Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SM Dev (John)

Squad Sizes

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

i look at it this way. i'm more than happy to have about 15 - 20 youngsters in my squad. if i sell one or use one in part exchange etc then i'll maybe go out and get another. a lot of my teams have a squad of about 40 - 50 players.

i dont see why managers feel the need to buy 80 + youngsters for their team. a bit over the top wouldn't you say?

i do agree that it would have been better that the squad cap was in place to begin with but hindsight is a wonderful thing and i doubt when SM was first created the devs ever thought that squads of over 100 would ever exist..

Fair enough, I can see why some managers wouldnt want 100+ squads (I don't have any either, I think) and why the huge squads look excessive.

but, why change it? why remove the choice of having a vast squad? what harm is it doing? Nobody is suggesting you should have a large squad, and nobody out there is being forced to.

just going to annoy perfectly decent managers by removing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

why not get your team 15-20 good prospects. then when you sell 1 go and grab yourself another young prospect to replace him. isnt that what a lot of clubs do in real life anyway?

There are thousands of prospects on the game who can rise soon' date=' so why should you be forced to have a certain amount of them? 15-20 prospects?! What happens if none go up as soon as you wished.. ? Surely if you stick to 20 youngsters the others will be snatched up, so yes, it's a fact that getting all the 80 you think will increase is the only way round, mostly so they won't get bought by others. Fairness or something like 'but you have to give the others a chance too' is completely out of the question - who gets there first wins, and if it's a tie then it's who wants the player most (Assuming he will pay more..).

In real life teams do that because they have:

- A transfer Market - Therefore all the clubs will be aware of the players and everyone goes in for them at the same time, and therefore the same club just cannot win the battle to every one of them..

- Scouts - As mentioned by Steve, they have scouts, and in real life players don't play on a rating, but, for example, if you need a target man you get a target man, not the highest rated player available, which we do not have on SM.

- Challenges - Every club goes in for young stars. If Chelsea want to buy a youngster, they are definitely not going to get him easily. Within a few hours you'll get something like '16 clubs interested in ****', and therefore they have a huge challenge to get the player. If you are not challenged on SM all the better, so get him, why do you have to double check on who you want to get because you can only have a certain amount of players?

To be honest, I hate this idea, not because I've got a team with over 100 players, but even because of all the other reasons mentioned by Steve and other people.

I agree that the problem is in the amount of 90+ players one can have, and not in the youths. Also, Dexter pointed out that Sao Paolo had 93 pro's in their team in that season, so yes Fraser, real teams do get that close.

However, back to square one:

Squad sizes are getting out of a hand. Some squads have over 100 players in the squad which is just hogging players and plunging clubs into debt.

Wasn't this the main reason why this was going to be introduced?

It doesn't exist - like Steve rightly said - so what is the new reason? :confused:

No offence, but If the tech team or anyone came to me telling me that it was for the speed of the site, I would NEVER EVER believe that.. even if so, with the thousands earned (and rightly earned for the great job) by GM, surely a few hundreds could be used on yet another server, but still, this is not needed, as the speed of the site is great as it is now, and if I had to guess I'd say only about 50 out of the around 50k teams managed have teams of over 100 players, which is 0.1% or something. :eek:

PS: If this had to happen, the worst possible scenario would be if it happened to every setup. Surely if SM want to go against the majority of their people, at least it should be added in the new setups only..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

This game is Simulation is it not?

It has realistic sides, but its got to have extra elements that are not so

life like, to keep people interested...

Like I said earlier in this thread, I dont see any harm what so ever in having

a huge squad. If youve managed a side for 4 seasons or so, making the right

transfers and making profit for your club, enabling you to get squads the size

that you want, I don't see the problem.

Players are on the database to be bought and sold, wether it be unmanaged

teams, unavailable to manage teams and of course managed. So does it

really matter if they are sitting around in an unavailable, or a managed? I dont see the difference.

Why should SM boast the 36,000 real life player database if your not allowed

to buy who you want when you want, because like I said, if youve earnt

the right to boast a big squad then why not? People take pride in having

big squads, wether they be youngsters or world beaters (myself included in

some circumstances).

But put it like this, if people knew they were going to have to give half theyre

squads away in a year and a halfs time away when they first started, they

probably wouldnt of even bothered to of played the game in the first place,

because in theory they would of wasted a year and a half of gaming time,

creating what they thought was to be the best squad of players to ever exist

on the game.

