Jump to content

Squad Sizes  

1 member has voted

  1. 1.

    • No
      232
    • Capped at 50
      202
    • Capped at 100
      123
    • Capped at 150
      18
    • Capped at 200
      32


Recommended Posts

Re: Squad Sizes

This debate will go on forever . It is split into two sides. On one side is a Manager with 100 players in a team , the other Manager has 30 players in their team. The manager with 100 players (like me i have 157) use the way that soccer manager deals with player increases to either pay massive wage bills with a small stadium or they use that money to buy players they would otherwise never be able to buy. The other manager just sits on his team with 30 players and ends up with a team that gets old and loses form and usually the manager quits. Why should the managers out of all the managers on Soccer Manager who spend the most time and put the most effort into their teams get punished by been forced to have a smaller squads just because the managers that dont put in the effort and cant match these teams over a few years ? It would be a huge mistake. All the managers who put all the effort in and stayed at their teams for far longer periods would leave and you would be left with all the managers who would be looking for glory without having to put much effort in at all.

Now to strenghten my point think about this,. In real life a manager will usually start of in the lower leagues, and move there way up one team at a time and if they are good at what they do they will end up in a good job at a good team. Managers of the big teams who dont do well get sacked and get replaced by the managers who do well. This doesnt happen on Soccer Manager. Managers of the big team dont get sacked. They dont have to quit.They could hogg that team forever. How else can a manager of a lower league team ever get a team that can ever challange for glory? The have to take the long long route, Start at the bottom. Buy risers ,sell and repeat , bit by bit they can close the gap on the teams with who start with all the players and all the money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Re: Squad Sizes

Re: Squad Sizes Feeling a bit despondent about all of this and whether SM is actually worth playing anymore. The fun has been ripped out of the game for me and fellow coaches don't understand my stra

Re: Squad Sizes

This debate will go on forever . It is split into two sides. On one side is a Manager with 100 players in a team ' date=' the other Manager has 30 players in their team. The manager with 100 players (like me i have 157) use the way that soccer manager deals with player increases to either pay massive wage bills with a small stadium or they use that money to buy players they would otherwise never be able to buy. The other manager just sits on his team with 30 players and ends up with a team that gets old and loses form and usually the manager quits. Why should the managers out of all the managers on Soccer Manager who spend the most time and put the most effort into their teams get punished by been forced to have a smaller squads just because the managers that dont put in the effort and cant match these teams over a few years ? It would be a huge mistake. All the managers who put all the effort in and stayed at their teams for far longer periods would leave and you would be left with all the managers who would be looking for glory without having to put much effort in at all.

Now to strenghten my point think about this,. In real life a manager will usually start of in the lower leagues, and move there way up one team at a time and if they are good at what they do they will end up in a good job at a good team. Managers of the big teams who dont do well get sacked and get replaced by the managers who do well. This doesnt happen on Soccer Manager. Managers of the big team dont get sacked. They dont have to quit.They could hogg that team forever. How else can a manager of a lower league team ever get a team that can ever challange for glory? The have to take the long long route, Start at the bottom. Buy risers ,sell and repeat , bit by bit they can close the gap on the teams with who start with all the players and all the money.[/quote']

what? its often the big teams who have the most money to snap up the most youngsters and sell them on or hog them for ever, even more of a monopoly or money raiser. its absolute absurd that you can be manager of a russian team, do extremely well, have a big stadium and yet only get 10-20k per home game and make a loss every week. what is the point of trying?

do you know why real life clubs cant have teams of 100? because players want to play, young players want to grow, mature players want game time, great players want success and big wages. SM really need to implement these things.

its absolutely stupid that a big club like say juventus can get relegated wth 30 good players cos the manager sucks and not lose a single player, manager keeps his job and there are no real consequences other than they'll probably have a good season against weaker teams.

players should get unhappy, want to play, want success, want money, kids should demand first team chances or a loan if unhappy doing nothing and so on. clubs should not be allowed to hoard youngsters, research or no. just ask the italians who keep losing kids to england. just cos you found a kid doesnt mean you deserve to keep em.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

I can't think of a single reason why there should be a squad cap.....

If I want to spend my own time trolling through the stats of the Latvian league or the English 2nd division and then buy young players from those leagues then I should be allowed to.

If a manager wants to keep his squad tight at 25players - or 40 including youngsters that his choice, but I quite easily make a profit with a large squad by working for it

The squad cap is already set at 255 players anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

I can't think of a single reason why there should be a squad cap.....

