Too many players "want to move to a bigger club"

Ok, this is now getting ridiculous!

I'm in 2012 with Rosenborg BK: 4 back-to-back league titles (and the 5th on its way), 3rd pot seeding in Champions League Group Stage. We usually manage to qualify for the First Knockout Stage (that, or a Round of 16/Round of 8 in UEFA Cup when the CL group is too tough).

But despite a clearly improved position among European clubs, many of my players want to move on as soon as a semi-decent team shows interest in them.

I could understand that for already established players with a good International career (the likes of Jarstein, Lustig, Tettey, Skjelbred or Sapara)

I could even understand for second-tier yet established players who got offers from better leagues.

But now the thing is reaching the point it's a parody... My 19 years old striker is unhappy because he feels "he needs to move to a better club to further his career" after like TWENTY first team appearences in 3 seasons...

Or my 20 yo centreback who wants to leave and can choose between illustrious clubs such as Larisa, Volendam, Mouscron or Lecce!

And mind you, we're not speaking of Wonderkids or anything... just good 4/5* players.

I see Norwegian Tippeligaen isn't the most fancy league in the world, but at least I can guarantee 6/8/10 European Cups appearences per year, and an almost certain league win.

Why should a 19 years old homegrown talent want to move to a mid-table act in Netherlands? or to a good Bulgarian or Israeli team?

This makes little sense to me...

Is there a (non-cheating) way to avoid my players wanting out just as a foreign team is interested in them?

What do I have to achieve to be able to retain the services of good-ish players who won't have a future in one of the Big Four leagues anyway???

I'm afraid you're stuck with it mate. The league reputation is static - so you can't improve that (without FMRTE). There may also be a cap on your club rep, linked to your leagues rep - somebody more knowledgable than me will confirm that for you.

In the updates forum, Raware had scores of players leaving Rangers every year.

I see Norwegian Tippeligaen isn't the most fancy league in the world, but at least I can guarantee 6/8/10 European Cups appearences per year, and an almost certain league win.

Why should a 19 years old homegrown talent want to move to a mid-table act in Netherlands? or to a good Bulgarian or Israeli team?

This makes little sense to me...

Makes sense to me. Move to the Dutch Division and even if you aren't playing in the CL your wages ar ehigher, your reputation will increase, you're more likely to attract the attention of scouts etc etc.

As TheMister said, i had it happen to me frequently when i was at Rangers on my save. He's right in that league reputation is static. Despite me winning leagues and cups, after a season or two my players wanted a move to a bigger club. I had to rebuild my squad 3 times in four years! I'm afraid it goes on league reputation and to some extent that 's understandable as who wouldn't want to play in a bigger league with higher wages. But i understand where you're coming from, it's frustrating. The only thing i can suggest is either ride it out and hope you can bring some success to the club i.e. Champions League and hope they change their mind or get shot of them.

Any suggestion that improving the League's prestige based on European dominance and growth in revenue will be in FM10?

SI have usually said that league reputation will remain static.

That was the unique huge bug of FM09, even after 9.3.

That is realistic feature, but if applied at 800% of the intended way it sounds a pathetic and ridicolous bug.

In addition the board, despiting setting its influence to 1 via editor, it was used to sell a bunch of talents every single year, let's say mine the last year sold 6 talents without my approval and I have set its influence to 1.

If this is not a bug ( their actions even if set influence to 1 ) tell me what else it could be.

SI have usually said that league reputation will remain static.

That is a shame.

That is a shame.

IT can't be true, otherwise no one will ever buy a single copy of FM10.

This huge bug is present since decades, I can't really imagine it will be present again.

We must riot otherwise.

Have they confirmed that this is still not fixed in FM10? This must be one of the most requested features by everyone who doesnt play in one of the big leagues.

SI, come here please to clarify.

If you say it will be present the huge bug I think the forum could be closed tomorrow cause no one will never ever buy FM10.

thnaks

Really hope there are dynamic league reputations in FM10, especially with the new competition editor, it'd just make sense...

