Jump to content

Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)


Recommended Posts

Before I start this is not a gripe or moan even though it may sound like it at times.

I am in a couple of the busiest form set-ups on SM so I will use them as an example to try and explain my position and then my suggestion to try to 'fix the problem'.

It used to be before that when new players were added to SM that there was very slight differences as to what a club could bid for each player, not just new players any young low rated player, this mean that a small D4 or D5 club had as much chance of winning the bid for the youngster as a D1 or D2 club which was great in my opinion as the new talent or youngsters would be shared amongst the big teams, small teams, middle of the road teams, I liked that as it stopped just a few teams from being able to snap up all the talent/newcomers/young players, what happens now on SM is the chairmans maximum bid allowances are so skewed that in one of the gameworlds where I am Liverpool I now that if I am bidding against virtually anybody else for a young talent then I will lose as my chairman will only allow a paltry bid, some people will say well your a big club and smaller clubs should be able to buy these talents to help keep the balance to help the smaller clubs to survive, people may be right to think like that but that means that my enjoyment/fun factor is severely diminished as I can't go buy the next 'figo' 'Ronaldo' etc and watch them grow, most often they fail to live up to their 'tag' but that is part of the fun.

I used Liverpool as an example so as you know that I was meaning a big club and yes everybody likes an underdog so they are probably saying well done to the small team, what happens if I change the team used in the example to Doncaster or Burton who by all means are a small teams, yet if they go head to head with a team that is built of all low rated players( yes this is happening in the forum gameworlds nowadays and probably elsewhere in gameworlds, people are selling off all players of high ratings meaning their chairman allows then to massively outbid any other team to grab all the newest talents that arrive) so then you have a small number of teams monopolising/grabbing all the newest talents that are being added to the game, I don't care about risers I am talking about talents of the future, I tend to leave the risers to the smaller teams as a principal.

So in these forum gameworld where there are 80 managers (4 division set up) or 116 managers (5 division set up) if all these new talents are going to a very small minority of teams you can see that there are going to be lots of managers left frustrated.

Does it need fixed? For me I think it does, firstly if you want any realism then some of the new talents should still go to the 'bigger' clubs and I say 'bigger' loosely but more importantly for peoples continued enjoyance of the game something definitely needs to change.

My suggestion would be to somehow even out how much a chairman of any club, no matter what size, what rating of players they have whether that be low or high rated, can offer for a player say under 80 rated then you will have a more even distribution of these 'prizes' 'talents' being spread about the gameworld clubs which would allow many more managers than there are at the minute of being allowed to play the fun part of the game of buying a 'talent' when he gets added and being allowed to watch him grow.

At the minute if you are like me and have some high rated players then you will probably be not even making a bid on these 'talents' 'new arrivals' as it is pretty much futile.

I will leave this as an example :

Andreas Pereira 18 yold 76 rated

Me as Liverpool chairman was able to bid £2.24 million maximum yet 'Club A' a club that has been manufactured by selling all the high rated stars was able to outbid me and the rest of the gameworld with a massive £7.9 million bid.

I am sorry to say but this is a bit of a joke and certainly a flaw that I think needs urgent attention and a fix as soon as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

I've been wanting to write something like this for a while Dan, but I didn't think I'd be able to explain it in as much detail and offer a suggestion. Through being in one of the GW's you are talking about in particular (:P), it is a pain in the arse when a 'lesser' club (excuse any arrogance - it isn't at all intended) outbids me when I have the available funds to beat them and, in a real life situation, better stature and facilities to attract them. But, as you said, I also understand that if SM used that approach/attitude then your Man United's, Chelsea's, Liverpool's and Tottenham's would have pretty much all the best new talent in the game. Obviously, that wouldn't be fair, yet it also isn't fair for the complete opposite of the above to be used, which it is at this current time.

Now, I'm fortunate enough to be managing top flight clubs in both the forum EC GW's I'm currently in, but I don't really focus on purchasing young and newly added talents in one of them. Because of this, I'm not able to challenge for any highly rated youngsters, i.e. 'the next Ronaldo/Zidane/Messi etc.', which is frustrating when I'm in charge of a bigger club, with the same amount, if not more money than a lower league side who can bid more than myself. Despite this, Division 4 side Swindon (used entirely for example purposes) are able to bring in 'the next Ronaldo/Zidane/Messi etc.', which doesn't really make a whole lot of sense with all of the above considered.

