How do you go about strengthening a league?

I thought I'd manage Hearts and turn them into a 3rd force to improve the SPL. After 12 years and 2 CL wins, and current Champions, I left them as the richest club (by far) in the world and with a 52,000 seater stadium. All players where on 5 year contracts.

June of 2020 I decide to take over at Rangers but within 6 or 7 weeks Hearts have sold virtually every star player. It's not as if they needed the money.

Basicly League reputations cant improve... so no matter what a player or players do in the SPL the league will always be seen as inferior to the EPL, Spain, italy etc...

A player who takes the old firm or any scottish team for that matter on to win countless CL titles, and routinely pumps the Man Utd's and Barcelonas of the world will still suffer from being a "lowly" spl team and will not be able to sign the best players as a result.

Basicly all thats needed is dynamic league reputations, so for example... if a Scottish, Belgian, Romanian etc... team won something in Europe then their domestic league should get a raise in repuation.

SI havent put this in the game despite many years of requests for it to be done.

TO be fair though, they cite the many issues it would raise... such as league prize money and tv deals etc... or something.

EDIT: and with regards to why Hearts sold all their guys once you left...

Probably whoever took over wasnt as determined as a Human player to keep the players at the club... so when they took over the AI will have accepted the various offers it got for them.

I know what your saying. Even after CL wins my rep only went to Continental for a few weeks then reverted to National.

As for the players, I suppose their rep probably meant they wanted a club of similar stature. They all ended up at Man U, Arsenal, Real and Athletico, Barcelona etc.

I think over a long period of time that leagues reps should be able to change. England currently have a good rep in world football but a few years ago it was Spain. A few years before the Italians where top dogs. I'm not talking about big movements in rep just a gradual increase/decrease over several seasons.

I can't see it being that hard to implement, as everything relating to the league (tv income, prize money) would surely just increase as the reputation does. It seems quite simple to me, although the question is, does one team winning a few european competitions increase a league's stature significantly? I bet all the other teams in the spl are still rubbish on your game aren't they, and i bet they still play to crowds under 15000 regularly

I agree that the excuses for not having dynamic reputation are pretty poor. Have SI never heard of UEFA league coefficients? Don't they indicate the impact of continental performance on league reputation? Certainly UEFA does, because it assigns slots accordingly.

If a league produced a club or a couple of clubs that started doing extremely well in continental play over several years, it would surely make a big impact for that league. It would attract players with higher reputations to those clubs, which would in turn boost the reputation and quality of play in the league. If suddenly a club like Hearts was the best in the world, wouldn't it boost the ability of other clubs in the league to attract players who wanted a chance to play against the best? Isn't this something about real football that the game is lacking?

No excuses at all, I agree with you folks. That's *the* major issue with FM series.

You want to make a career and even though you can afford big salaries, prize money and glory (Champions League) your club is still treated like a fish out of the pond when the major clubs come charging for your talent. Not to mention the coaches that won't work for you.

I find this utterly ridiculous, tbh.

Completely agree with everything that's been said; it would be a huge improvement to the longevity and variety of the game if it were introduced.

Totally Agree. Best solution I founded till now, is using an In-game live editor to edit myself the league reputation. But I feel like I'm cheating, even though what I do is fair enough.

I would like to see league reputations being able to change to a small extent due to the progress of its UEFA coefficient

I've been the manager of Aberdeen for a number of years (it's now 2015), I've won the CL once and the UEFA Cup once - not to mention numerous titles and trophies.

My manager's reputation is World Class, and the vast majority of my players are enjoying playing for the club. I've had approaches from 'big' clubs for almost my entire first team squad - most of which I've rejected without the player whinging.

As an experiment, I left the club for Barcelona after they punted their manager. Almost immediately, the bulk of players in Aberdeen's squad became unhappy or, at best, content to stay. Shortly afterwards there was a huge exodus. I would imagine, therefore, that's why the players left Hearts in the OPs game. A bit ridiculous to be honest, as by that point the club's reputation (and the league's) should have been elevated enough to prevent it.

Please include this in the next version!

Well I think its fine the way it is. For example Shaktar Donetsk won the UEFA cup last year, but i guess there aren't a lot of player that want to play in Ukraine now. I dont even think if Shaktar won the CL 2 times in a row a lot of players would go there. So i guess only club reputation should improve, but not leaugue reputation, as it now is in the game.

