Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

[Vandalised 13]

Just had this discussed and apparently you can't get sacked no matter how much you are in debt, which I'm really confused about?

I think it would be more of a test of managerial skills if you had to keep you're self a float instead of going into mass debt, it's just not realistic. Say there was something like a -2 million maybe 3 or 4 limit on how much you can go into debt before you are eventually sacked.

It would definitely test people more, having to keep an eye on player’s wages, on who they bring in and how much they keep in the bank for wages. Just seems sensible to me?

Cheers

[Glasgow Rangers_1 10]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

i m8 a agree n aye also think u should get saked if u are on a bad run

[Neller 6,175]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

Just had this discussed and apparently you can't get sacked no matter how much you are in debt' date=' which I'm really confused about?

I think it would be more of a test of managerial skills if you had to keep you're self a float instead of going into mass debt, it's just not realistic. Say there was something like a -2 million maybe 3 or 4 limit on how much you can go into debt before you are eventually sacked.

It would definitely test people more, having to keep an eye on player’s wages, on who they bring in and how much they keep in the bank for wages. Just seems sensible to me?

Cheers[/quote']

I think its ok as it is to be honest, the smaller clubs go into debt anyway even if you dont buy anyone and just stay running on what u start with.

Add that to the fact i think most clubs in the lower leagues are all in debt anyway then its already pretty realistic.

I manage 2 Grimsby teams my main one being in EC45, I have gotten 2 promotions and have an excellent squad with loads of quality youngsters, My best player being Deigo (92) but i do have a squad (big one) and loads are pretty high rated

Every season i go into a little debt like 3mil, but the end of the season injection always clears it up and i do the same again every season.

[pthame 3d 295]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

Just had this discussed and apparently you can't get sacked no matter how much you are in debt' date=' which I'm really confused about?

I think it would be more of a test of managerial skills if you had to keep you're self a float instead of going into mass debt, it's just not realistic. Say there was something like a -2 million maybe 3 or 4 limit on how much you can go into debt before you are eventually sacked.

It would definitely test people more, having to keep an eye on player’s wages, on who they bring in and how much they keep in the bank for wages. Just seems sensible to me?

Cheers[/quote']

I'm not sure whether to say it's a good idea or a bad idea. If a player has been managing a club for a good 2-3 seasons of the setup, and they get sacked for going into too much debt, I know I wouldn't be happy!

[PraetorianGuard 126]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

I disagree, let the players keep their teams regardless.

[Pedro 15]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

I think going 3 mil in debt is abit harsh as i have been with my team for like 2 seasons now and i have not bought a player for like 1 and half seasons and i habe only got 18 players in my team... my best players are totti and toni

after that they are like 89 below and i am in little debt 300.000 but i only started with 1 mil and the players was already here..so i would be so upset if i lost my team in that way as i dont think i have cheated so from me

i think little harsh on teams that did not mean to go in debt

well thats my fought on it

[Sky Blue Lee 5,407]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

Just had this discussed and apparently you can't get sacked no matter how much you are in debt' date=' which I'm really confused about?

I think it would be more of a test of managerial skills if you had to keep you're self a float instead of going into mass debt, it's just not realistic. Say there was something like a -2 million maybe 3 or 4 limit on how much you can go into debt before you are eventually sacked.

It would definitely test people more, having to keep an eye on player’s wages, on who they bring in and how much they keep in the bank for wages. Just seems sensible to me?

Cheers[/quote']

Never have liked this idea. SM have to make a realistic, yet profitable business. Adding this feature would mean people losing interest and leaving the game, meaning less profit.

Business aside, it would then stop other players managing that club, as they'd be sacked for having a club in debt. So it's a no from me.

[tebthereb 3,129]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

I think clubs should go into administration, when falling X amount into debt, meaning that their players can sell as though they were free agents (best bid over 75% of value), but have never been up for the idea of sacking. As Neller pointed out, some managers finances go up and down within a reasonable degree, so no need to be too harsh on people.