As I said, I haven't been able to think of an alternative solution that is suitable and would make everybody happy, although there might not be one anyway. I like your suggestion as it has the potential to create a happy medium and I'd assume it wouldn't be hard to implement at all. It may be a case of the highest bidder getting the player, which you can't really complain about at this moment in time, but even that could lead to a few other problems, which then steers away from it being a happy medium solution, in certain situations.

It'll be interesting to see what everyone else thinks, but I think you're bang on the money at the minute, Dan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

Cheers for responding to the suggestion/problem Ben, I was more trying to point out the problem than offer a solution but had to try and add in some sort of suggestion or the thread would be moved as it is in the suggestions/improvements section, anyway it definitely needs some sort of change as it is a bit of a joke at the minute, hopefully a few more people will add there view on how they view the situation and maybe try to offer a viable solution of some sorts.

The current transfer market has many flaws and needs a few fixes and for me this is one of the parts that needs done sooner rather than later, would be nice to grab one of the many 'next Ronaldo's' even if it is just to have a prettier looking youth team haha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

Cheers for responding to the suggestion/problem Ben' date=' I was more trying to point out the problem than offer a solution but had to try and add in some sort of suggestion or the thread would be moved as it is in the suggestions/improvements section, anyway it definitely needs some sort of change as it is a bit of a joke at the minute, hopefully a few more people will add there view on how they view the situation and maybe try to offer a viable solution of some sorts.

The current transfer market has many flaws and needs a few fixes and for me this is one of the parts that needs done sooner rather than later, would be nice to grab one of the many 'next Ronaldo's' even if it is just to have a prettier looking youth team haha.[/quote']

I understand that, otherwise it's just us having a rant without providing a solution to the problem we put forward. That sort of put me off the idea of starting a thread myself. Just let someone else do the hard work ;):P

Really, it's always worth taking a chance if you can afford to. Who knows, one purchase could very well turn out to be a similar success story to Gotze or Neymar etc., who I'm sure a lot of managers competed for when they were added to the database a few years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

Simplest solution? Squad caps (ohgodnoesnotagain!)

Honestly, it's looking more and more like the quickest fix to several of the hot issues such as player hogging, huge youth collections, massive loan outs, etc.

More in depth solution?

Club rating/reputation.

Bear with me, this may take some explaining, and is an idea I've had to resolve some of the more complex issues, but could also work for this as well.

It will also need some proper fleshing out as this is just the basics of the idea so some aspects will come across as a little sketchy, especially the finance side of it.

Each club, like the manager, has a reputation score. Based primarily on results and performance, but could also be affected by players - eg, if always unhappy, concerns, NMF (basically, poorly managed) club rep would drop. If players are happy and well looked after, club rep is maintained or even rises.

Affected by finance, eg in debt or always losing lots of money per turn (eg always spending far more on a player than the CV, or basically not paying attention to "value for money") rep drops. Well maintained financially, club rep stays or rises.

Could also be a way to maintain an artificial squad cap, as having too many players over a certain number could also affect club reputation - lack of youth opportunity, etc.

How would this work with youth, and the issue of lower offers from big clubs? Bear with me again.

My primary aim of the rep system would be to balance finances, to allow small RL clubs that are well managed to compete financially, by scaling the club income up and down in line with the rep.

Big club RL but poorly managed? Loads of top stars with concerns, or just losing every match and dropping down the divisions? Rep drops, and income is scaled down accordingly.

Small RL club doing really well, happy players and winning leagues? Rep goes up, and income is scaled up accordingly.

This way, the Real's, Man Utd's, Barcelona's etc don't maintain a huge financial advantage even from D3 just because they have a permanently and artificially high income from their stadiums and TV rights, etc. and vice versa for permanently low incomes for smaller clubs.

So, how would that help with the lower max bid of lower rated players?

Firstly, by imposing an artificial squad cap, by risking lower rep with too many players, you're going to want to manage a squad more effectively, not have too many players in the squad. It may just drop competition for every single youth that comes up. This would hopefully lower the max bids by preventing such a large scale bidding war.

Secondly, overpaying for a low rated, low value youth isn't going to do much for financial rep - a large club paying £2m for a 75 rated prospect with a CV of £780k isn't too bad, not much of a gap. A small club paying £4m for the same 75 rated prospect with maybe a CV in that team of £1m is quite a gap to cover. One or two of those isn't so bad, but if you start paying out far above the squad value of the player too often, finances would take a bit of a hit and so would the club rep accordingly.

Like I said, just the very basics of an idea not wholly related to the issue, but I think it could have the potential to address several of the bigger more contentious issues people seem to have a with the game right now... Well, with the exception of the ratings, anyway :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

No, sorry, was a bit over the top ;)

I think the problem is with the current setup everything is black or white, there's no flexibility in the system to adjust for problems like this.