Well I think its fine the way it is. For example Shaktar Donetsk won the UEFA cup last year, but i guess there aren't a lot of player that want to play in Ukraine now. I dont even think if Shaktar won the CL 2 times in a row a lot of players would go there. So i guess only club reputation should improve, but not leaugue reputation, as it now is in the game.

I don't think players consider league reputation. AFAIK league reputation is used to keep the club reputations below a certain level. After winning a CL (or indeed any competition), your club reputation will rise. If it goes above a certain figure, then it will be reset at the end of the season to that figure.

This is something SI needs to fix soon. For me this applies to Sweden. I want to the Swedish league rep to be able to be improved if me and/or another bunch of Swedish teams start posting good results in Europe over a longer period of time. It would only me realistic for the Swedish league rep in that situation to be improved dynamicly.

The same goes with TV-licenses, it should be like the sponsorship side works. If the league i'm playing in has a ****** tv-deal but over a longer period of time we improve our teams and start getting better results irl that would result in a better tv-deal when the current contract would end.

Hopefully they've thought of this and are planning on implementing it in FM11 (if not in FM10). I don't understand why you wouldn't make stuff like this dynamic.

Real life league reps do not change quickly, so why should they in the game? Sure, if 4-5 teams in Scotland, Romania or Finland were *regularly* competing for honours then their league rep may go up a bit, but honestly, what top pro is going to want to move to Scotland or Finland just because one single team has acheived something great?

If Rangers had won the CL 3 times in a row, can you honestly see C Ronaldo or Messi or Eto'o even thinking about it? Perhaps when they're over the hill and want one last hurrah, but Scotland, Finland, and - heck - even France will struggle to pry the top stars away. And even if they land a gem early, they will always want to move away.

I'm not saying league reps CAN'T increase over time, just that it takes MANY years with MANY teams CONSISTENTLY performing well.

Well I think its fine the way it is. For example Shaktar Donetsk won the UEFA cup last year, but i guess there aren't a lot of player that want to play in Ukraine now. I dont even think if Shaktar won the CL 2 times in a row a lot of players would go there. So i guess only club reputation should improve, but not leaugue reputation, as it now is in the game.

Years ago, Dutch players wanted to play in Belgium because the league was better. Nowadays, Belgian people want to play in Holland because the league is better. So it's nonsense that league reputation never changes.

Real life league reps do not change quickly, so why should they in the game? Sure, if 4-5 teams in Scotland, Romania or Finland were *regularly* competing for honours then their league rep may go up a bit, but honestly, what top pro is going to want to move to Scotland or Finland just because one single team has acheived something great?

If Rangers had won the CL 3 times in a row, can you honestly see C Ronaldo or Messi or Eto'o even thinking about it? Perhaps when they're over the hill and want one last hurrah, but Scotland, Finland, and - heck - even France will struggle to pry the top stars away. And even if they land a gem early, they will always want to move away.

I'm not saying league reps CAN'T increase over time, just that it takes MANY years with MANY teams CONSISTENTLY performing well.

You are right, but any team which has won the CL three times in a row will be a very attractive employer and usually be able to keep the players they have and be able to sign good new ones.

They will certainly not start a selling spree without any economic urge.

League reputations should be able to change but only slightly and only slowly.

Irl the Bundesliga is right on the verge of overtaking Serie A again by looking at the international transfers this summer. Probably either this year or next it will also manifest in the UEFA ranking. Reputations do change, but I agree that Ajax' CL win did not make the Dutch league THE place to go back in 95, nor should it in FM.

However the transfer AI maybe takes league reputation into account a bit too much. If a club has lots of money it should not accept offers for any player unless they are pressing the club to leave and create a bad ambience there. But even then no club would sell more than two first-teamers. Then, on the other hand, people will start crying again that it's too hard to sign players, so it's a balance thing. What happened to the OP's ex-club should however seem obviously wrong to anyone.

Can't be bothered to read everyone's post, so apologies if it's already been said. League reps can be changed via FMRTE which you can find over in the editor part of this forum.

If you were a good player, and you faced a similar offer from two clubs, one being a mid-table English or Spanish team, the other being a powerhouse in Ukraine, Russia, Holland, Turkey or whatever that consistently is up there in CL fighting for a title or a honorable place, what would you prefer?

For me, the answer is simple.