[aBRaNcHi 54]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

i think that the "Make it more realistic" or "it has to be 100% realistic" excuse is not needed .. i think that this should stay a game .. nothing more.. with some realistic and some unrealistic things.. which i think its good in this way.. if everything would be as real life 100% this would b somehow screwd up

[Ross.DAFC85 1,931]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

Or if you went so far into debt then you suffered from a point deduction?

[tebthereb 3,129]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

i think that the "Make it more realistic" or "it has to be 100% realistic" excuse is not needed .. i think that this should stay a game .. nothing more.. with some realistic and some unrealistic things.. which i think its good in this way.. if everything would be as real life 100% this would b somehow screwd up

OK... I agree that as a game SM need a mix of playability and realism, but what are you saying should be done given this, and in relation to this thread?

[aBRaNcHi 54]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

OK... I agree that as a game SM need a mix of playability and realism' date=' but what are you saying should be done given this, and in relation to this thread? [/quote']

lol i knew it somehow would make no sense in this thread.. what i mean is that look what Vandalised said

I think it would be more of a test of managerial skills if you had to keep you're self a float instead of going into mass debt, it's just not realistic.

its like suppose everything would be "realistic" .. things just would go crazy.. the starting amount of money would change.. the times teams play would b different .. the value of player would change.. everything would change.. .. just dont try to make an effort nd understand me if you cant.. its my crazy mind talkin:rolleyes:

[Armand_Mufc 530]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

I think this would be realistic but say you have just joined SM and you suddenly end up in debt and you lose your club. That wouldnt be fair.

So I think that the experienced SM members like with reputation points of 75 and over then they would get sacked. But to make it easier the manager gives you a warning first and tells you not to get into any more debt and then if you dont gain money then he can sack you. The warning would last for 2 weeks/

That would be realistic and easier.

What do u think?????????

[ian neller 10]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

lol i knew it somehow would make no sense in this thread.. what i mean is that look what Vandalised said its like suppose everything would be "realistic" .. things just would go crazy.. the starting amount of money would change.. the times teams play would b different .. the value of player would change.. everything would change.. .. just dont try to make an effort nd understand me if you cant.. its my crazy mind talkin:rolleyes:

No i know where your coming from ,so we both must be crazies,

What he is trying to point out above is Vandalised says what we have at the moment is not realistic,so aBRaNcHi is showing how absurd things would have to change if we wanted to base it all on reality and not some playability factor,in his crazy sort of way Teb he is telling you he is for the playability factor not for everything to be reality.

[aBRaNcHi 54]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

I think this would be realistic but say you have just joined SM and you suddenly end up in debt and you lose your club. That wouldnt be fair.

So I think that the experienced SM members like with reputation points of 75 and over then they would get sacked. But to make it easier the manager gives you a warning first and tells you not to get into any more debt and then if you dont gain money then he can sack you. The warning would last for 2 weeks/

That would be realistic and easier.

What do u think?????????

well i think that the problem is like.. imagine you sign up fora club which is somehow bankrupt ..no money but you like to rise it up nd see if you are that good... but things dont go that well at the begng?...

Originally Posted by Alan_Neller

No i know where your coming from ' date='so we both must be crazies,

What he is trying to point out above is Vandalised says what we have at the moment is not realistic,so aBRaNcHi is showing how absurd things would have to change if we wanted to base it all on reality and not some playability factor,in his crazy sort of way Teb he is telling you he is for the playability factor not for everything to be reality.[/quote']

lol i guess you are right nd im glad not to be the only crazy xD nd have some1 understanding my point

[ian neller 10]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

Just had this discussed and apparently you can't get sacked no matter how much you are in debt' date=' which I'm really confused about?

I think it would be more of a test of managerial skills if you had to keep you're self a float instead of going into mass debt, it's just not realistic. Say there was something like a -2 million maybe 3 or 4 limit on how much you can go into debt before you are eventually sacked.

