Chairmen Picking the Team!

With the reported pressure that managers are under for Chairman in the modern day game, like supposedly picking the team and signing players without the manager knowing.

Does anyone think it is wise to be introduced on FM?

Or would it take the fun out of the game?(even though it's a real life occurance)

If it's happening irl, then I tend to say it should be in the game. But something like that could take a lot of fun out of the game. It could be an optional feature, like the one we currently have where the ass man picks the team for you?

It could be introduced if say your on a run of bad form, or if your chairmen is particulatrly interfering

If it's happening irl, then I tend to say it should be in the game. But something like that could take a lot of fun out of the game. It could be an optional feature, like the one we currently have where the ass man picks the team for you?

yeah i say that if something happens irl then it should happen in FM but not in this case, because once your chairman starts picking the team then your time is up.

yeah i say that if something happens irl then it should happen in FM but not in this case, because once your chairman starts picking the team then your time is up.

I tend to lean towards the option of him buying players for you, because that goes on a lot more irl and wouldn't take that must fun out of the game, but selecting the team for you, as you've said, can only mean bad things.

I like this, for instance, Briatore was apparently picking the team at QPR when he was there. I don't think it would be good to introduce an option where you let him pick the team, but maybe one where - like some transfers - he feels the need to take over because he 'knows best'. Obviously this could also lead to some conflict (good realism). But hopefully it wouldn't lead to him picking it every week or too often.

Good idea, though. .

I like this, for instance, Briatore was apparently picking the team at QPR when he was there. I don't think it would be good to introduce an option where you let him pick the team, but maybe one where - like some transfers - he feels the need to take over because he 'knows best'. Obviously this could also lead to some conflict (good realism). But hopefully it wouldn't lead to him picking it every week or too often.

Good idea, though. .

Yeah with Briatore picking the team at QPR that was why they went through about 10 manager sin 2 years, because he wanted to play manager ( Somebody send him their copy of FM )

It could be introduced if say your on a run of bad form, or if your chairmen is particulatrly interfering

Or if you manage Hereford United

With the reported pressure that managers are under for Chairman in the modern day game, like supposedly picking the team and signing players without the manager knowing.

Does anyone think it is wise to be introduced on FM?

Or would it take the fun out of the game?(even though it's a real life occurance)

If this is introduced then it will be just the same as when the Chairman steps in and accepts transfer bids - which we all know is incredibly annoying.

The chairman of Hearts in the SPL, Vladimir Romanov, is particularly keen on picking the team at occassions when he sees fit, must to the disgust of various managers who have went along with it or openly objected. Graeme Rix resigned, stating interference from above as his reason. Jesus Gil, former top man at Athletico Madrid, is another example of this.

I reckon this would add to the FM experience, but would depend on the interference level of your chairman.

Things like this that are going to have an obvious impact on the potential fun of the game should never be introduced regardless as to whether they occur irl or not.

Things like this that are going to have an obvious impact on the potential fun of the game should never be introduced regardless as to whether they occur irl or not.

You hit the nail on the head with that statement mate,

I wouldn't have a chairman that picks the team, but I think it would be a neat feature for chairmen who like interfering to send you a message with the team they'd like to see on the pitch. Maybe you'd be more likely to get sacked if you didn't listen to them and lost the game.

I recall a few years ago (when Abramovich took over at chelski) there were a number of chairmen in game who would demand a certain standard of player and if they felt you weren't going for them, they'd sign a 'marquee' player whether you needed them or not. That level of interference is about right IMO.

I wouldn't have a chairman that picks the team, but I think it would be a neat feature for chairmen who like interfering to send you a message with the team they'd like to see on the pitch. Maybe you'd be more likely to get sacked if you didn't listen to them and lost the game.

This is why it should not be put into the game.

I recall a few years ago (when Abramovich took over at chelski) there were a number of chairmen in game who would demand a certain standard of player and if they felt you weren't going for them, they'd sign a 'marquee' player whether you needed them or not. That level of interference is about right IMO.