It's realistic that players want to leave as the Norwegian league isn't the strongest.

I don't remember anyone from SI ever saying that league reputations will always remain static. I would like to see them change in the future myself.

On the same topic, players "loyalty"-attribute does not seem to have any meaning whatsoever in the minor leagues. A player with loyalty 20 will still want to leave his favorite club for "a bigger club" as soon as possible.

Anotherthing I don't get is why players in newly relegated teams want to move to another team in the very same league. That really do not make any sense to me.

I tried Rosenburg years ago but didn't stick with it longer than a few games (from memory). In the English Blue Square leagues though I often get players who 'want to move to a bigger club'. Their bark always seems to be worse than their bite though, and after some persistance they usually seem to sign a new deal eventually (if I want them to). It may well be different in Norway, mind.

I think people are mistaking one clubs success with league success. Static league reputation makes sense, unless a number of teams start having major impact in Europe, finances improve etc. One club isn't good enough for a leagues reputation to increase.

This is what makes any LLMing rather pointless in any league except the big 3. I know I gave up on my last LLM save because of it. Just like the OP, I managed to reach beyond the group stage in CL repetedly, but since my team played in the swedish league I was plundered at every transfer window. A real shame, I liked that game, taking a div2 team (lowest swedish playable league) with amateur status to a factor in Europe.

When I found out I was screwed by a programed hardcap the save died kinda fast.

Really, this is something that has to change! League rep has to be dynamic. No drastic changes in a year or two, but over a period of 10 years things should change! Just compare Serie A now and during the 90's, the Dutch league now and during Ajax heydeys.

Static leage rep is silly!

It would be difficult to program and as Elithral said it would take more than one team doing well in europe to justify the increase of a leagues reputation.

Really, this is something that has to change! League rep has to be dynamic. No drastic changes in a year or two, but over a period of 10 years things should change! Just compare Serie A now and during the 90's, the Dutch league now and during Ajax heydeys.

The Dutch league was never that attractive, even when Ajax were at their best. Their success was built on home grown players and even though they were the ebst team in Europe, players would still rather sign for Valladolid than Feyenoord. Serie A was, and still is, the opposite, players will always want to play in Serie A, regardless of club success.

Perhaps the only realistic example is the Premier League and it's reputation increase, but it was regaining reputation, after the European ban, not acquiring it.

Static league reputation makes sense. Just ask Lyon, Porto, Monaco etc.

Difficult to program?

Xi = Reputation for club i

Y = League rep

Y = sum(Xi)/i

or perhaps something with weightings..

Y = sum(wi*Xi)/i

That is a way to simple equation for something as complex as "how a league is valued/rated" I know. But the thing is, its all math, and quite simple math too. It would be quite easy to use perhaps 10 or 20, even 100 variables in this. Variables could include anythings like trophies won, star players present, economy, you name it.

What is complex, or rather, subjective, is how you decide what factors contribute more/less. I suspect this is the reason SI has not implemented a dynamic league rep, not because the programing is hard. Just consider the match engine, now that is complicated programing.

Really, this is something that has to change! League rep has to be dynamic. No drastic changes in a year or two, but over a period of 10 years things should change! Just compare Serie A now and during the 90's, the Dutch league now and during Ajax heydeys.

Static leage rep is silly!

I couldn't agree more Fred.

There are subtle changes every now and then with every league in the world. Portuguese teams, every now and then, have a surge due to the natural talent which comes through their club ranks. Until the point comes when their players are bought by bigger teams their leagues are thrust in to the limelight and enjoy more success albeit for 2-3 seasons. If the game could reflect this it would be good.