If I want to spend my own time trolling through the stats of the Latvian league or the English 2nd division and then buy young players from those leagues then I should be allowed to.

If a manager wants to keep his squad tight at 25players - or 40 including youngsters that his choice' date=' but I quite easily make a profit with a large squad by working for it

[b']The squad cap is already set at 255 players anyway[/b]

100% agree.

And i think that the current limit of 255 players shouldn't exist either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

I'm yet to hear a valid argument for squad caps so I voted against them :)

I may be swayed on this topic though if anyone can put forward a convincing claim that isn't realism or the game being unfair to those who're lazy B)

I don't think anyone can put "realism" as a reason - otherwise the likes of Wayne Rooney wouldn't be playing for Yoevil or similar in any game world

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

I don't think anyone can put "realism" as a reason - otherwise the likes of Wayne Rooney wouldn't be playing for Yoevil or similar in any game world

I agree with realism in some instances. That's why I strongly advocate the player concern system.

Buying and selling risers is a crucial part of game-play though and therefore doesn't need to be realistic in that sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

I agree with realism in some instances. That's why I strongly advocate the player concern system.

Buying and selling risers is a crucial part of game-play though and therefore doesn't need to be realistic in that sense.

I like the player concerns - even though I havent had a single player have one yet...

BUT HERES AN IDEA....

What about when you sign a player....as part of the negotiations you say what % of games they are likely to play in

Example

Rooney - 97 - offer 45mill - and contract is he will play 80%+

Phil Jones - 80 - offer 2-3mill - and contract is he will play 20% of games

Young Riser - 70 - offer 10k - likely to play 0%

I am sure SM could easily implement this - and if you then break your 'managers word' the player quickly becomes unhappy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

I like the player concerns - even though I havent had a single player have one yet...

BUT HERES AN IDEA....

What about when you sign a player....as part of the negotiations you say what % of games they are likely to play in

Example

Rooney - 97 - offer 45mill - and contract is he will play 80%+

Phil Jones - 80 - offer 2-3mill - and contract is he will play 20% of games

Young Riser - 70 - offer 10k - likely to play 0%

I am sure SM could easily implement this - and if you then break your 'managers word' the player quickly becomes unhappy

That could get quite messy. For example, using Phil Jones in your example, who would Phil Jones sign for:

Yeovil offer 2m - contract says he will play in 90% of games

Man U offer 2m - contract says he will play in 10% of games

West Ham offer 2.1m - contract says he will play in 40% of games

Birmingham offer 2.5m - contract says he will play in 20% of games

All offers accepted by the selling club - who does he sign for? Club offering best price, best chance of success or most chances of playing. Would mean the players would suddenly need to have an AI element incorporated, which currently does not exist :o:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

I also say no to squad caps.

Wage demands from servicing a squad of say 255 players should put such a drain on finances that you would be forced to sell in order to maintain your squad or buy anymore players.

You cannot have 200+ 90 rated players but you can have 20 x 90+ rated players and 235 youngsters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

I voted for 100 cap.

I brought Bradford up from 4th division and won the premier league last season by buying and selling risers but never needed to have more than 80 players.

A reason for squad cap is it keeps the GW more competitive and doesn't put off new managers from joining. If all the top players and future stars and money making risers are hogged by the top four clubs then there is no hope or enjoyment for new managers and other managers are likely to quit because there is no one good available.

It will introduce more skill and there for more satisfaction if you have to manage your squads more efficiently. You may have to compromise and sell players you don't want to which is realistic i.e the current Rooney situation.

There's little skill in buying 100's of risers from somebody else's rating prediction list.

Giving managers difficult decisions is realistic and what is lacking from the game. When I took over Bradford I thought it was going to be a long term project with ups and downs, but in four seasons I won the Premier League. As pleased as i was it was too easy.

To be honest I think even a 50 squad cap would make the game alot more fun even though it would mean I would have to sell half my squad.

Maybe there should be different worlds with different max squad sizes and you choose which one to enter. Simples :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

I voted for 100 cap.

I brought Bradford up from 4th division and won the premier league last season by buying and selling risers but never needed to have more than 80 players.

A reason for squad cap is it keeps the GW more competitive and doesn't put off new managers from joining. If all the top players and future stars and money making risers are hogged by the top four clubs then there is no hope or enjoyment for new managers and other managers are likely to quit because there is no one good available.