Each individual manager decides what sort of squad they want, wether it be

a team full of oldies/youngsters, wether if be 18 or 150 players. SM should

accomodate for everybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest SM Dev (Ste)

Re: Squad Sizes

A few lines of thought:

How many managers actually have a first team squad of over 100 players (taking youth players out of the equation)?

Being realistic is there a need to have more than 100 first team players?

A cap on the youth squad will make you scout more. Instead of buying player x, y, z, just because he is a teenager, you will have to look into who you are actually buying. No one can argue that a manager who has 40, 50, 60 youth team players, has actually bought all of them as they are all the next 'big' thing.

A cap on the first team squad will only have an impact on a very small percentage of managers (again look at my first point).

Large squads can potentially cripple clubs financially (ignore the Barcelona's, Madrid's etc who have massive stadiums), and thus stop potential managers taking over.

The game has changed a lot since its creation, and player squad limits was not introduced on launch (like several other features). The games is always developing (for better or worse), and to say we should have introduced caps on launch, is like saying we should have introduced feature x on launch.

The issue of player hogging can easily be addressed. That is a seperate issue and nothing to do with squad limits.

The issue of cheating is a seperate issue to squad limits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Well said Raz!

A few lines of thought:

How many managers actually have a first team squad of over 100 players (taking youth players out of the equation)?

Being realistic is there a need to have more than 100 first team players?

A cap on the youth squad will make you scout more. Instead of buying player x' date=' y, z, just because he is a teenager, you will have to look into who you are actually buying. No one can argue that a manager who has 40, 50, 60 youth team players, has actually bought all of them as they are all the next 'big' thing.

A cap on the first team squad will only have an impact on a very small percentage of managers (again look at my first point).

Large squads can potentially cripple clubs financially (ignore the Barcelona's, Madrid's etc who have massive stadiums), and thus stop potential managers taking over.

The game has changed a lot since its creation, and player squad limits was not introduced on launch (like several other features). The games is always developing (for better or worse), and to say we should have introduced caps on launch, is like saying we should have introduced feature x on launch.

The issue of player hogging can easily be addressed. That is a seperate issue and nothing to do with squad limits.

The issue of cheating is a seperate issue to squad limits.[/quote']I would refer to my previous post. Clubs do not usually have such huge squads in real life, but they can, and in reality no club has a capped squad size. Yes, few SM managers have such huge squads, so why bother changing it, they are doing no harm. If thousands had it I would see the technical concern. I also think there are most definitely a 100+ young players who could be the next big thing, you only have to look at international u-21's, and you are spoiled for choice. As SM add more players this will become increasingly true. I also dont always buy players with a view to them becoming a superstar, but with a view to them making me money, and nothing wrong with that either.

If SM are now saying their concern is a financial one, and not that of 'hogging' then this has already been discussed too (my last post mentioned all the possible 'benefits' of a cap I could think of and why they are not valid) and I think the people who are normally crippled financially are the people who sign lots of high rated older players. I took on a team who were £25m in debt because of this. The people with large squads are those who plan for the future, and plan to play for a long long time, so debt is not usually a concern for them. Certainly hasn't been for me when having a large squad.

Bank balance should be the 'cap' on who people can buy same as it is for anyone else. If anything needs changing in this area, I think sale of players should be put into the 'chairman's' hands when a club falls below a balance of 'minus X' amount, meaning that a club risks losing its best players if not keeping its finances in good order. This would eliminate the problem you mentioned, and sort out the one I mentioned too; it is not realistic or playable that clubs could wrack up such huge debt unchecked.

This cap will do nothing positive for SM. So many drawbacks to it as I mentioned in my last post, and no benefits that cant be done better through another type of change.

Is this actually even open for discussion though Steve? Anyone taking note of the alternative suggestions people have made and the concerns raised (like in my last post)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest SM Dev (Ste)

Re: Squad Sizes

Well said Raz!