I think leagues do change and as you said the Serie A is a good example. It's reputation was number one in the 90's without a shadow of a doubt yet now crowds are dropping and players are seeking options in Spain and England over Italy. Of course they still hold a fantastic level of quality but it isn't the same level as the 90's. The dutch league is endruing a terrible time right now yet we saw PSV, Ajax, Feyenoord and Vitesse enjoying the limelight which came with the success of Ajax. A league doesn't have to progress, it can get worse too, or it can be up and down which would be a good challenge to yourself to make the league stand out by keeping your team successful.

Another good example of leagyes changing would be the Russian Leagues. Talk about topsy turvy, they were nowhere not long ago now they are constantly competing for european trophies because of the amount of money floating about.

I think things like this would work well in the game, all we can do is suggest them and see if SI take it up...

Edit: I think the OP's example of scandanavian leagues is another example. I remember growing up watching Brondby and Rosenborg. I can't remember the last time I saw them! And if I do the teams from Scandanavia are terrible now!

That is a way to simple equation for something as complex as "how a league is valued/rated" I know. But the thing is, its all math, and quite simple math too. It would be quite easy to use perhaps 10 or 20, even 100 variables in this. Variables could include anythings like trophies won, star players present, economy, you name it.

I really think you are underestimating how difficult it would be to take these things into account. Also, trophies won is a club thing, not a league thing.

So far no-one has provided an example of a small club performing above expectation that has seriously affected the reputation of the elague it plays in and not just the clubs reputation. I've explained the Dutch and Serie A examples as club rep, not league rep.

Further examples to the contrary of your example are Porto, who won the CL and lost a whole host of players as a result. Lyon who have done well in the CL and continually lose players as a result. On both occasions the league reputation has barely improved, and as a result the players have moved on to bigger clubs and better leagues.

Can anyone give an example of a club doing well, it being the only club from that elague that does well and as a result the leagues reputation improving to a point where players, throughout the league, are happy to stay there, regardless of PA/CA?

Difficult to program?

Xi = Reputation for club i

Y = League rep

Y = sum(Xi)/i

or perhaps something with weightings..

Y = sum(wi*Xi)/i

That is a way to simple equation for something as complex as "how a league is valued/rated" I know. But the thing is, its all math, and quite simple math too. It would be quite easy to use perhaps 10 or 20, even 100 variables in this. Variables could include anythings like trophies won, star players present, economy, you name it.

What is complex, or rather, subjective, is how you decide what factors contribute more/less. I suspect this is the reason SI has not implemented a dynamic league rep, not because the programing is hard. Just consider the match engine, now that is complicated programing.

It sounds simple but it would bring problems if suddenly leagues started improving too fast. Are there any leagues in the world that have improved based on the results of one team in europe? Seems like everybody is ignoring that simple question.

I'd be pleased if players who sign as back up would accept that's what they are, before moaning to the press after a few months, or at most a season-especially back up goalkeepers.

I think its fair to say that a leagues rep should not be static, but it cant be determined on only one clubs success. I can give a few examples of a few leagues who have had a change in reputation over the years. First off, Scottish football, in the early 90's Rangers had several players from the England squad including their captain, do you think this is possible now? not a chance....This isnt just to do with the demise of Scottish football, but also the increased reputation of english football. That wasnt just on the efforts of Man Utd but a few clubs being successful in europe.

There's plenty more around the world and I think its definately something that should be addressed but not just off the results of one team...Maybe it could be linked to a nations co-efficient for continental competitions

It is vital for long term gaming, imo. I'm curious as to what pull do all these minor leagues have if they're only really useful for the first season or so?

I mean, the fact your success won't be acknowledged...

We can assert something about it isn't realistic in some sense but me playing up until 2030s isn't either.

I can understand it but I don't, personally, agree with static rep. Surely the big leagues now must have had to build themselves up, on the back of certain clubs managing to gain notoriety? Just seems iffy ground when long term games need to remain a challenge and reward for success. National interest would grow also.

It sounds simple but it would bring problems if suddenly leagues started improving too fast. Are there any leagues in the world that have improved based on the results of one team in europe? Seems like everybody is ignoring that simple question.