It will introduce more skill and there for more satisfaction if you have to manage your squads more efficiently. You may have to compromise and sell players you don't want to which is realistic i.e the current Rooney situation.

There's little skill in buying 100's of risers from somebody else's rating prediction list.

Giving managers difficult decisions is realistic and what is lacking from the game. When I took over Bradford I thought it was going to be a long term project with ups and downs' date=' but in four seasons I won the Premier League. [b']As pleased as i was it was too easy.[/b]

To be honest I think even a 50 squad cap would make the game alot more fun even though it would mean I would have to sell half my squad.

Maybe there should be different worlds with different max squad sizes and you choose which one to enter. Simples :D

I rarely trust other peoples scouting (as you can see from my signature at the bottom of the post)

I can't see how someone having asquad of 200 would put someone off joining a game world if honest - when I've joined a game world I don't even look at other teams as I want it to be a challenge regardless of where Rooney, Messi and Ronaldo are

I guess this topic is truly Marmite :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

I rarely trust other peoples scouting (as you can see from my signature at the bottom of the post)

I can't see how someone having asquad of 200 would put someone off joining a game world if honest - when I've joined a game world I don't even look at other teams as I want it to be a challenge regardless of where Rooney' date=' Messi and Ronaldo are[/quote']

I don't think they mean the top-rated players, i think they mean the risers.

If i have a choice of joining a gameworld where you have 200 risers or joining a gameworld where you have 100 risers i know which one will give me more scope for success as a newbie to your gameworld ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

I don't think they mean the top-rated players' date=' i think they mean the risers.

If i have a choice of joining a gameworld where you have 200 risers or joining a gameworld where you have 100 risers i know which one will give me more scope for success as a newbie to your gameworld ;)[/quote']

Sorry I worded it badly - the main 'No' voters originally seem to be saying that it's player hogging on the other thread

I haven't seen one argument for capping the number of players that makes reasonable sense

TBH though - my squads all currently have under 100 players and I am still making a tasty profit every week/month even after my wage bill :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

The problem is when you first start playing the game, you believe that you if you buy up all the youngsters, one or two of them are bound to come good and their wages will stay tuppence hapenny for 5 seasons.

Then reality kicks in. SM take so long to review your players and the increments are so modest that by the time they reach high 80's or low 90's if you are very, very lucky, you will have moved on to better more guarantees that help you win top league titles.

In competitive GM's you just cannot get by with a squad largely consisting of 87/88/89 rated players, you can in easier GM's with fewer managers. You then end up getting fed up waiting for your starlets to come good and help out your main squad.

Its a placebo effect. It seems great at the time, you buy Abel Hernadez as this forum tells you hes the next best thing but whoops he is benched every game, Pjanic the same, cant kick a ball for Lyon for more than 10 minutes, what about Santon, what about Canales, the list is endless.

At the end of the day there is no substitute for quality 90+ rated players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

Sorry I worded it badly - the main 'No' voters originally seem to be saying that it's player hogging on the other thread

I haven't seen one argument for capping the number of players that makes reasonable sense

The problem with the squad cap debate is that there are 2 issues at play - "player hogging" (having loads of 90+ rated players) and "riser hogging" (a club or clubs have all the obvious risers meaning the gameworld can't attract/ sustain interest from new managers) and squad caps are a crude instrument for dealing with both problems.

For example a cap of 100 will do nothing to stop player hogging and would only slightly reduce riser hogging.

A cap of 50 would curb hogging but would slow down the ability of small clubs to develop as they could "only" carry 25-30 risers at any one time.

The only suggestion i've ever seen that could potentially deal with both problems is introducing a wage budget.

This could be set by the chairman at the start of each season and be based on your teams squad value.

As small clubs are mainly buying risers who are on low wages it means that the best scouts will still pick up the +7/+6 risers and the folk slower off the mark are left with the +1/+2 risers.

With a wage budget big clubs who want to buy risers will have a choice to make; do they want 1x 90 rated player on £45k a week or would they rather have 6x 75 rated players on approx £7k a week for the same wages?

There might then be a few more 90's sold (now and again!) :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Should squad caps be introduced ?

IMO squads should be capped at 100 to make it semi realistic. No team in real life have close to 100 players let alone 200 but in SM world I think 100 should be just enough from stopping teams hogging players which then ruin certain game worlds by making it somewhat unenjoyable for other players who cannot sign any decent prospects for the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

×
×
  • Create New...