I would refer to my previous post. Clubs do not usually have such huge squads in real life' date=' but they can, and in reality no club has a capped squad size. Yes, few SM managers have such huge squads, so why bother changing it, they are doing no harm. If thousands had it I would see the technical concern. I also think there are most definitely a 100+ young players who could be the next big thing, you only have to look at international u-21's, and you are spoiled for choice. As SM add more players this will become increasingly true. I also dont always buy players with a view to them becoming a superstar, but with a view to them making me money, and nothing wrong with that either.

If SM are now saying their concern is a financial one, and not that of 'hogging' then this has already been discussed too (my last post mentioned all the possible 'benefits' of a cap I could think of and why they are not valid) and I think the people who are normally crippled financially are the people who sign lots of high rated older players. I took on a team who were £25m in debt because of this. The people with large squads are those who plan for the future, and plan to play for a long long time, so debt is not usually a concern for them. Certainly hasn't been for me when having a large squad.

Bank balance should be the 'cap' on who people can buy same as it is for anyone else. If anything needs changing in this area, I think sale of players should be put into the 'chairman's' hands when a club falls below a balance of 'minus X' amount, meaning that a club risks losing its best players if not keeping its finances in good order. This would eliminate the problem you mentioned, and sort out the one I mentioned too; it is not realistic or playable that clubs could wrack up such huge debt unchecked.

This cap will do nothing positive for SM. So many drawbacks to it as I mentioned in my last post, and no benefits that cant be done better through another type of change.

Is this actually even open for discussion though Steve? Anyone taking note of the alternative suggestions people have made and the concerns raised (like in my last post)?[/quote']

This idea is open to debate, and I have read all the posts on this thread.

In real life no club has a limit to how many players first team players they sign, but how many real life clubs have 100+ first team players? The example given by Dexter is the only example I can find, and I take that with a pinch of salt given the politics/finances of the Brazilian league.

Also - like I stated in my last post, how many SM managers have 100+ first team players? The first team squad limit will only effect a very small percentage, as the majority of managers do not have 100+ first team players.

In SM there is no need to have a squad of 100+ players. That is why we are looking at capping the first team limit for the reasons stated in my last post. The first team squad could be capped at one figure, and the youth team squad could be capped at a higher limit (as more managers are prone to buying youth).

A cap is something which we could introduce. Not every new feature will please everyone.

The idea of a finance cap is something which we are looking at introducing. I am in favour of the chariman putting player x on the transfer list, if your club goes in the red. This will make managers handle their finances better in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

This idea is open to debate' date=' and I have read all the posts on this thread.

In real life no club has a limit to how many players first team players they sign, but how many real life clubs have 100+ first team players? The example given by Dexter is the only example I can find, and I take that with a pinch of salt given the politics/finances of the Brazilian league.

Also - like I stated in my last post, how many SM managers have 100+ first team players? The first team squad limit will only effect a very small percentage, as the majority of managers do not have 100+ first team players.

In SM there is no need to have a squad of 100+ players. That is why we are looking at capping the first team limit for the reasons stated in my last post. The first team squad could be capped at one figure, and the youth team squad could be capped at a higher limit (as more managers are prone to buying youth).

A cap is something which we could introduce. Not every new feature will please everyone.

The idea of a finance cap is something which we are looking at introducing. I am in favour of the chariman putting player x on the transfer list, if your club goes in the red. This will make managers handle their finances better in the future.[/quote']

sorry to come into an argument so late. BUT if you capped the youth team at a higher level it wouldnt matter anyway. Because once they had reached 22 they would move into the first team. If they already had the maximum amount in the first team this would stop them from buying other players i presume ? thats one potential problem if you were trying to promote scouting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest SM Dev (Ste)

Re: Squad Sizes

sorry to come into an argument so late. BUT if you capped the youth team at a higher level it wouldnt matter anyway. Because once they had reached 22 they would move into the first team. If they already had the maximum amount in the first team this would stop them from buying other players i presume ? thats one potential problem if you were trying to promote scouting.