I don't think anyone wants, say, Russian league to hit worldwide rep in a few seasons, but if success is sustained across over a few decades, then surely investment in the Russian game would grow to help build the reputation of a growingly successful country.

In reality, it would probably take a lot longer, but I don't think it is unreasonable to give it a bit of a boost in FM games. I can't imagine dynamic rep affecting anyone that only plays for a couple of seasons, but for those that regularly reach the 2030s and beyond, could be beneficial.

I think its fair to say that a leagues rep should not be static, but it cant be determined on only one clubs success. I can give a few examples of a few leagues who have had a change in reputation over the years. First off, Scottish football, in the early 90's Rangers had several players from the England squad including their captain, do you think this is possible now? not a chance....This isnt just to do with the demise of Scottish football, but also the increased reputation of english football. That wasnt just on the efforts of Man Utd but a few clubs being successful in europe.

There's plenty more around the world and I think its definately something that should be addressed but not just off the results of one team...Maybe it could be linked to a nations co-efficient for continental competitions

I totally disagree. Rangers were playing in the latter stages of the European Cup, that's why the players signed for them, no other team in Scotland was half desireable. Once again, this is a club example, not a league example.

England , on the other hand, had been banned from Europe for a number of seasons. These are third party factors that affect league reputation, not club ability.

Static reputation is a must.

I totally disagree. Rangers were playing in the latter stages of the European Cup, that's why the players signed for them, no other team in Scotland was half desireable. Once again, this is a club example, not a league example.

England , on the other hand, had been banned from Europe for a number of seasons. These are third party factors that affect league reputation, not club ability.

Static reputation is a must.

So your telling me English Football hasnt had in increased reputation in the last decade or so? Thats utter nonsense, its gone from one of europes main leagues to tquite possibly the best in the world....As for Rangers, when we signed some of Englands best players it was done before any remote "success" in europe we werent playing at a decent level in europe til the 92-93 season

MLS has grown in reputation also, not a lot but it certainly had it.

All leagues experience growth or loss in reputation. The real world isn't static. So I don't see how it is a 'must'.

MLS has grown in reputation also, not a lot but it certainly had it.

All leagues experience growth or loss in reputation. The real world isn't static. So I don't see how it is a 'must'.

Great example. They had stars there such as Pele ages ago, then it faded outto nothing, now it is back again.

Ranbir your totally right, another example is the UAE league(not exaclty the best league in the world) they have only recently gone fully profesional and now they have managed to attract a better standard of players, one club has just signed Ricardo Oliviera the former AC Milan striker. Yes that probably has a lot to do with money(and lots of it) but you cant tell me a nations top league isnt gonna go profesional and not have an increased rep. Of course im not talking a huge increase, but it should move the rep up a couple of points for example from 2 to 4

Maybe it could be linked to a nations co-efficient for continental competitions

Sure. In many ways that co-efficient does represent quality (but in many ways NOT! ). Fifa (I think) publishes a league ranking each year. This is not a static ranking. For example, the Swedish Premier league has dropped considerably the past few years mainly because of poor preformance in continental cups. As a direct result the league itself is now less desireable for both prospects and foreign players.

I could do the comparison, slightly skewed I know, between the ukrainian league and say Bundesliga. For west european players a team like Shaktar Donetsk might not be a dream, Im sure most would go for a Bundesliga team instead if given the chance. Brazilian players however doesnt seem to think like that. It is well known that the money payed in "east european" football is quite good, better than most midsized teams here in the western parts and the possbility of continental cup play is equaly good. Given the recent results in the EURO Cup, one could argue the chance of success might even be higher to the east.

But yes, I agree with the notion that league rep should not change rapidly. Nor should individual team preformance have a major inpact. But I fail to se how a game that prouds itself with not only realism but the goal to perfectly replicate real life football, can overlook such a fundamental thing as the ups and downs of the football world.

Life isnt static - why should FM be?