Yeah i remember this now as well, i think that it was in FM07

I recall a few years ago (when Abramovich took over at chelski) there were a number of chairmen in game who would demand a certain standard of player and if they felt you weren't going for them, they'd sign a 'marquee' player whether you needed them or not. That level of interference is about right IMO.

I vaguely recall someone coming on to these boards and moaning about their chairman complaining about the standard of players, then going out and spending £100 million or so on Gerrard, bankrupting their side and undoing all of the poor bugger's good work.

I vaguely recall someone coming on to these boards and moaning about their chairman complaining about the standard of players, then going out and spending £100 million or so on Gerrard, bankrupting their side and undoing all of the poor bugger's good work.

Yeah remember it well. As the manager it was infuriating, but with the way things were at that time ( and still now to some extent, yes Florentino Perez, I am looking at you!), it was realistic.

Yeah remember it well. As the manager it was infuriating, but with the way things were at that time ( and still now to some extent, yes Florentino Perez, I am looking at you!), it was realistic.

In one memorable United save I got fired for signing a player the board asked me not to sign. Had to go back to a previous save. Thank God for the seasonal back ups.

In one memorable United save I got fired for signing a player the board asked me not to sign. Had to go back to a previous save. Thank God for the seasonal back ups.

WOW first time i have heard that one, i hope you learned your lesson:D

If this is introduced then it will be just the same as when the Chairman steps in and accepts transfer bids - which we all know is incredibly annoying.

Steff Wright did this to me when I was manager of Lincoln. Bang went my three best players.

Although, in hindsight this was good because one of them got sold to Juventus for about 13million and I got 40% of that.

Didn't get any of it in my transfer budget though...

The chairman/president could threaten to fire you if you don't play player X/Y/Z

The chairman/president could threaten to fire you if you don't play player X/Y/Z

They should mange the team themselves if they start telling the manager who to buy

i dunno which series i was playin but i remember that my chairman bought a player for team. they did not ask me . even that player was not my shortlist. also sometimes they sell if an unrejectable offer comes. so chairman is already in the game.

but maybe when the team performances so badly. he can advice to use some players. if the stuation gets worser he can pick a few players to team. and we must not be able to unpick them for these matches...

I like this idea as it would bring the Chairman/Manager relationship into play, which I understand is the norm in real life.

It could also be a test of character for the manager, a battle of will if you like. Which will be determined on the pitch.

Chairman says 'this is the team I want you to play on Saturday'

You are then given the option to make changes or not. If you do make changes then pray the team gets a result or you card could be marked, and this could continue like this untill the chairman concedes you are the better tactician and leaves you alone.

I do also like the idea of the chairman gifting you a player they believe to be a 'star', especially if the player came with a caviat stating they cannot be sold for x seasons, or must play x games a season (injuries accepted). Like in real life this would add a new dimension in honing your management /relationship skills.

i think we must open a topic make a poll for this.

maybe not picking the team but signing players, Robinho wasn't a hughes signing but he was under pressure to play him, Curbs left West ham because he didnt have control and Newcastle sold Milner with no regard to keegan's wishes, so that would work, imagine having your chairman blow your whole budget on someone THEY like e.g schevchenko

so it must be optional iin my opinion

I think this has already been in the game. When I played as Milan on the Amiga version of CM Italy I was constantly critisized for not playing x or y. This was during the time when you could only field 3 non italians...

/JB

I have mentioned previously the addition of a Director of Football within the game for certain clubs, this would deal with a similar issue to what is proposed here. There are various threads already discussing this. Dunno if SI are listening though.

I wouldn't have a chairman that picks the team, but I think it would be a neat feature for chairmen who like interfering to send you a message with the team they'd like to see on the pitch. Maybe you'd be more likely to get sacked if you didn't listen to them and lost the game.

This.

Also, it's fun to see how we all are ready to clamor for MORE REALISM, and then as soon as a good and realistic idea surfaces many retreat and complain that "it spoils the fun".