When a player has reached the age of 22, you will have a general idea of how he is developing in real life. Thus you would decide whether to sell him on, or promote him into the first team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

When a player has reached the age of 22' date=' you will have a general idea of how he is developing in real life. Thus you would decide whether to sell him on, or promote him into the first team.[/quote']

True. But he could get better forcing you into decisions you don't have to make

currently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

In real life no club has a limit to how many players first team players they sign' date=' but how many real life clubs have 100+ first team players? The example given by Dexter is the only example I can find, and I take that with a pinch of salt given the politics/finances of the Brazilian league.[/quote']As I mentioned in my earlier post though, real life teams have multiple other methods of generating and developing great young prospects and money that SM simply cannot offer. Having large squads is a viable method of ensuring wealth and good players.
Also - like I stated in my last post' date=' how many SM managers have 100+ first team players? The first team squad limit will only effect a very small percentage, as the majority of managers do not have 100+ first team players.[/quote']Few managers do, I quite agree. In my mind this means the need to change anything is even smaller. If it was widespread, I could see SM's concerns from a technical point of view a bit more, and also from an image point of view as SM understandably want to look as though they are offering a realistic experience.
In SM there is no need to have a squad of 100+ players. That is why we are looking at capping the first team limit for the reasons stated in my last post. The first team squad could be capped at one figure' date=' and the youth team squad could be capped at a higher limit (as more managers are prone to buying youth).[/quote']I agree there is no need to have 100+, but equally, what is the harm? Now some managers do have 100+, capping it will just hurt them. There is no need for teams to have more than 18 players rated 90+ but this happens too. I don't see the harm in leaving the choice, as already discussed.
A cap is something which we could introduce. Not every new feature will please everyone.
I don't see how this would benefit anyone though. You have agreed hogging is not the issue here. If it is a financial one (not that I see much evidence of large squads being the ones in debt), have the finance cap which would be fair, realistic, expected by most, and stop people getting into debt with large squads. A squad cap will just annoy people and stop them being able to make decisions they are within their rights to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

The idea of a finance cap is something which we are looking at introducing. I am in favour of the chariman putting player x on the transfer list' date=' if your club goes in the red. This will make managers handle their finances better in the future.[/quote']

But without stadium upgrades its totaly impossible to keep teams like Grimsby out of debt, even if you didnt buy anyone within a few weeks they go into debt anyway on there default squad.

you could never buy anyone and also release half your team you start with to stay out of debt but theres no fun in that really, I think we need to get more people interested in being the smaller clubs instead of managers owning 2 milans, 3 chelsea's, 5 barca's etc.

When a player has reached the age of 22' date=' you will have a general idea of how he is developing in real life. Thus you would decide whether to sell him on, or promote him into the first team.[/quote']

unless the unmanagable teams were made more active in making bids for your players, as its very,very rare atm. its impossible at times to sell some of your players even if they are half decent ones. because there are so many unmanaged teams with equal quality plus the fact they can offload 2 rubbish players in exchange they take that option.

You could use your unwanted players in exchange your self but because youre only getting rid of these players because your in debt then you cant actually make the offer to exchange them anyway

As for squad limits at 1st i was against the idea but then i wasnt to bothered and saw the points by John and Stegore but after reading tebs previous posts i can see his point aswell.

there maybe only a few youngsters who fly up alot, but there are thounsands who jump up enough to make teams like Grimsby a good enough profit to survive, ive made millions from players ive never even heard of or scouted. I dont just bid for anyone but ive done excellent by buying unkown players, even ones unkown on the forum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

good shout fraser' date=' and effectively what you've said is what happens.

You just get clubs that have an endless amount of young players without any real regard to scouting the player. They are just bought because they are young.

The limit would make people selective about who they buy, and who they exactly need in their squad, rather than scattergunning or minesweeping for talent.

Thus it wouldnt harm the scout at all, would just require them to fine tune their nose for talent.[/quote']

i disagree with the i have about 100 youngsters in my youth squad mainly 70s who ive scouted and so far 25% or more of them have had a increase in rating some of 10 points other 2-3.

Also not every team has the next best thing some teams have youth who just end up and benchwarmers or reverve players so some managers look for that, as i have a decent starting lineup and get youth to fill injured positions.

Also if the cap says we cannot buy unless we sell off players

what if I offer for player x 2 mil plus player y and player z

will sm allow 2 for 1 deals to reduce squad sizes or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest SM Dev (Ste)

Re: Squad Sizes

good shout fraser' date=' and effectively what you've said is what happens.

You just get clubs that have an endless amount of young players without any real regard to scouting the player. They are just bought because they are young.

The limit would make people selective about who they buy, and who they exactly need in their squad, rather than scattergunning or minesweeping for talent.