I think personally a combination of continental performance (of qualified teams) as modified by national rankings, and continental qualifiers in World Club Cup (so as not to have New Zeland league e.g. having a reputaiton as high as Italy, well without some serious newgens coming through for 20 years) should be used as base for dynamic league reps. It should be codeable, but maybe not very soon, otherwise club reps wouldn't be codeable either.

Dynamic reps would improve the game as sone countries and leagues do show dramatic improvements, I remember for qualifying for Euro 92 Ireland pasted Turkey home and away, as Turkish football was in the doldrums, it wouldn't happen now mainly due to dramatic improvements within the domestic leagues.

So your telling me English Football hasnt had in increased reputation in the last decade or so? Thats utter nonsense, its gone from one of europes main leagues to tquite possibly the best in the world....As for Rangers, when we signed some of Englands best players it was done before any remote "success" in europe we werent playing at a decent level in europe til the 92-93 season

a) The English league's rep was already high, it improved significantly financially, which is one of the pre-requisates previously stated.

b) The English league enjoued half decent European campaigns from a number of clubs, not just one. Another pre-requisate previously stated.

The English league did not suddenly gain reputation because one club did well in Europe. If anything you've only highlighted the facts previously stated. A league cannot gain rep without a number of teams gaining rep or significant financial improvement (which takes care of the MLS argument btw)

All FM examples are based on small leagues with only one team performing wonders. I completely agree with Elrithral and AcidBurn, everyone else has issed the point.

Can anyone give me an example of a league that has gained rep irl, with only one team improving, the rest of the league mintaining their standard and no financial improvement to the league system?

The answer is no.

I should clarify/simplify.

In order to emulate FM a relevant example must include.

A league in which only one team made significant strides.

A league in which all other teams didn't improve.

A league that did not improve financially, as a whole i.e. every single team.

Examples?

I agree the reason that England improved its rep was because of getting more and more money which in turn meant English clubs could then start to compete with European giants for foreign superstars. This resulted in the improvement of rep, not teams do well in europe.

Any team that does well in europe that is not in the top european leagues will have most of their stars bought. Raising the leagues rep beased on the success of one team is not realistic, Porto and the Portugese league did not suddenly start buying world class players after winning the champions league.

It would be nice if it wasn't completely static though. Who knows how big the North American and Asian leagues could become in the future.

It would be nice if it wasn't completely static though. Who knows how big the North American and Asian leagues could become in the future.

People mostly move to these leagues for money, the worldwide interest in these leagues in my opinion will never be high enough to result in a big rise in rep that will in turn help attract the best players in the world. When the USA league attracted the worlds biggest names it was all about a pay day at the end of their career.

Still no SI official answers here, worrying.....

a) The English league's rep was already high, it improved significantly financially, which is one of the pre-requisates previously stated.

b) The English league enjoued half decent European campaigns from a number of clubs, not just one. Another pre-requisate previously stated.

The English league did not suddenly gain reputation because one club did well in Europe. If anything you've only highlighted the facts previously stated. A league cannot gain rep without a number of teams gaining rep or significant financial improvement (which takes care of the MLS argument btw)

All FM examples are based on small leagues with only one team performing wonders. I completely agree with Elrithral and AcidBurn, everyone else has issed the point.

Can anyone give me an example of a league that has gained rep irl, with only one team improving, the rest of the league mintaining their standard and no financial improvement to the league system?

The answer is no.

Basically I agree with this. However I'd like to see a dynamic league rep where the increases are based on a number of clubs overperforming. For example if Scotland had 3 representitives in Europe past Christmas on a regular basis then this would warrant an increase. If one or both of the Old Firm are there (or not, as the case may be) then all that has happened is maintenece of the Status Quo. If thats the case then the increase in league rep isnt justified IMO.

Celtic, no doubt. If a number of clubs begin to perform or a number of clubs become wealthy enough to compete then league rep should improve and in that instance static rep is bs!