Either the big clubs can always outbid the little guy because of their financial muscle, or the little guys will always win because the value adjustments are too strict in their favour, purely to stop big clubs hoarding all the players just because they can afford to.

Short of applying harsh squad caps to force a strict limit on clubs thereby making them think more carefully about who they bid for, the current system isn't flexible or clever enough to scale bid values depending on current club status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

ive been in your position in plenty of GW's but it does stop the big clubs hogging all the talents, as that's what some people want to do and would do, why dont you just say that every club can bid same amount and the player decides what club to join, based on gametime competition etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

how about same limits for every club on external players?

Would make sense

they should also allow more of a gap between max chairmen value and your current player values as when i bid on a player the chairmen value is too high o give for p/e even when the player is similar like i have Ochao and wanted to trade for trapp but couldnt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

ive been in your position in plenty of GW's but it does stop the big clubs hogging all the talents' date=' as that's what some people want to do and would do, [b']why dont you just say that every club can bid same amount[/b] and the player decides what club to join, based on gametime competition etc

Alternating it from the big clubs hogging all the talents to the same two or three small clubs hoovering up and hogging all the talents is just as bad, there should not be any small clique of clubs hogging/being able to buy all the young talent whether that be small or large clubs, they have to find a happy medium where clubs of all sizes have the ability to win the signature of said youngster.

how about same limits for every club on external players?

Would make sense

they should also allow more of a gap between max chairmen value and your current player values as when i bid on a player the chairmen value is too high o give for p/e even when the player is similar like i have Ochao and wanted to trade for trapp but couldnt

Every club being able to bid the same max amount would be interesting and even if it was a random club that won said youngster that would still allow a better allocation of youngsters to different clubs rather than seeing them going to the same two or three clubs everytime a max bud is made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

Really no fix to this but I agree in part the way it works right now simply because those teams with weaker squads even if buying up the most the youths added still takes years upon years of waiting for them to get to any sort of average rating even for the top top prospects, although in most setups bar a few; good rated players are available regularly if a weaker team instead decided to put their funds towards that so any weaker team instead putting funds towards players for years down the line you can't really take it away from them that much

Perhaps having a cap on how many newly added players (free agents) one may sign might be an option across the board but overall squad cap argument doesn't come in play here as most teams that buy up youths in such a way have small squad of players to begin with anyway..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

Really no fix to this but I agree in part the way it works right now simply because those teams with weaker squads even if buying up the most the youths added still takes years upon years of waiting for them to get to any sort of average rating even for the top top prospects' date=' although in most setups bar a few; good rated players are available regularly if a weaker team instead decided to put their funds towards that so any weaker team instead putting funds towards players for years down the line you can't really take it away from them that much

Perhaps having a cap on how many newly added players (free agents) one may sign might be an option across the board but overall squad cap argument doesn't come in play here as most teams that buy up youths in such a way have small squad of players to begin with anyway..[/quote']

For me there is no way I can battle against the teams that have manufactured themselves to win out the battle for young newcomers/talents, if the Club that has sold all its players above 80 rated bids for a youngster they can outbid me and everyone else everytime, you say you can't take it away from them if they are willing to wait out the years whilst these players grow, I am not taking anything away from them it is them that are taking away my and others enjoyment of maybe buying a talent when he gets added to the database, it used to be a fun part of the game for me but in the two top forum set-ups I am in I do not even bother to look at the new players anymore as there is no point, all I see now is a players number getting signed from the same old three teams, it is not just me there are others in these set-ups that are the same as me that just don't bid on them anymore.

People say they don't like big clubs hogging all the talents, myself I don't like that either but neither do I like the same three or four clubs in each of the set ups having a monopoly on the new talents added to the database, I don't partake much in any other set-ups but recently I have saw myself playing more and more Football manager to appease my buying of new talents, it is a shame as it is another thing that is wrong with SM that will no doubt not be fixed.It pains me to see these same three of four clubs being able to pay three or four times more than me for a player, I can bid near 2 million yet they a 'Small' club can bit near 8 million, I would say it is a joke but for me it is not funny.

I like your idea of maybe limiting the number of newly added players that would maybe be a small fix and let some other clubs maybe get a player or two once these teams have used up there quota, one of teh clubs that I am talking about has spent roughly 60 million already this season on twenty-odd new players on the database, we are twelve games in, I wonder how many they will be able to buy in the whole season.