Of course we're not talking about players and coaches who would battle for a starting 11 position or rotation in Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man Utd or Inter Milan.

We're talking about the middle of the pack, and our lack of ability to retain players even though we can afford them that would prefer going to some low-tier team in a higher reputation league or stay out of the bench for a major team.

Usually, IRL, players who can start at a very good level are not stupid enough to earn a contract from a powerhouse to be the 3rd option and keep away from competitive football for a full year. At least I'd think that way.

A little anedocte:

Comes a kid to his grandson and asks: So, grandpa, you did play for that wonderful X team that earned 5 CLs and 8 Leagues?

- Yes, I did.

- Wow, that's so cooool. When you came back 2-0 to earn your first title against Madrid, how did it feel?

- It was great son...

- What about marking Cristiano Ronaldo?

- Well, actually your grandpa was not IN the field at the final.

- Oh, that's ok. Plenty of options I suppose. But how was it to witness the glory from the field level at the bench? Did you run through the field celebrating when the referee finished the game?

- Humm, your grandpa was at the stands, at the club's booth. It was very energetic, I can say that.

- That's all right. But tell me, grandpa, what's your fondest memory of CL?

- Ah, it was in a match against Jeunesse Esch.

- Jeunesse who?

- It's a team from Luxembourg. Pretty good side.

- What stage was that?

- Preliminary stage, son. This was our first CL.

- Nice! Did you score a goal?

- No, actually the starting player at the DM slot got injured and I was able to play for 10 minutes in CL. And afterwards I sold Jeunesse's jersey that I traded with their captain online for a good price!

Curtains closed.

Well I think its fine the way it is. For example Shaktar Donetsk won the UEFA cup last year, but i guess there aren't a lot of player that want to play in Ukraine now. I dont even think if Shaktar won the CL 2 times in a row a lot of players would go there. So i guess only club reputation should improve, but not leaugue reputation, as it now is in the game.

One problem is that club rep is not allowed above a certain level. For example Hearts from my OP where never allowed above National rep (the few weeks between the final and the end of the season apart). No matter how many times I won the CL that clubs rep would remain national. Therefore just leaving it to the clubs reputation to change does not work either. Clearly if Hearts won a few Champions Leagues their reputation would far exceed the borders of Scotland.

League reps do change IRL. As I said England may be top dogs now but one of the other big countries will take over at some point in the future (as England did from Spain). I think the SPL's rep is 13 in the game. Perhaps giving the rep the ability to change by a couple of points over time would be handy (Scotland could then fluctuate between 11 and 15). The tops nations could fluctuate between 16 and 20 for example. Just an idea.

Can't be bothered to read everyone's post, so apologies if it's already been said. League reps can be changed via FMRTE which you can find over in the editor part of this forum.

I've loaded my game using FMRTE. I put SPL into the search bar but nothing shows. How do I use this editor to edit a league rep?

I can't seem to find the leagues?

Coop,

I follow your thoughts.

Wasn't Ajax way beyond Holland League's reputation in the 70's and even 80's?

In terms of Leagues...Italy was the dominant League in the 80's and through part of the 90's, then became Spain. English league, btw, was almost unnoticed outside of GB through the late 80's ban on UEFA competitions.

We talk about the French league, but it did climb its reputation also, and Lyon has been a high profile team through the last years, until starting to decline recently.

Even the example between Belgian and Dutch leagues...I remember hearing about Anderlecht a lot during the 80's, and nowadays the Dutch clubs have a higher profile.

It is fair to say that Shaktar, CSKA/Spartak, even Fenerbahce have been able to attract talent that otherwise would be playing in higher reputation leagues in mid-teams or as backups.

Even the German league example, by measuring its level of money for transfers, is another piece of evidence. Just recently Bundesliga was the top league with less money to offer.

It is clear to me that there are upcoming leagues, that if won't threaten the status quo of the top European powers, at least will make the game more interesting and spread irl.

Hopefully the same would happen with the clubs. Back to GB, I'd prefer to be a Celtic/Rangers starter than say, play for Wigan (with all due respect). Quite possibly, I'd rather be a star at the 3rd best team in Scotland than be one more fighting relegation in the Premiership - especially if the money conditions wouldn't be so different.