Thus it wouldnt harm the scout at all, would just require them to fine tune their nose for talent.[/quote']

I think you have missed socratys point.

i disagree with the i have about 100 youngsters in my youth squad mainly 70s who ive scouted and so far 25% or more of them have had a increase in rating some of 10 points other 2-3.

I am not saying that you have just bought any old youngsters, so please don't take this the wrong way. Everyone knows that when a youth player is added to the DB, he will come on at a low rating, due to a limited amount of playing time. It is fairly obvious that there is a good chance he will get a raise over the course of a season (especially if he carries on making appearances etc). So if you buy 100 new young additions, then a high percentage (whether you have researched them or not) will probably get an increase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Everyone knows that when a youth player is added to the DB' date=' he will come on at a low rating, due to a limited amount of playing time. It is fairly obvious that there is a good chance he will get a raise over the course of a season (especially if he carries on making appearances etc). So if you buy 100 new young additions, then a high percentage (whether you have researched them or not) will probably get an increase.[/quote']

I dont think there is alot up with that tho as alot of people really dont have the time for doing scouting and reaserching. plus most managers dont do that anyway they just get all the players names from the forum and others who do the scouting.

I wish i had the time to check half the players i buy but im really limited for time most days with work and owen (youve seen what i mean there ;) ) add onto that the other 2 kids. i have no chance

plus some people like me :) enjoy buying 10-15 players and hoping half of them go up and in most cases 95% of mine have

although saying that i have still never go near the 100 mark you mean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

But without stadium upgrades its totaly impossible to keep teams like Grimsby out of debt' date=' even if you didnt buy anyone within a few weeks they go into debt anyway on there default squad.

you could never buy anyone and also release half your team you start with to stay out of debt but theres no fun in that really, I think we need to get more people interested in being the smaller clubs instead of managers owning 2 milans, 3 chelsea's, 5 barca's etc.

unless the unmanagable teams were made more active in making bids for your players, as its very,very rare atm. its impossible at times to sell some of your players even if they are half decent ones. because there are so many unmanaged teams with equal quality plus the fact they can offload 2 rubbish players in exchange they take that option.

[/quote']

I am not opposed to the idea of caps but agree strongly that something must be done about this underlying economic flow. In many of the leagues, certainly the English Championships, most of the cash flows out of the league and never returns. Most deals involve buying from unmanaged teams, while unmanaged teams rarely purchase players from managed ones.

Right now if I sign a youngster and he develops it is often very difficult to sell him on, certainly not at a good price and for cash. For smaller clubs to balance the books and avoid having to place top players on the transfer list more deals need to be initiated by unmanaged teams, for players marked "available" but not necessarily on the transfer list since that tanks morale.

Also, I am alright with finance/salary caps but they should not be too restricting or it will be impossible to manage a smaller club to success. In reality this is what exists, which is why there is much more limited mobility in real-life football. The salary cap can't be tied simply to weekly income or it will be impossible for a 4th division team to move upward. As Neller has said, going into debt but balancing the books by the end of the season is really the only way to move a team upward. Especially until something is done to make-up for the small stadium capacities and other disadvantages of small clubs.

Also, whatever caps are put in place should take into account profits from scouting and selling on players, not just stadium income. Additionally there should be some financial flexibility to allow managers options, such as carrying a slightly higher wage bill for a period of time. Too many restrictions will make the game far less enjoyable as smaller clubs will have less freedom to improve their stock due to their much smaller initial finances.

That said I agree that people who buy older players for huge wage bills and declining finances do nothing good for the game. However, whatever rules are put in place should not overly limit the options and mobility within the game that make controlling lower division teams enjoyable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Everyone knows that when a youth player is added to the DB' date=' he will come on at a low rating, due to a limited amount of playing time. It is fairly obvious that there is a good chance he will get a raise over the course of a season (especially if he carries on making appearances etc). So if you buy 100 new young additions, then a high percentage (whether you have researched them or not) will probably get an increase.[/quote']This is all the more reason why the current situation is not problematic. As you say, everyone knows that a player added is likely to be worth signing. If one manager decides to buy 100 of these, but another manager decides to buy 1 and a few established players, both decisions have their merits. I don't see the need to take away this option.

Having seen a new thread on ways of reducing club debt/mismanagement, would I be wrong in assuming that this is now perceived (quite rightly) as a separate issue to large squad size?