It would definitely test people more, having to keep an eye on player’s wages, on who they bring in and how much they keep in the bank for wages. Just seems sensible to me?

Cheers[/quote']

Yes but the difference is that in reality if a manager took a team up from 4th div to 1st or even just one division would they get the sack even if keeping them in same debt or higher,

Nope

Plus they would get a lot higher gates etc ,more finances ,even new or extended stadiums ,do you at the moment get these in this game ,

Nope

So until stadium up grades ,attendances etc come more into play then its a big NO for me,

The biggest challenge in S/M is not the big clubs ,its the small clubs.

If a manager spends time and effort getting there club from 4 to 1,and on the way because of the system at the moment gets into surmounting debt ,that may not be their fault.

I have one team Wellington in one set up and been stuck in div 4 getting hammered out of sight most games for few seasons ,they are 500k in profit.

In EC.3 i am Notts County and got promoted last season and at the moment stand in a very good position of going straight into div 2 this season.

I am 4.25 mill in debt because the players ratings i need to get me where i am going ,the wages bleed me dry for what income i am given and feeble spectators at my matches ( IN REAL LIFE IN THIS POSITION GATES WOULD BE HIGHER ).

I am hoping at end of season whether i go up or fail the final hurdle i will get enough from chairman to clear debt and give me a chance to dabble again with a bit of extra money.

But if you had your way i can keep Wellington but lose Notts .

NO WAY:)

[Neller 6,175]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

If anyone who has managed a lower club (properly long term) then they know its impossible to stay out of debt even if you dont sign anyone.

Grimsby default starting team sends you into debt during the season, sure you could release half your squad and try and manage on 20 players but thats also unrealistic because Grimsby are not like that in real life.

Fact is most lower clubs in real life are in debt, thats not down to the manager its because of costs to stadium, wages, staff etc etc (most of which are inc in SM's fianances.

As i said earlier I manage my Grimsby in EC45 currently nearing promotion into Div 1, on a 10k stadium .. yes i go around 4mil into debt every season but theres no other way, but it always gets cleared up.

Anyone who is for this idea should give running a div 4 team (successfully) a shot and then see if they change there mind, if we are going to add somethign like this it will ruin the game for the lower clubs so if were going to do that because of "realism" then we should limit the massive stars playing for the big clubs as this is also unrealsitc.. will many people want that idea.. not a chance

[KP99 14]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

agree with Neller and ... Neller... (sounds like a firm of Accountants!!)

And just one question too... What happens to the team - does it become unmanageable?? Or how long does any manager coming in get to turn the club finances around??

I DO think the principle behind the idea is a good one, it's just that the way SM is at the moment it is impracticable , for the reasons given, as it is not realistic that any small team which makes it through the league would keep the same size stadium, and even more unrealistic that it would not be full for each game. In another thread, which I cant find right now, Bobo (I think) said that he had taken Bristol Rovers (I think) to the top level, but at home to Liverpool, in a 10,000 capacity stadium, he had a crowd of 2,000 plus!

Once that gets sorted , then maybe look at this again.... Now getting sacked for poor performance should be possible... (but I am going off topic and there is another thread on that...)

[ian neller 10]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

Anyone who is for this idea should give running a div 4 team (successfully) a shot and then see if they change there mind' date=' if we are going to add somethign like this it will ruin the game for the lower clubs so if were going to do that because of "realism" then we should limit the massive stars playing for the big clubs as this is also unrealsitc.. will many people want that idea.. not a chance[/quote']

Totally agree,for them that think this game should be as close to realism that S/M can get it then how about this idea,

First the upside,

Very easy for S/M to implement ,would make accessing the site far easier,clear up managers not answering messages etc ,plus many more i can think of,especially on forum chairman,smfa,cheats would just go away forever etc.

Yep list is endless.

Now the idea,

Realism at its best ,true to real life .

No transfers you just do your formation /tactics as the manager.

Every season S/M update your squad with the actual REAL LIFE players that come and go to these clubs.

Now you cant get more realism than that .