Maybe that and a much more even amount that each club could bid for each newcomer would set this more on an even keel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

This still annoys me greatly, would have been nice to hear a Dev's thought on this but I guess the thread has only been here for a month maybe I will check back in another month and see if any response.

'Realistic and sophisticated transfer market'

That quote from the homepage of SM is comedy gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

I don't see this system changing anytime soon tbh as the logic behind it well it's logical B)

Only a cap on how many free agents/new added players (must include some elapsed time frame) can be bought in a season or year real life i can see being a remote possibility

But that said what should the limit be, you dislike that someone is able to sign about 25 players in (x amount of time/ what was that time?) should the limit be 15 players per season for example? or should the limit be a financial restriction rather than a numerical one?

of course a number of factors must be considered, the type of setup, the competition one faces when signing players, if for example as you stated 3 managers are signing all the talents and having to spend 8m on each player due to competition from others, 8m for a player by 15/20 is 120/160m and although some teams may have more funds this is an average if not max for a weak team in certain setups :eek:B) so any induced cap or limit would only mirror what already exists except in the case were a club did not have competition for players and was able to sign a "shel" amount of players due to having to pay only a few hundred grand for each so a cap would still be beneficial to stop this.

So even if 3 teams were spending 8m per player more than likely only 60 players or 80 (depending on the factors of course) could be signed, i know that sounds a lot and of course it comes down to personal judgement on who is or is not a talent but for argument sake I'll say that each calender year that's a fraction of the talents that are added to the database. (and by talents i mean reasonable talents not just world beaters)

ok post for 8am i mean 7am, lets say 8am ;) eyes closing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

I don't see this system changing anytime soon tbh as the logic behind it well it's logical B)

Only a cap on how many free agents/new added players (must include some elapsed time frame) can be bought in a season or year real life i can see being a remote possibility

But that said what should the limit be' date=' you dislike that someone is able to sign about 25 players in (x amount of time/ what was that time?) should the limit be 15 players per season for example? or should the limit be a financial restriction rather than a numerical one?

of course a number of factors must be considered, the type of setup, the competition one faces when signing players, if for example as you stated 3 managers are signing all the talents and having to spend 8m on each player due to competition from others, 8m for a player by 15/20 is 120/160m and although some teams may have more funds this is an average if not max for a weak team in certain setups :eek:B) so any induced cap or limit would only mirror what already exists except in the case were a club did not have competition for players and was able to sign a "shel" amount of players due to having to pay only a few hundred grand for each so a cap would still be beneficial to stop this.

So even if 3 teams were spending 8m per player more than likely only 60 players or 80 (depending on the factors of course) could be signed, i know that sounds a lot and of course it comes down to personal judgement on who is or is not a talent but for argument sake I'll say that each calender year that's a fraction of the talents that are added to the database. (and by talents i mean reasonable talents not just world beaters)

ok post for 8am i mean 7am, lets say 8am ;) eyes closing[/quote']

Nice post.

The 8 million(7.9 million) was just an example of how much difference a 'small club' was able to offer for a 76 rated newcomer free agent compared to me as the 'big' club being able to offer 2.4 million max for, there is me as one of the biggest clubs in the 7046 gameworld being massively outbid by Notts County, yeah realistic transfer market.:rolleyes:

I do not mind being outbid for players by any club whether that be a smaller club or a bigger club but when a new talent gets added and this guy or one of two other guys bid then I might as well forget it, it is just like me bringing a knife to a gunfight I lose overtime, we are 20 games into a 38 game season and Notts County alone have already snapped up 33 new young additions.

Most of the best looking 'talents' such as Neves, Gaudino, Perreira, Pozo, Aarons, Muric, Solanke, Harper, Avdidaj, Rodriguez, Solanke, Baker, Ribery, Bergwijn, Augustin.....etc....they have all went to one team Notts County... yeah the club that has sold all the players over 78 rating so as they could pick up this crop uncontested as they can outbid whoever they bid against, then there are the other two clubs who can also outbid everytime as they have sold off their high rated players bit not to the extent of County so whatever County don't bid for they are the next two in the pecking order to up scoop the talents so by the time it gets to me actually having a chance at signing a new talent then tbh there is not much left.

How to fix it? The suggestion of 'limits for every club on external players?' was an idea from Legendary Manager, if that was changed to ' a limit on number of newcomers every club can bid on each season' I am still not sure if that would work but it would be a start as if each of these three clubs were only able to buy ?X? amount of newcomers per season it would maybe mean that these clubs would have to bid more cautiously on what newcomer they wanted which in turn would mean other talents would be available to the rest of the gameworld, I mean we are only 20 games into the season and that covers 11 weeks and not that many 'good' talents get added per week and if Notts County alone are snapping up an average of 3 per week virtually uncontested you can see why it is futile even thinking of looking at a new talent with me being somewhat of a 4th rung player in the chances to sign these new guys.