Most agree (I hope) that hogging is not the concern here, and if the financial one now isn't the real core of the issue either, then that leaves technical reasons or realism. If technical reasons, there are ways around this and the lack of any detailed explanation around this this makes me suspect it is not enough of a concern to be the core issue anyway. If for realism, I just don't think it is playable or viable unless a great number of other unlikely tweaks and features are added.

I remain utterly baffled as to why this is a good move for SM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

I think it a shame no liaison took place before the decision was made to introduce a cap. I know several managers who will hate the idea

As since proved with the reaction this thread has took on its introduction.

The laison is happening on here and now. Nothing has been implemented and will take a few weeks to do so. A squad limit does need to be introduced however as managers could end up with' date=' well basically an unlimited amount of players in their squad.

[/quote']

Disagree with your view of the laison happening on here right now,if it was and being done with no verdict already reached and you was taking serious consideration of members views then it should not be cut and dried ,

it should be open to debate,but you say a Squad limit DOES need to be introduced ,not your thinking about it and want our views with an open mind.

even Steve says

We are currently looking at an initial cap of 50 first team players' date=' and an initial cap of 50 youth team players.

We will then liaise with forum members, to come to a player cap limit for both squads, prior to setting anything in stone.[/quote']

So Teb was right in first instance ,there is actually no liaison to do with if we need to limit squad size,that decision has already been made ,the actual liaison your really debating on here is at what figure to cap it as Steve said above .

Lets get this in perspective a cap of 100 players is not really a serious cap at all!

Totally agree ' date='thats why i dont see why you have made a mountain out of a molehill for something that could have been left well alone seems it proberly only affects a small percentage of managers.

How many managers actually have a first team squad of over 100 players (taking youth players out of the equation)?

A cap on the first team squad will only have an impact on a very small percentage of managers.

Well thanks for backing my words up Steve ,so why the need for this self made mountain by S/M being made bigger.

We need a cap and if people dont want 100' date=' well where do we draw the line 150 players at 1 club? 200?[/quote']

This again backs mine and Tebs words that whatever has been said was fruitless for anything against your proposal,you made your pre decision come what may.

This has been one of the best threads on forum for quite sometime ,its just a shame the outcome was already set and not open to proper discussion,the opening thread should have just stated S/M have decided in there wisdom for the good of the game we are capping Squad sizes,and we would like to LIASE with forum members the limit to set it at.

After all as shown that is the only real liaison open to us.

Large squads can potentially cripple clubs financially (ignore the Barcelona's' date=' Madrid's etc who have massive stadiums), and thus stop potential managers taking over[/quote']

Totally agree except has been mentioned by me and others,it depends on who is in your so called large Squad,

Lets be plain and truthfull if this is not a shut case as it so obviously seems.

We seem to agree that there are not a lot of managers out there with 100 plus Squads,but to get these sizes they must have had the finance to buy,I think you will find that the "Large Crippling Squad " what you say stops potential managers ,90% or more will be halve this size anyway with massive payed players,thats why you cant use this as an argument for just capping squad size.

The issue of player hogging can easily be addressed. That is a seperate issue and nothing to do with squad limits.

If so why does the S/M blog say ,

"Squad: SM Squad Sizes

Squad sizes are getting out of a hand. Some clubs have over 100 players in their squad, which is just hogging players, and plunging clubs into debt. "

This is the main reason the Blog gives by S/M ,now your saying because of the flak this capping has took on this thread its a seperate issue,

so now are we not to believe what the Blog says ,if so whats the need for it.

Ive noticed a new thread started by you titled " Club Debt/Player Hogging/OAP Squads"

Well seems all these have all been fetched up on here as the best way forward and why these steps should be taken first instead of a straight forward cap , i can only think its being taken away from here and classed as a "seperate issue" to try and take the heat away,but no need seems its a pretence that what we had to say would have made a difference from something that was going to be done from the off anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Ive noticed a new thread started by you titled " Club Debt/Player Hogging/OAP Squads"

Well seems all these have all been fetched up on here as the best way forward and why these steps should be taken first instead of a straight forward cap ' date=' i can only think its being taken away from here and classed as a "seperate issue" to try and take the heat away,but no need seems its a pretence that what we had to say would have made a difference from something that was going to be done from the off anyway.[/quote']Yes, thought the same myself... seems like SM are now just trying to separate the issues, and keep switching focus on 'why' squad caps would be good, to take the heat away as you said.