While I seem to understand FUN=being in charge of everything and having it done my own way so I can exploit the dodgy AI in many different ways and then showboat about leading Stafford Rangers to Champions League glory in 10 years.

Interfering chairmen exist

Boards selling players whether you want it or not exist

Directors of Football exist

Omniscient, almighty "l'etat c'est moi" managers DO NOT exist

Still when there is a high-value bid for one of your players, management can accept the bid over your head.

I think it was in FM06 when occasionally management expected manager (you) to bring in couple of high-reputation players and if you didn't they picked one themselves and signed him for you (then fans been disappointed because you didn't play your new signing often enough)

This.

Also, it's fun to see how we all are ready to clamor for MORE REALISM, and then as soon as a good and realistic idea surfaces many retreat and complain that "it spoils the fun".

While I seem to understand FUN=being in charge of everything and having it done my own way so I can exploit the dodgy AI in many different ways and then showboat about leading Stafford Rangers to Champions League glory in 10 years.

Interfering chairmen exist

Boards selling players whether you want it or not exist

Directors of Football exist

Omniscient, almighty "l'etat c'est moi" managers DO NOT exist

Fully agree. I would like to see these factors put into the game where necessary.

Still when there is a high-value bid for one of your players, management can accept the bid over your head.

I think it was in FM06 when occasionally management expected manager (you) to bring in couple of high-reputation players and if you didn't they picked one themselves and signed him for you (then fans been disappointed because you didn't play your new signing often enough)

True. I loved that part. Plus the signings were never bad. Players like Pirlo, Buffon, Shevchenko.

I do think that chairmen should be more involved in transfers than they are currently, especially when it comes to bringing players in. In all honesty, the way we can do whatever we please as long as we stay within budget isn't very realistic, is it? The board should block a big money offer for someone completely unknown, have complaints about you making no major signings after a poor season as a big name club, refuse to sell the club icons, cash in on transfer offers if they need the money, and generally have things to say about what you're doing with their club.

I definitely don't think any of this needs to spoil the fun of FM, but it needs to be designed in a way that presents a new/different challenge and is properly weighted against each individual chairman's attributes. Arsenal isn't run the same way as Real Madrid. There's probably also something to be said for affording high reputation managers more trust and patience, which would also allow a player who does not find these things appealing in the game to simply play with a higher starting reputation.

I remember a few FM's ago i was in charge at Chelsea i was told by Abramovich that i should be signing better players.

I had a budget of £40m left but he went and spent £80m on brining in Christiano Ronaldo from Man Utd on the last day of the transfer window.

Was a nice idea and i was happy to get Ronaldo into the team.

Think what you could have is the Chairmen suggesting you play certain players and if you do not then your relationship starts to get strained and he makes it publicly known he dislikes you for going against him, would be a nice touch.

If I understand correctly, in real life, a manager will approach his chairman/board with a list of players he would like to sign the chairmen/board will then do their best to broker the deals.

This is realism! If it was implemented would it squeeze the fun out of the game?

If I understand correctly, in real life, a manager will approach his chairman/board with a list of players he would like to sign the chairmen/board will then do their best to broker the deals.

This is realism! If it was implemented would it squeeze the fun out of the game?

NO. Simple answer. Some ppl however think in real life you can do what you like so that in a game they can brag about winning hundreds of titles.

This is not an official process IRL, although some areas of the world chairmans are putting pressure on coaches to select certain players still it is not a suggested method. Therefore I do not see SI adding this, if this is added then one can say "hey what about adding fixing matches", "bribing referees", "Riots in stands"..... " players sleeping with each others wifes/gf"

I think SI will stay away from these areas even though they may happen IRL.

This is not an official process IRL, although some areas of the world chairmans are putting pressure on coaches to select certain players still it is not a suggested method. Therefore I do not see SI adding this, if this is added then one can say "hey what about adding fixing matches", "bribing referees", "Riots in stands"..... " players sleeping with each others wifes/gf"

I think SI will stay away from these areas even though they may happen IRL.