E.g. I manage Gerss, Celtic, Hearts and Hibs and I take the two Glasgow clubs to the CL final and the two Embra clubs to the Uefa final, of course league rep should improve.

However, team improvements anything close to that scale are few and far between.

As well as coding reputations to get higher, they would also have to be able to go lower. It's not exactly an easy thing to calculate...there's many many variables to take in to account and that's why this feature hasn't been added sooner. I bet you it's one of those long-term features Miles was talking about in his blog

Anyway just because one team suddenly becomes successful in an obscure league doesn't mean the entire leagues reputation will shoot through the roof. It's all complicated and I wouldn't have a clue where to start if I wanted to come up with a solution so I won't even bother trying

Is there not a way to set the reputation of for example certain clubs in Denmark for Danish players higher?

eg the player sees Denmark higher than someone from abroad would...

Nomis07, Elrithral and AcidBurn:

Maybe I misunderstand you, but it seems like you would dislike the fact that things can change..? FM is quite a dynamic game as it is. Players develop, some good other bad. Teams cycle through lineups, sometimes successful sometimes not. We already have glory days and decline in so many aspects, why not add upon that? Hell, even your Player manager evolve, not only in terms of CA. Dynamic league rep is just another way to improve the possibilities, broaden the game. Sure, it should be slow. Very slow. But just read some of the long term save reports that are floating around the forums. They are a brilliant reading, most often depicting the epic rise and fall of clubs. Who hasnt asked himself the question; where would "my" team be in 20 years, 40? Has Man U been relegated and spent the last few seasons in the Championship? Did Barcelona finally overtake Real in league wins? Have your local club advanced to the premier division? Why not have something similar for leagues. Dynamic is natural. Dynamics make things interesting. Last but not least, a game would not be a game if it wasnt for... thats right, dynamics.

Edit:

Celtic, no doubt. If a number of clubs begin to perform or a number of clubs become wealthy enough to compete then league rep should improve and in that instance static rep is bs!

E.g. I manage Gerss, Celtic, Hearts and Hibs and I take the two Glasgow clubs to the CL final and the two Embra clubs to the Uefa final, of course league rep should improve.

However, team improvements anything close to that scale are few and far between.

Couldnt agree more! Thats what I was envisioning

Dynamics seems to be you word of the day lol. I think if league reps were to change it should be extremely slow and not based on the success of one team from that country. Shakhtar and Kiev were in the UEFA Cup final but that does not mean that their league will rise in rep, if over the next 10 years they both start to compete with the highest european clubs then it will rise but only a little bit. The process of leagues rising would have to implemented to take course over 10-15 years and that would be with sustained success in europe from the leagues teams.

No-one is suggesting that league reputations rocket(or plummet) in the short term. But to keep everything locked damages the long-term game.* Leagues get an increase in reputation. That reputation is indicative of increased viewer ship and financial investment. Neither of which change, which again further damages the long term prospects of building a club from a "lesser" league.

*We're talking games that reach the 2030s and beyond, here.

German league has declined drastically from late 90s. Bayern used to be the team to beat in Champions League, Dortmund were a top side, and Leverkussen as well.

Now? Bayern have some decent players, but will never win the CL, and everyone else is no better than a Uefa cup side.

Right, we've seen the change of football in the past 30 years. How strange it is that in FM the status quo is kept.

I understand the challenges in making it work in coding it but it would be distressing to discover it isn't or won't be on the agenda for future FM releases.

Given that none of us actually code the game we've got no idea how difficult it is to implement. If SI don't want to implement dynamic league reputations because they don't think it's realistic, that's a different kettle of fish to not implementing it because of the demand on resources to make it work correctly.

Has anyone used an editor to improve the league rep significantly to see what impact it has on the game over a number of seasons?

I think that something needs to be done more on club reputation. As CP managed Benfica and won how many euro cups CP? If in real life a team like Benfica won 6 champions leagues in a row players would be more willing to join that club. I think there should be a point when club rep over rules league rep.