I think SM need to just make all clubs be able to bid roughly the same amount on newcomers with a little bit of random threw in then at least everyone would have a chance of signing these newcomers, as at the minute the same couple of clubs are snapping up all the talent leaving the other 95% of the gameworld fighting for scraps or like me just not bothering and chalking it down to another bit of SM that used to be good.

I have to say I am not against Notts County or their manager or any of the other managers who have sold off their higher rating players to get an easy foothold in the newcomers market I just don't like the way SM are allowing them and others to operate by exploiting the loophole that was put in to stop 'Big' clubs hogging the talent, I have used Notts County as an example but it is happening in other full world set-ups like 7777 for example and I am sure it is happening elsewhere too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

Well the season has now finished and the 'manufactured small club' train keeps steaming along, 40 transfers of newcomers come in to Notts County the most recent is 18 year old 76 rated Chelsea kid Ruben Loftus-Cheek, my max bid as Liverpool was 2.1 million yet Notts County were able to bid a MASSIVE 7.4 million, why there is such an imbalance I don't know, I am meant to be the big club yet I can be outbid over 5 million on a 76 rated player, the lopsidedness is a joke.

I never bid for the player as I don't bid for newcomers anymore but it is frustrating at the level of disparity between clubs.

Buying newcomers should be a part of the game for everybody but the way it is set out at the minute the talented newcomers are being hoovered up by the same old few clubs who have manipulated the squads so as they can bid higher than anyone else for newcomers, Sort it out SM ***!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

I've just noticed a club in one of my GC leagues doing this, he's sold all his decent players and now has a 32-man squad with average age 17 (his Senior Squad has one player in it, age 22!)

Yes he's now able to bid BIG for all the new youngsters (he outbid me and several other clubs for Maitland-Niles as he was able to bid £6.5M) which is annoying...

...but then again he's only able to field an average rating of 80 which means he loses all the time, after 15 games of the season I have 36 points while he has 8. So yes in 10 seasons time or whatever he may have a team that matches mine in average rating - but honestly I'd rather be in my position than his!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

I've just noticed a club in one of my GC leagues doing this' date=' he's sold all his decent players and now has a 32-man squad with average age 17 (his Senior Squad has one player in it, age 22!)

Yes he's now able to bid BIG for all the new youngsters (he outbid me and several other clubs for Maitland-Niles as he was able to bid £6.5M) which is annoying...

...but then again he's only able to field an average rating of 80 which means he loses all the time, after 15 games of the season I have 36 points while he has 8. So yes in 10 seasons time or whatever he may have a team that matches mine in average rating - but honestly I'd rather be in my position than his![/quote']

Yes the same has happened where I am with Maitland-Niles sold for 7.5 million to Notts County, they are doing even poorer as the season has finished and they are on just eight points, they are relegated from division 3 to the bottom rung after being relegated from division 2 with 24 points the season before when he took over, they have 60 players with 82 the highest rated and only 1 older than 21, I have no problem with the manager or the way he is manipulating the system to be able to win any bid for newcomers but it does take the enjoyment away from me and others who cannot bid for new talent as and when it gets added as that is an enjoyable part of the game or was in this gameworld a couple of seasons ago.

SM need to either pit a system in place where bids will be evened out so as newcomers can get spread about between teams allowing more managers the chance to grab a new talent or they have to introduce a new system limiting the number of newcomers a club can buy per season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

If this changes it will kill game worlds even more. Sure its not like real life transfers but I feel it is required to help smaller clubs & maintain interest for their managers. Personally feel its one area SM has exactly correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re: Buying youngsters/newcomers/talents (chairmans bid allowances per player)

If this changes it will kill game worlds even more. Sure its not like real life transfers but I feel it is required to help smaller clubs & maintain interest for their managers. Personally feel its one area SM has exactly correct.

I respect your point of view but my point is I think this is affecting smaller clubs as well as bigger clubs, if you manufacture a club by selling all the high rated players and leave your top rated players around the 80 rated mark then you will have a free reign to buy ANY newcomer that gets added to the database, in the gameworld what I am using as an example there are eighty clubs yet one club can outbid the other 79 clubs and take whatever newcomers he feels, surely this cannot be right or any benefit to small or large clubs alike??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...