Now the upside if we dont want this,

Cheats ,Complaints on forum about transfers blocked etc,not answering messages,waiting for updating season ,transfers going through /rejected etc

Again the list is endless.

"The downside" .

You actually might go for my idea which then would make this game become the worst on the Web and not the best,nope there always must be a playability factor ,only so much can be taken close to realism ,to close and S/M will collapse like a pack of cards.

[Joe G McFc 33]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

yes mabye but what if a new manager comes in and looses 1k?

[Shelbourne FC 3,485]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

If anyone who has managed a lower club (properly long term) then they know its impossible to stay out of debt even if you dont sign anyone.

Grimsby default starting team sends you into debt during the season' date=' sure you could release half your squad and try and manage on 20 players but thats also unrealistic because Grimsby are not like that in real life.

Fact is most lower clubs in real life are in debt, thats not down to the manager its because of costs to stadium, wages, staff etc etc (most of which are inc in SM's fianances.

As i said earlier I manage my Grimsby in EC45 currently nearing promotion into Div 1, on a 10k stadium .. yes i go around 4mil into debt every season but theres no other way, but it always gets cleared up.

Anyone who is for this idea should give running a div 4 team (successfully) a shot and then see if they change there mind, if we are going to add somethign like this it will ruin the game for the lower clubs so if were going to do that because of "realism" then we should limit the massive stars playing for the big clubs as this is also unrealsitc.. will many people want that idea.. not a chance[/quote']

I have no problim with Darlington keeping them outa debt (Mind you thats after the cash injection & prise money) & ive bought in plenty players wisly i may add & got rid of almost the entire starting squad, I do have a nice stadium but its never anywere full even top of Div 2 now (2nd season) i get no more than 15,000 (i think) (have to check)

MAYBE i should try grimsby (whats the ultimate test) as a test il take over a new team when new setups start & every 1 can see how i do.

Im much better at Not so good teams than the likes of barce ect alot more funa aswell

[tebthereb 3,129]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

yes defnitely a must but what if a new manager comes in and looses 1k?

You think it is a must despite the last half dozen or so posts that are on this thread?

Seems like a 'must not' to me, as has been mentioned would most likely ruin the game, as would not be fun. Is it just me, or is it not even realistic to sack a manager for going into debt? I can't recall hearing of a manager being sacked in reality due to poor finances.... maybe for not achieving results worthy of the amount they have invested, but that is a whole other idea, and might be worth thinking about once SM's planned idea of 'chairman expectations' comes into play.

[Joe G McFc 33]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

You think it is a must despite the last half dozen or so posts that are on this thread?

Seems like a 'must not' to me' date=' as has been mentioned would most likely ruin the game, as would not be fun. Is it just me, or is it not even realistic to sack a manager for going into debt? I can't recall hearing of a manager being sacked in reality due to poor finances.... maybe for not achieving results worthy of the amount they have invested, but that is a whole other idea, and might be worth thinking about once SM's planned idea of 'chairman expectations' comes into play.[/quote']

Yes, Your right but that mus mean you need a financial manager in teams

[Neller 6,175]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

I have no problim with Darlington keeping them outa debt (Mind you thats after the cash injection & prise money) & ive bought in plenty players wisly i may add & got rid of almost the entire starting squad' date=' I do have a nice stadium but its never anywere full even top of Div 2 now (2nd season) i get no more than 15,000 (i think) (have to check)

MAYBE i should try grimsby (whats the ultimate test) as a test il take over a new team when new setups start & every 1 can see how i do.

Im much better at Not so good teams than the likes of barce ect alot more funa aswell[/quote']

Yeah im not in debt after the chairman injection, I only go into debt during the season i have never been in debt when the new season kicks off and I probably have 1 of the best young squads for such a low club.

Below is the squad i managed to assemble with just 3mil and a 10k stadium, also never had a player above 70 rated when i started except 1 in Reddy.

My point is i wouldnt have been able to build the team below without going into debt during a season, Look at the size of that squad yet at the start of every season im outa debt again and its always like that.