What a load of bull. One thing has NOTHING to do with the other. IRL clubs use Director of Football and Chairman often suggest player purchases and loans. Who do you think got Beckham loaned to Milan, Leonardo? Galiani did just like Valdano attracted Cristiano Ronaldo or back in the day Rossell brought Ronaldinho to Barcelona.

SI should add this, in fact they should never have removed it in the first place. If you want to play without any of this then choose easy mode like you do on other games.

If I understand correctly, in real life, a manager will approach his chairman/board with a list of players he would like to sign the chairmen/board will then do their best to broker the deals.

This is realism! If it was implemented would it squeeze the fun out of the game?

Yeah your right there mate.

I personally would not like to see this as i like to buy/loan players and do the negotiating.

Yeah your right there mate.

I personally would not like to see this as i like to buy/loan players and do the negotiating.

and no-one is stopping you from doing this.

What a load of bull. One thing has NOTHING to do with the other. IRL clubs use Director of Football and Chairman often suggest player purchases and loans. Who do you think got Beckham loaned to Milan, Leonardo? Galiani did just like Valdano attracted Cristiano Ronaldo or back in the day Rossell brought Ronaldinho to Barcelona.

SI should add this, in fact they should never have removed it in the first place. If you want to play without any of this then choose easy mode like you do on other games.

FM is a game. It's supposed to be fun. Yes, it also strives to be as realistic as possible, but this should never in a million years get in the way of the fun of the game. People play this game as they want to have control over the transfers of their chosen club and they want to be able to send the team that they choose onto the pitch. Adding things to the game that are going to get in the way of this is only going to turn people off of the game.

Oh come on...

A strange idea of "Fun" and "Realism" we have indeed...

"Realistic" it's as long as it's ADVANTAGEOUS realistic features, but those real-life bits that will hinder our flawless and triumphant career at Craptown FC suddenly become "too much realism" and not fun anymore?

"Fun" means winning left and right while "exploiting" a somewhat defective AI, thanks to the fact the human player has quasi-divine powers over the club he manages.

And then every year it'll be a never-ending parade of "the game is too easy" or "the AI is dumb, I win too much and too easily".

We have at hands a real-life solution that, if introduced in the game, would almost totally nullify the effect of human player supremacy over silly AI, but noooooooo it's not fun anymore!!!!!

It's not "Football Manager"... it's "Football God"...

Honestly I can't understand how people can be against THE most obviously realistic feature, which has been bafflingly left out for so many years... While of course the same people have been asking for minor cosmetic additions

Oh come on...

A strange idea of "Fun" and "Realism" we have indeed...

"Realistic" it's as long as it's ADVANTAGEOUS realistic features, but those real-life bits that will hinder our flawless and triumphant career at Craptown FC suddenly become "too much realism" and not fun anymore?

"Fun" means winning left and right while "exploiting" a somewhat defective AI, thanks to the fact the human player has quasi-divine powers over the club he manages.

And then every year it'll be a never-ending parade of "the game is too easy" or "the AI is dumb, I win too much and too easily".

We have at hands a real-life solution that, if introduced in the game, would almost totally nullify the effect of human player supremacy over silly AI, but noooooooo it's not fun anymore!!!!!

It's not "Football Manager"... it's "Football God"...

Honestly I can't understand how people can be against THE most obviously realistic feature, which has been bafflingly left out for so many years... While of course the same people have been asking for minor cosmetic additions

What utter tripe. Again, people want to make their own transfers. They want to choose what team they field. They don't want to transfers to be controlled for them. They don't want the team they field be dictated to them.

And whats with the assumption don't that those of us that don't want this in the game just want an easy ride? What on earth makes you think that? Could it be perhaps that we just want to play a GAME? Could it be that we just don't want all of the real life trappings that a real manager would face? That we just want to relax and after a days work and have a bit of fun rather then get thrown into another stressful situation, and this time, for no good reason?

