## 3 Results  
Table 1 shows the results of descriptive statistics for all variables that were included in the study. Correlation analysis was performed for the Nomination Scale for Identifying Football Talent questionnaire and weight, the CMJ, 505 COD tests, and Illinois Agility Test. Crucially, the dataset did not reveal any significative correlation between NSIFT and weight (see Supplementary Materials). However, different correlations were revealed for the CMJ, 505 COD tests, and Illinois Agility Test. (See Table 2 for more information). To elucidate the comprehension of the correlation analysis, analyses of figures of correlation were performed with each significative item from the Nomination Scale for Identifying Football Talent questionnaire with results from the CMJ (Figure 2), 505 COD test (Figure 3), and Illinois Agility Test (Figure 4). Finally, a multiple regression analysis was performed to verify which physical fitness test (in agreement with the correlation analysis) could be used to better explain the importance of different talent values. For more information, see Table 3. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Young Soccer Players (n = 80)**} \\ \hline  & **Mean \(\pm\) SD** & **LCI 95\%** & **UCI 95\%** & **CI** \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{l}{**Anthropometrical measures**} \\ \hline Height (cm) & 141.60 \(\pm\) 0.09 & 139.56 & 143.64 & 2.06 \\ Weight (kg) & 35.27\(\pm\) 6.31 & 35.27 & 38.03 & 1.38 \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{l}{**Physical Fitness Test**} \\ \hline Countermovement Jump (cm) & 24.25\(\pm\) 3.55 & 23.47 & 25.03 & 0.78 \\ Illinois Agility Test (s) & 19.34\(\pm\) 1.11 & 19.10 & 19.58 & 0.24 \\
505 COD test (s) & 2.90 \(\pm\) 0.17 & 2.86 & 2.94 & 0.04 \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{l}{**NSIFT Items**} \\ \hline I1 & 7.75 \(\pm\) 1.40 & 7.05 & 8.44 & 0.69 \\ I2 & 7.60 \(\pm\) 1.70 & 6.76 & 8.43 & 0.83 \\ I3 & 7.37 \(\pm\) 1.49 & 6.64 & 8.10 & 0.73 \\ I4 & 7.30 \(\pm\) 1.80 & 6.41 & 8.18 & 0.88 \\ I5 & 7.40 \(\pm\) 1.44 & 6.69 & 8.10 & 0.70 \\ I6 & 7.57 \(\pm\) 1.70 & 6.73 & 8.41 & 0.83 \\ I7 & 7.72 \(\pm\) 1.61 & 6.93 & 8.51 & 0.79 \\ I8 & 8.37 \(\pm\) 1.54 & 7.61 & 9.13 & 0.75 \\ I9 & 8.80 \(\pm\) 1.11 & 8.25 & 9.34 & 0.54 \\ I10 & 8.10 \(\pm\) 1.70 & 7.26 & 8.93 & 0.83 \\ I11 & 8.25 \(\pm\) 1.83 & 7.35 & 9.14 & 0.89 \\ I12 & 8.22 \(\pm\) 2.15 & 7.16 & 9.28 & 1.05 \\ I13 & 7.87 \(\pm\) 1.88 & 6.95 & 8.79 & 0.92 \\ \hline \end{tabular} Note. – LCI 95%: Lower Confidence Interval; CI: Confidence Interval; NSIFT: Nomination Scale for Identification Football Talent ((II) Interpret 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) Keep to learn and develop; (II0) Able to concentrate in matches and training; (I11) Possesses a winning mentality; (I12) Has a positive attitude; (I13)).  
\end{table} 
Table 1: Anthropometrical measures, physical fitness, and Nomination Scale for Identification Football Talent (means \(\pm\) SDs).