Cheers,

Tele

The whole league rep thing could be done in parameters so leagues can only ever go to or below certain levels. This allows the game to keep some form of "balance" and so we don't get to the point where say all the english leagues are rep 1 and for example estonias league is the best in the world.

But either way they need to make it so league reps can change overtime if a countries league is going through a prolonged period of sucess. But its not something that should change based on 1/2 years of a team winning the european cup.

If you were a good player, and you faced a similar offer from two clubs, one being a mid-table English or Spanish team, the other being a powerhouse in Ukraine, Russia, Holland, Turkey or whatever that consistently is up there in CL fighting for a title or a honorable place, what would you prefer?

For me, the answer is simple.

Of course we're not talking about players and coaches who would battle for a starting 11 position or rotation in Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man Utd or Inter Milan.

We're talking about the middle of the pack, and our lack of ability to retain players even though we can afford them that would prefer going to some low-tier team in a higher reputation league or stay out of the bench for a major team.

Usually, IRL, players who can start at a very good level are not stupid enough to earn a contract from a powerhouse to be the 3rd option and keep away from competitive football for a full year. At least I'd think that way.

A little anedocte:

Comes a kid to his grandson and asks: So, grandpa, you did play for that wonderful X team that earned 5 CLs and 8 Leagues?

- Yes, I did.

- Wow, that's so cooool. When you came back 2-0 to earn your first title against Madrid, how did it feel?

- It was great son...

- What about marking Cristiano Ronaldo?

- Well, actually your grandpa was not IN the field at the final.

- Oh, that's ok. Plenty of options I suppose. But how was it to witness the glory from the field level at the bench? Did you run through the field celebrating when the referee finished the game?

- Humm, your grandpa was at the stands, at the club's booth. It was very energetic, I can say that.

- That's all right. But tell me, grandpa, what's your fondest memory of CL?

- Ah, it was in a match against Jeunesse Esch.

- Jeunesse who?

- It's a team from Luxembourg. Pretty good side.

- What stage was that?

- Preliminary stage, son. This was our first CL.

- Nice! Did you score a goal?

- No, actually the starting player at the DM slot got injured and I was able to play for 10 minutes in CL. And afterwards I sold Jeunesse's jersey that I traded with their captain online for a good price!

Curtains closed.

I honestly don't understand what you are trying to say. :confused:

Should a player choose a multiple CL winning side from Scotland or West Ham in your opinion? Do they do what you think they should irl in your opinion?

I don't think we should be talking a couple of years for these timescales - it takes a decade or so to move a league's standing in real life to something substantial (Holland, Belgium - and now possibly Italy and Germany).

In real life a Ukrainian team wouldn't win the Champions League 10 times in a row right now, so we'll never know how to really model it. However, a Ukrainian team winning the Champions League 10 times in a row will inevitably raise the standard of football in the Ukraine (all the money flowing round) and therefore its reputation.

League reputation should be one of the last things on a player's mind when he makes a move - the key things they will look for is the team's prestige and how much they will pay him. Then he'd choose between playing against nobodies against playing with good players (and oddly enough, this is not clear cut depending on age - old folks will be happy to settle for playing against nobodies). Nor should it cap a team's reputation in any way - Celtic and Rangers are way above the Scottish average, for example.

As an example, I would consider Serie A's reputation to be:

2004: 19

2005: 19

2006: 19

2007: 18 (Calciopoli)

2008: 18

2009: 17

2010: 17

So that's a move of -2 in 7 years - the sort of movement we'd like to see, I think.

I don't think we should be talking a couple of years for these timescales - it takes a decade or so to move a league's standing in real life to something substantial (Holland, Belgium - and now possibly Italy and Germany).

In real life a Ukrainian team wouldn't win the Champions League 10 times in a row right now, so we'll never know how to really model it. However, a Ukrainian team winning the Champions League 10 times in a row will inevitably raise the standard of football in the Ukraine (all the money flowing round) and therefore its reputation.

League reputation should be one of the last things on a player's mind when he makes a move - the key things they will look for is the team's prestige and how much they will pay him. Then he'd choose between playing against nobodies against playing with good players (and oddly enough, this is not clear cut depending on age - old folks will be happy to settle for playing against nobodies). Nor should it cap a team's reputation in any way - Celtic and Rangers are way above the Scottish average, for example.

As an example, I would consider Serie A's reputation to be:

2004: 19

2005: 19

2006: 19

2007: 18 (Calciopoli)

2008: 18

2009: 17

2010: 17

So that's a move of -2 in 7 years - the sort of movement we'd like to see, I think.