Stegore, you mentioned earlier that you had read all the posts on this thread. The reason I implied otherwise is that nobody from SM seems to have acknowledged half of the arguments against the idea, or tried to counter them, and instead the SM collective have repeated arguments rather than developing them or tossed out a new 'main reason' why it needs to be changed. This makes it look as though we are being ignored and/or as though it was long since decided - but that SM are now trying to publically justify a decision that has secretly already been made internally.

My apologies if I am doing you guys an injustice, but is just the way it appears to me and apparently Alan too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

As stated in my original post we need a cap on squads.

Originally Posted by johngore

The laison is happening on here and now. Nothing has been implemented and will take a few weeks to do so. A squad limit does need to be introduced however as managers could end up with, well basically an unlimited amount of players in their squad.

The liason is at what level as originally stated. We have not made this into a mountian we have simply stated that we need a upwards cap on squad level for many reasons.

Surely common sense can dictate that if limits are not introduced people can (and have as has been described on this thread) buy 260 players at £10k each thus effectively spoiling a club.

Believe it or not technical issues are a factor. A page with 150 players listed on it downloads more info, processes more queries and takes longer. We have asked for ideas what this amount should be and how best to implement. We originally suggested 100 players believing that this would be a fair and reasonable level, believing that this level would effect very few people. If we introduced this without any discussion then we may have had only a handful of emails about this, and not this huge debate on the forum.

I can already here you saying, well if it only effects a few managers why bother?

The simple answer is that the game is growing and this will become more of a common problem as more people play the game. We currently have 81,260 managed clubs, if this number grows to 200,000 over this next year then even at 0.5% of clubs having over 100 players then this will mean 1,000 managed clubs being viewed with huge squadlists.

The people who are most against this idea of a cap and who support a limitless squad size dont even have 100 players in their squad.

To my knowledge noone has come on this forum and said "Please dont add a cap as I have over 100 players."

People seem to be denouncing the 100 level mark and then saying I have 60 or 80 players? 100 players allows for a large senior squad of 25 players plus a huge pool of youth players, 75. If people can seriously not survive with a limit of 100 players then suggest another limit.

Limitless and computers do not mix well. We didnt introduce a limit originally, but with hindsight wish we had, as we believed club balances/budgets and common sense would prevail.

There are also other reasons for adding a limit like realism (yes clubs have there own youth system but very few players actually break through), minesweeping every new player added to the db etc.

What we wanted a discussion on is what would a reasonable limit be?

The seperate thread regarding club debt etc is a sepertae issue. Squad size can be a contributing factor to club debt but are clearly seperate issues. As a club can have just 18 players and still be plunging into debt, while a club could have 50 players and be making a profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Well said Raz!

I would refer to my previous post. Clubs do not usually have such huge squads in real life' date=' but they can, and in reality no club has a capped squad size. Yes, few SM managers have such huge squads, so why bother changing it, they are doing no harm. If thousands had it I would see the technical concern. I also think there are most definitely a 100+ young players who could be the next big thing, you only have to look at international u-21's, and you are spoiled for choice. As SM add more players this will become increasingly true. I also dont always buy players with a view to them becoming a superstar, but with a view to them making me money, and nothing wrong with that either.

If SM are now saying their concern is a financial one, and not that of 'hogging' then this has already been discussed too (my last post mentioned all the possible 'benefits' of a cap I could think of and why they are not valid) and I think the people who are normally crippled financially are the people who sign lots of high rated older players. I took on a team who were £25m in debt because of this. The people with large squads are those who plan for the future, and plan to play for a long long time, so debt is not usually a concern for them. Certainly hasn't been for me when having a large squad.

Bank balance should be the 'cap' on who people can buy same as it is for anyone else. If anything needs changing in this area, I think sale of players should be put into the 'chairman's' hands when a club falls below a balance of 'minus X' amount, meaning that a club risks losing its best players if not keeping its finances in good order. This would eliminate the problem you mentioned, and sort out the one I mentioned too; it is not realistic or playable that clubs could wrack up such huge debt unchecked.

