Why are the Big Clubs Always Superior?

Over the years of fm i have played with smaller clubs like qpr, leeds and now notts co and no matter what team i have with them, the big clubs like man utd, chelsea, liverpool and arsenal to fm seem to have a superior team.

like i have just played chelsea, as manager of notts co and the guy the before the game says that chelsea have the superior team in quality and after the game in the report notts co lost to a superior chelsea side. but when i look at the line ups notts co have a far superior team, just look

notts co

gk

stekelenburg

d

rafael

gerson

subotic

johnny evans

m

kacar

anderson

perrotti

rakitic

s

pato

balotelli

chelsea

gk

turnbull

d

azpilicueta

terry

mancienne

a cole

m

augusto fernandez

essien

toulalan

mikel

s

pazzini

falcao

and its 2013 so terry and a.cole arent even that good now so i dont see why the rates chelsea's team better and they dont even have good subs, just gignac, j cole and lampard.

so does the game just rate the big clubs the best no matter what team they put out, just because they are chelsea they will win.

This message is based almost purely on reputation. Sometimes there are games when my team's in first and the other team's in last - but if the other team's reputation is much higher, they will be heavy favorites and considered "superior" even if their team is equal or not as good as mine on paper. It has been like this for several years, and SI has not changed anything.

Why are the Big Clubs Always Superior?

Because they are the BIG clubs.

Dude, they are superior, because they are really superior in real life.

Dude, they are superior, because they are really superior in real life.

It sounds like you didn't read his post. He was saying that the talent in his starting line-up was superior to his opponents, but the message reflected the opposite.

Soccer Manager gave the answer.

I feel SI have mucked it up a bit. The wording is incorrect. If Man Utd field their under-18s against Everton, who is superior? No joke cracking on that one please, I'm making a point. It shouldn't be based entirely on reputation, or if it is, it shouldn't state "superior" (which we take to mean 'better').

It sounds like you didn't read his post. He was saying that the talent in his starting line-up was superior to his opponents, but the message reflected the opposite.

Soccer Manager gave the answer.

I feel SI have mucked it up a bit. The wording is incorrect. If Man Utd field their under-18s against Everton, who is superior? No joke cracking on that one please, I'm making a point. It shouldn't be based entirely on reputation, or if it is, it shouldn't state "superior" (which we take to mean 'better').

Thats exactly right i'm kinda getting sick of my fans being slighlty dissapointed when i beat a championship side 1-0 or 2-0 in the league cup with my youngsters because i was expected to win comfortably.

Sure if i field a full strength side i could win by several goals but if a bunch of youngsters play well and win i would be happy as a supporter.

Thats exactly right i'm kinda getting sick of my fans being slighlty dissapointed when i beat a championship side 1-0 or 2-0 in the league cup with my youngsters because i was expected to win comfortably.

Sure if i field a full strength side i could win by several goals but if a bunch of youngsters play well and win i would be happy as a supporter.

Totally agree.

Thats exactly right i'm kinda getting sick of my fans being slighlty dissapointed when i beat a championship side 1-0 or 2-0 in the league cup with my youngsters because i was expected to win comfortably.

Sure if i field a full strength side i could win by several goals but if a bunch of youngsters play well and win i would be happy as a supporter.

Another thing that has annoyed me for a while, and that SI could easily solve. Also, why are the board so disappointed if you go out of the F.A Cup in the third round, but win the Prem and Champs League? It bores me that you have a target in the F.A Cup anyway. In real-life that just doesn't happen, and for a big club how you did in the F.A Cup would only matter if you did poorly in the Prem and Champs League.

There's only one solution:

...and repeat until England is your's!

Another thing that has annoyed me for a while, and that SI could easily solve. Also, why are the board so disappointed if you go out of the F.A Cup in the third round, but win the Prem and Champs League? It bores me that you have a target in the F.A Cup anyway. In real-life that just doesn't happen, and for a big club how you did in the F.A Cup would only matter if you did poorly in the Prem and Champs League.

I think that clubs still need to have targets for the F.A Cup but they could certainly be relaxed, Liverpool's expectation is always to reach the final but the last time they did that was 2006 I think. Such high expectations are quite unrealistic, it should be to reach the semi-finals or even quarter-finals instead.

Wahey! Great to see Derby win 4-0 at Anfield!

I've got Salvio coming to me in the summer, for £2.8m.

I think that clubs still need to have targets for the F.A Cup but they could certainly be relaxed, Liverpool's expectation is always to reach the final but the last time they did that was 2006 I think. Such high expectations are quite unrealistic, it should be to reach the semi-finals or even quarter-finals instead.

Agreed. Whenever I am a big club, and win the title, the next year my targets are always: Win title (fair enough), get to Champs League Final (in real-life I think most seasons, clubs would be happy to reach quarter-final as long as they win one every now and again), F.A Cup Final (ridiculous), and until this year it was always get to final of League Cup aswell. I am glad they seem to have got rid of that one now.

Agreed. Whenever I am a big club, and win the title, the next year my targets are always: Win title (fair enough), get to Champs League Final (in real-life I think most seasons, clubs would be happy to reach quarter-final as long as they win one every now and again), F.A Cup Final (ridiculous), and until this year it was always get to final of League Cup aswell. I am glad they seem to have got rid of that one now.

Exactly for some reason even though i didn't even make the semi-finals of the Champions League in the first season my expectations rose to make the final next season.:confused:

It makes no sense.

Definitely the current confidence system is poor and does not reflect the dynamic we have IRL.

For league confidence, it is ok now, because you promised the board regarding the finish; and if you won last year, hou'd normally expect to retain the title.

But for cup competition, the expectation should be tuned down, as luck does play a fairly big part in a cup run (drawing, away or home, injury on the match day, etc.) Semi-final should be the maximum the board can target. 5th round or quarter final should be ok for most of EPL clubs, and for CL, 1st knock-out or quarter final should be good for most of the teams. It would outrageous that my board expect you to win everything, but that is what is happening now.

Also, the board may ask you to win at least a trophy (like Arsenal) so the trophy cabinet is not empty

Back to OP, I agree that it is sad that they based the team on reputation rather than those 11 on the field. Maybe they should base the team on Total player value

They say reputation doesnt count in human games but I think it does, the big teams are still more difficult to beat even when you have a far superior side to them with a small club.

Agree that confidence needs to be fixed, I overachieved by 10 places and got into Europe and they are still moaning about a 34 year old old player I sold 2 years ago with only 3 technical stats in double figures for a serie a side!

Back to OP, I agree that it is sad that they based the team on reputation rather than those 11 on the field. Maybe they should base the team on Total player value

I think you're on to something here- not value mind you, as it would be distorted by clubs with money paying over the odds for players- on my game Man City paid 37.5m for Corluka...

I'd suggest some combination the CA of the starting XI, which the game can read, and the current average form of those players. It already averages players' form over 5 games, why not come up with a similar 'overall team average' score (which could be in the background or visible, whichever) which then gets used.

The game at the moment reads the club's reputation as the factor, so if Man Utd finish 5th two years in a row while I take a League 1 side to the Prem, then I'm 3 points clear at the top having comprehensively beaten Arsenal and Chelsea away, and they're mid-table, they still go into the game as favourites. Is that right? Would big teams like Man U/Chelsea etc be expected to pick up eventually after a run of poor form, especially against an over-achieving side? Possibly. But if the whole structure of the league had changed, and it was 20 years into the game, and my League1 side had won the CL three times on the spin, would it be different then? It should, but it seems like it doesn't.