Yup, I totally agree with this

I don't think we should be talking a couple of years for these timescales - it takes a decade or so to move a league's standing in real life to something substantial (Holland, Belgium - and now possibly Italy and Germany).

In real life a Ukrainian team wouldn't win the Champions League 10 times in a row right now, so we'll never know how to really model it. However, a Ukrainian team winning the Champions League 10 times in a row will inevitably raise the standard of football in the Ukraine (all the money flowing round) and therefore its reputation.

League reputation should be one of the last things on a player's mind when he makes a move - the key things they will look for is the team's prestige and how much they will pay him. Then he'd choose between playing against nobodies against playing with good players (and oddly enough, this is not clear cut depending on age - old folks will be happy to settle for playing against nobodies). Nor should it cap a team's reputation in any way - Celtic and Rangers are way above the Scottish average, for example.

As an example, I would consider Serie A's reputation to be:

2004: 19

2005: 19

2006: 19

2007: 18 (Calciopoli)

2008: 18

2009: 17

2010: 17

So that's a move of -2 in 7 years - the sort of movement we'd like to see, I think.

I would say that sounds about right.

My manager's reputation is World Class .... I left the club for Barcelona after they punted their manager. Almost immediately, the bulk of players in Aberdeen's squad became unhappy or, at best, content to stay. Shortly afterwards there was a huge exodus. I would imagine, therefore, that's why the players left Hearts in the OPs game. A bit ridiculous to be honest, as by that point the club's reputation (and the league's) should have been elevated enough to prevent it.

League reputation limits Club reputation, which is a disappointing aspect of any long-term game in a developed, attractive country like France.

From my own experience managing Lyon having taken the job in 2015, we started with a National reputation (around 7400) because Lyon had faltered over the years. Winning the Ligue 1 got us to 7800. This rose to Continental (8200) after i'd won the European Champions Cup twice in 3 seasons as well as the World Club Championship.

On season update day, the European success was forgotten (along with my favoured personnel status!) and we lost 800 points and slipped back down to National again. This just repeated itself every season. It rose to Continental after some success and dropped down again next season to National.

Players wanted to leave, quality players didn't want to come. This was France.

If you were a good player, and you faced a similar offer from two clubs, one being a mid-table English or Spanish team, the other being a powerhouse in Ukraine, Russia, Holland, Turkey or whatever that consistently is up there in CL fighting for a title or a honorable place, what would you prefer?

For me, the answer is simple.

Of course we're not talking about players and coaches who would battle for a starting 11 position or rotation in Real Madrid, Barcelona, Man Utd or Inter Milan.

We're talking about the middle of the pack, and our lack of ability to retain players even though we can afford them that would prefer going to some low-tier team in a higher reputation league or stay out of the bench for a major team.

Usually, IRL, players who can start at a very good level are not stupid enough to earn a contract from a powerhouse to be the 3rd option and keep away from competitive football for a full year. At least I'd think that way.

A little anedocte:

Comes a kid to his grandson and asks: So, grandpa, you did play for that wonderful X team that earned 5 CLs and 8 Leagues?

- Yes, I did.

- Wow, that's so cooool. When you came back 2-0 to earn your first title against Madrid, how did it feel?

- It was great son...

- What about marking Cristiano Ronaldo?

- Well, actually your grandpa was not IN the field at the final.

- Oh, that's ok. Plenty of options I suppose. But how was it to witness the glory from the field level at the bench? Did you run through the field celebrating when the referee finished the game?

- Humm, your grandpa was at the stands, at the club's booth. It was very energetic, I can say that.

- That's all right. But tell me, grandpa, what's your fondest memory of CL?

- Ah, it was in a match against Jeunesse Esch.

- Jeunesse who?

- It's a team from Luxembourg. Pretty good side.

- What stage was that?

- Preliminary stage, son. This was our first CL.

- Nice! Did you score a goal?

- No, actually the starting player at the DM slot got injured and I was able to play for 10 minutes in CL. And afterwards I sold Jeunesse's jersey that I traded with their captain online for a good price!

Curtains closed.

Your point in unclear, but if you are suggesting a decent player would pick Zenit St Petersburg over Tottenham or Aston Villa or even Everton, you must be mad.