If i wanted to i could have signed a load of high rated old dudes and probably climbed the leagues alot faster but i belive this is a miles better way and I also enjoy it tons more than any club like Barca, Liverpool as thats no challenge its just easy

.... and i dont need ANY fiancial adviser, why cant it just be left as it is thers nothing wrong with it, if you want to put a limit on something put it on the amount of old players you can have as they are the wage hoggers

GENERAL

LANGFIELD, Jamie G 27 85

VOLDERS, Mark G 30 82

SMITH, Graeme G 24 82

MARCELO, LB 19 87

LIRON, Ludovic RB/CB 29 82

SANKOFA, Osei RB/CB 22 82

CHICA, Francisco CB/RB 22 86

NANO, CB/LB 26 86

TOPUZAKOV, Elin CB 30 85

SPELMANN, Martin CB/DM 20 84

MARTIS, Shelton CB 24 84

KILDENTOFT, Henrik CB/RB 22 83

HUNTINGTON, Paul CB/RB 19 82

McAULEY, Gareth CB/RB 27 80

ANDREOLLI, Marco CB 21 80

GUEDE, Karim CB 22 77

MARCOS, García LM 20 87

DEJAGAH, Ashkan LM/AM 20 85

HALLFREDSSON, Emil LM 22 84

ROSENTHAL, Jan CM 21 86

DANTSEV, Aleksandr CM 22 84

GUARIN, Freddy CM/RM 20 84

IAGO, CM/RM 23 83

VELOSO, Luís DM/CB 21 87

CREGG, Patrick DM/CM 21 82

DIEGO, Ribas AM/CM 22 92

CRISTIANO, Moraes AM 23 83

CANDIDO COSTA, Alves W 26 85

BRUNO GAMA, W/AM 19 82

DJALÓ, Yannick F 21 86

MANU DEL MORAL, CF 23 86

LENNY, Fernandes CF 19 84

RASMUSSEN, Morten D. CF 22

VELA, Carlos CF 18 83

Number of Players -> 34 Average Rating -> 83 Average Age -> 22 Average Value -> £3.9M

YOUTHS

FLINDERS, Scott G 21 77

TSCHAUNER, Philipp G 21 74

HART, Joe G 20 74

SIRIGU, Salvatore G 20 73

PADELLI, Daniele G 21 68

JONES, Daniel LB/LM 20 78

DE CORTE LB 19 77

CRANIE, Martin LB/CB 20 77

MILLIGAN, Mark RB 21 76

EDGAR , David CB/RB 20 77

DEFENDI, Rodrigo CB 21 76

ANTWI, Godwin CB/DM 19 75

RAJKOVIC, Slobodan CB 18 75

METE, Soilhyo D 19 72

PATTISON, Matthew CM 21 76

MAA BOUMSONG, Daniel CM 20 70

PEKTAS, Ergin CM 20 70

CYWKA, Tomasz CM 18 66

VALDEZ, Efrain M 20 74

IDRIZAJ, Besian M 19 69

McGOLDRICK AM/W 19 78

ANDERSON, Paul W 18 70

DIABLO, Vaskos W 21 66

SLAVKOVSKI F 18 80

MORENO, Dayro F 21 80

ALEXANDRE PATO, F 17 80

DOS SANTOSF 18 18 78

ABWO, David F 21 70

KNIGHTS, Darryl F 19 64

SUNU, Gilles F 16 60

BERRY, Tyrone CF 20 71

PACO MONTANES CF 20 68

Number of Players -> 32 Average Rating -> 73 Average Age -> 19Average Value -> £640k

[Shelbourne FC 3,485]

Re: Managers sacked at a certain level of debt

I wrote out a big reply to that last comment but X it off :mad:

Anyway thats a good squad ya have there, what Team/Season you in.

I used a mix of old & young players so as to have some success early on.

So far so good but lost again to anunmanaged team (not sure about them team i never beat them)