT Items** & **R** & **R2** & **AR2** & **F** & **P** & **SE** \\ \hline
505 COD Test & I2 & 0.28 & 0.08 & 0.07 & 6.80 & 0.01 * & 1.47 \\ I3 & 0.26 & 0.07 & 0.05 & 5.43 & 0.02 * & 1.32 \\ I4 & 0.33 & 0.11 & 0.10 & 9.85 & 0.001 ** & 1.55 \\ I5 & 0.25 & 0.06 & 0.05 & 5.39 & 0.02 * & 1.37 \\ I8 & 0.25 & 0.06 & 0.05 & 5.19 & 0.03 * & 1.37 \\ I10 & 0.31 Figure 2: Correlation analysis involving each significative item from Nomination Scale for Identifying Football Talent questionnaire with results (\(n=80\)). * Denotes significance at \(p<0.05\). The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure was employed to assess the adequacy of the sample for the analysis, yielding values between 0.83 and 0.95, which indicated a good level of sampling adequacy. In the analysis, two components emerged with eigenvalues exceeding the Kaiser criterion of 1, collectively accounting for 73% of the total variance observed in the data. The Factor Scores Matrix, utilizing Bartlett's Methods, demonstrated that the correlations for each identified factor were significantly large (\(p\) = 0.00), confirming the robustness of the factor structure (see Table 4).