If you want all the stresses and pitfalls a real manager faces, then go find a real team to manage. Leave the game as what it is. A game.

Whilst this may happen in real life I really don't want this to be implemented. There has to come a point where this remains a fun, user-controlled game, rather than an exact replica of the real life football world.

What utter tripe. Again, people want to make their own transfers. They want to choose what team they field. They don't want to transfers to be controlled for them. They don't want the team they field be dictated to them.

And whats with the assumption don't that those of us that don't want this in the game just want an easy ride? What on earth makes you think that? Could it be perhaps that we just want to play a GAME? Could it be that we just don't want all of the real life trappings that a real manager would face? That we just want to relax and after a days work and have a bit of fun rather then get thrown into another stressful situation, and this time, for no good reason?

If you want all the stresses and pitfalls a real manager faces, then go find a real team to manage. Leave the game as what it is. A game.

If you want to win and then claim to be a great manager by simply exploiting a weak AI by all means do this, add an option entitled "easy" at the start of the game and you can play with that option. Some of us have the game to try and see if we could improve on real life situations enforced on managers. That will not happen if we are allowed to buy a player from a really low division and stick him in the premiership because "its a game". Stop saying silly things Bongo, its all about making the game last long, make it challenging and ppl will buy it. Examples are plenty or do you think ppl buy games because they are easy?

If you want to win and then claim to be a great manager by simply exploiting a weak AI by all means do this, add an option entitled "easy" at the start of the game and you can play with that option. Some of us have the game to try and see if we could improve on real life situations enforced on managers. That will not happen if we are allowed to buy a player from a really low division and stick him in the premiership because "its a game". Stop saying silly things Bongo, its all about making the game last long, make it challenging and ppl will buy it. Examples are plenty or do you think ppl buy games because they are easy?

Seriously, can you all please stop this crap about wanting it "easy" just because I don't actually think this idea is in anyway, shape or form something that would make a good addition to the game. Please find where I actually said I want an easy game. I'll make it easy for you. You won't. I like hard games, I like to be challenged, but, I don't want things put in my way that are clearly going to prove frustrating just because they happen in the real world. I want better AI. AI that won't just buy goalies or youngsters but players it actually needs. I want AI that has the sense to use the right players. Thats whats needed. Not some smokescreen.

And why do people buy games? To have FUN! Look around the forums for a second. You'll see plenty of threads talking about their highest transfer, their worst transfer or about good players to buy or who they should play. It's pretty obvious really that the majority of users want to be in control. If that wasn't the case, threads like this would pop up much more frequently, and garner a hell of a lot more support then they do. The fact that they don't gives a pretty clear indication that they don't want the AI doing part of the work for them. And I really think you are deluding yourself if you think otherwise.

Meh...

the "a game should be fun, and ____ feature is not fun" philosophy can be applied to other proposals and bits that have been proposed and introduced during the years...

Is the "spreadsheet training formula" fun? Hell no... that has to be the most time consuming and boring feature ever... But it's realistic [even though I think it's more up to the coaching staff than to the manager], so if it'll come back, we'll cope with that.

Are press conferences a lot of fun after the first two weeks? At all, but real-life managers spend a lot of time answering to the same questions week in and week out...

Etc etc.

So explain me that: WHY is realism fine as long as it gives us "freedom", but it's suddenly a burden as soon as it interferes with our One Man Show?

It's a game, yes. But if REALISM has been the key for the success of this franchise, then we shouldn't throw our toys out of the pram if the MOST REALISTIC feature in football management gets added to the game.

To be honest, what's the point in claiming to be a FM genius, a tactical master etc when the game allows you so much freedom of action?

Seriously... you can buy whoever you want, as long as you have money to do so, no matter how obscure that striker is, or how many strikers you already have.

It's not rocket science... all you need is MONEY, the rest is piece of cake.

Basically it's like winning an arm-wrestling contest against a bunch of teenagers... You're so much better it's no fun anymore after a while.