This cap will do nothing positive for SM. So many drawbacks to it as I mentioned in my last post, and no benefits that cant be done better through another type of change.

Is this actually even open for discussion though Steve? Anyone taking note of the alternative suggestions people have made and the concerns raised (like in my last post)?[/quote']

Wats the point in putting a squad cap on, most of the 100 or watever number the players are onli worth 10k its not all the best players on the game so wats your problem its not like you would buy them.You would buy players that would improve your squad not make it worse !!!

Then what would be the point in scouting players if you have the limit already taken up!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

To add a little more realism we need to have a cap. 100 is more than enough!

In real life, why would any youngster join a club that has 100+ players on their books?!

It is a game about scouting, but you've got to target players rather than just casting a net out and hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

John from your latest post I get it that you and the tech team really want a cap introduced, and are just here to ask for opinions of the amount of people.

If I had to give my opinion if there HAD TO be a cap, I'd vote 120 players maximum, and could be spread out anywhere, so not like 60 squad and 60 youth, but 120 anywhere, so that all the youths could be kept alone. However I would hate this if it was added to the already made setups, as some people do have teams a little over that, maybe 10/20 over, but do not wish to sell the players for obvious reasons. After 4 seasons in charge of a team and thinking about the future you shouldn't be made to sell players if you want to buy more. But anyway, further arguments about this will only go back to point one and start with the same arguments all over again.

However I should also add, that despite my Barca having something like 140 players, I still am not in the minus after home games, due to the almost 4m I get through gate receipts, when the total wages of the 140 players is just 2.4m a week, which sums up to 17k a week on average each player, which is low for the best European club in the world, mainly because most of them are youngsters. So I think it should (somehow) be the lower division clubs who can have limited players, because the big ones can cope with this :)

NO FOR A CAP - AT LEAST DEFFO NO FOR A CAP ON ALREADY CREATED TEAMS!

I wish the SM team would read the suggestions below, because from your new post John, apparently NONE of the suggestions from Neller, Teb and Myself have been taken notice of... :eek::o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

I think squad limits will be ok as long as other things were intorduced to go with it.

I see what John means by the technical side and i belive i was spot on with it a few posts back and still belive thats an easy fix by limiting the database results coming out at a time, yes it means having a page 1,2 for looking at your squads but that could be the punishment for having a large squad, but it would fix the technical problems.

But i do now agree with Stegore, John, Perry and co that 100 is plenty and anything over is pretty unrealstic to be honest because most the youth are not the same players who people keep saying well clubs have U20's etc in real life because those aint even on the DB untill they get near the 1st team like the Arsenal youngsters.

But i also think if this was added then we definatly need more bids from the unmanaged clubs to sell of the players who we have scouted and who have had a rating increase and we want to move them on (if you belive its the right time of course) because at the moment its almost impossible as a team like grimsby to sell players as most are rated 75-85 as i dont ever buy OAP's.

because if you can never really sell any players how would you keep your squads down? yes you can exchange players but you lose out on loads of money plus if you wanted to make cash to stay out of debt at the minute you cant really.

I also think if it is being done for realism we need a few more things added what people have been asking for because in the end we are the ones playing the game, things like the minumum amount clause on a player in real life Rafa,Jose,Fergie dont have to answer 20 bids per day of 10-12 million for players like Gerrard, putting him on unavailable does nothing, even messagin the manager does nothing he just bids again as soon as you reject it. most times with the exact same offer. if i could put a min amount on gerrard of say 30mil then that would save me and the managers bidding from wasting our time and would also stop some idiots harrasing. people who think every player has a price, or dont like the idea or want to consider any bid inc exhanges then just done use the feature simple as that.

We also need the top stars who are not playing at clubs to get unhappy / not sign contracts and leave on a free etc. to happen as that is the most unrealistic thing atm.

the last 2 idea's are not really to do with squad limits but if squad limits are mainly due to realism then wanted to just show a few other things

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Squad Sizes

Wats the point in putting a squad cap on' date=' most of the 100 or watever number the players are onli worth 10k its not all the best players on the game so wats your problem its not like you would buy them.You would buy players that would improve your squad not make it worse !!!

Then what would be the point in scouting players if you have the limit already taken up!![/quote']

Read most the thread mate all that has already been covered :)

You can probably find all the answers to that in Johns last post

Share this post


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...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...