Constructive Criticism

I want to put together something, maybe in it's final version it will be a poll, maybe I'll write a letter. Not sure yet.

I want to be able to take it to SI and say "these are the problems with management simulation" Remember that - management simulation problems

I'm going to rule out anything with the match engine or tactical interface at this point. I think they are areas SI always works to improve, what I want is a list of the things outside that remit that let the game down.

I want to construct a list of things that are integral to football management, and then what we think are wrong with them, I'll try and test anything people say out and then add it to the list or maybe create a specific thread and do some research. When I think about FM these are the main areas I think we should be dealing with.

- transfers/contracts

- training

- player interaction

- staff interaction

- club marketing/inter-club activities

- board interaction

- interaction with the F.A (?)

- press interaction

What I'd like people to do is look at each area, think about the problems you've had; Things that are out of sync when compared between you and other computer managers, things that strike you as wholly unrealistic, etc. Briefly try and explain the problem without too much opinion. I'll be honest I'm not very good at not ranting, but I'm breathing deep and I'm ready to give it a try.

- transfers/contracts -

1. Transfer negotiations seem different between users and computer managers, clubs are unwilling to accept an offer previously accepted by another club despite not being rivals.

2. When negotiating transfers in general the computer haggles away from you and when adding clauses which definitely add value (e.g., cash per game.) the computer demands cash up front as well. Sometimes doubling your previous offer.

3. Agent fees. Christiano Ronaldo's agent reportedly made 4mil from the 80mil transfer. Maybe set agents fees a little lower? and no more than 5% of the deal for anything over 10mil?

4. (From StevoRobbo) Targeted Loans. - the ability to direct loan offers to a specific team/league.

5. (From ManUTactician247) Lower League players fussing over very small amounts of money

6. Assistant manger needs 2 options. Renew ALL contracts/Renew worthwhile players.

7. (From ManUTactician247) Need to be able to make public when agent is hindering major deals (maybe only for world class players?)

8. (From Ac13) Be able to defer a transfer till the end of the season. (players going out.)

- training -

- player interaction -

1. I can't always praise/deride players for training levels at the right time. Make every option permanently available, until relationship breaks down.

2. I've had a player talk to the media about clubs being interested in him for years, yet the option "talking to the media" in transfers is permanently blanked out.

3. (From ManUTactician247) Declaring an opponent is a threat sometimes only works after match (unverified as yet)

4. (From Themadsheep2001) Player personalities - too vague.

- staff interaction

1. I can't tell them anything at all, though they insist on having backroom meetings every two weeks.

2. (From ManUTactician247) Staff signing interaction; both new and existing staff should have manger promises... e.g. If we don't get promoted to the Premiership you can leave etc.

3. (From Themadsheep2001) Manager on Manager interaction - be able to ALWAYS criticise/praise any area of a Manager's activity

- club marketing/inter-club activities

(From Bracken) Higher division/Reputation clubs allowing the players they purchase (usually stars of the future) to stay on loan at the old club until ready for first team football

(From Ac13) Dynamic League reputation needs to be more closely linked with sponsorship deals, reflecting bottom clubs rising and top clubs slow fall from grace.

- board interaction

- interaction with the F.A

1. I've yet to win a disciplinary reprieve despite contesting every one for a year, I just can't tell from looking at things in the match engine, and the commentator often disagrees with the FA, maybe make it a bit more obvious whether we should contest things or not.

2. Referee relationships - through criticism/praise of decisions

- press interaction

1. Repetition of questions/irrelevant questions.

2. (From ManUTactician247) Saying you'll do your best to get by without should not enrage an injured player.

If you can all post your problems with each section or just a particular section, I'll try and add them all in to the OP.

Fingers crossed this doesn't seem too ranty.

Excellent idea, as long as it stays within the guidlines of the OP and not another place for people to rant. I really hope this works.

More Options For Loaning Out Players

I want more options available to me when loaning out players. I want to be able to target clubs within specific leagues to offer my players to. And also to only target clubs that can match a certain criteria. For example: I want to offer my promising reserve team striker to a club in the Championship but also only to teams where he will be an important first team player. Its annoying going through 15 offers per player automatically rejecting any 'backup' offers.

Once ive rejected the backup offers, I am then left with the offers where he will be a valuable first team player. But then I need to click on each team to see which division they are in, because currently there is absolutely no info in the news item as to which division the club is in. Again very time consuming when offering many players for loan.

If the above is too complicated to implement then can there at least be a better was of filtering the offers once they have come in. For transfers you can automatically reject or accept offers that meet a certain criteria (transfer value). This should also be available for loans.

One thing I'd like to see improved, sort of leading on from StevoRobbo (who i completely agree with by the way), is the option when negotiating a transfer to ask for the player to be loaned back to the club he's leaving immediately. It happens sometimes in real life and would be a great option if you're a lower league club losing a star to a top team where he won't play very often.

- transfers/contracts

- Players fussing over £5 or £10 in lower leagues.

- Assistants not renewing contracts

- No way to tell players their agent is hindering the deal.

- No reason for joining another club (not ambitious enough etc...)

- training

- Assistant does training so no noticeable problems

- player interaction

- Players having a "bad" relationship with you for asking them to try a new move

- Senior players saying they're not happy with the player you wanted them to tutor although they were receptive to the idea in the conversation.

- Sometimes when saying an opponent is a threat, he only reacts after the match that he is gonna be under pressure.

- staff interaction

- Same Backroom Advice every week with an occasional new player you might want to sign.

- Can't tell them that you can't offer them that much money because of financial restraints.

- club marketing/inter-club activities

- This could be improved as right now, having friendlies in a particular country is pointless as your profits won't increase from the publicity.

- It would be nice to see more interaction between a parent and feeder club. Having a friendly is all you seem to notice about feeder clubs.

- board interaction

- Haven't tried this yet but it would be nice for them to talk to you if you're ever doing very well or very bad. They could tell you to "Keep up the good work" or "You need to improve or find yourself out of a job".

- interaction with the F.A (?)

- Criticising referees is pointless, it would be nice for it to have an effect on the referee for the next time he refs you (Either scared of bad publicity from the angry manager or gives more decisions against you because he has a bad relationship with you and vice-versa)

- An option to praise a referee for a good game/decision to build up a relationship (again good relationship with you could mean more decisions your way or determined to prove he isn't biased by going against you.

- press interaction

- Same questions in press conferences

- Press telling you to focus on your own players, but don't the press love this sort of thing???

- Saying you can do your best to get by without an injured player shouldn't make them unhappy.

- Telling the press you want to attack a better team shouldn't always worry people, I am 15th/16 in the league, faced a team just relegated from the division above, had a go and won 4-2. Maybe players should realise I was right and not be as frightened as they were before.

- When I battle relegation, predicting another team to win the title (which aren't my rivals) shouldn't make someone unhappy.

- When asked about who is going to take care of an opposition threat and I pick my 4.5* DM, this should not enrage someone in the reserves who never plays.

- If I am asked if my relationship with a manager is good and I say it is, why then is my next question "Am I looking to get one over him in mind games"?

All I can think of for now. BTW I love the game in general but a few things I'd like to be changed.

One thing I'd like to see improved, sort of leading on from StevoRobbo (who i completely agree with by the way), is the option when negotiating a transfer to ask for the player to be loaned back to the club he's leaving immediately. It happens sometimes in real life and would be a great option if you're a lower league club losing a star to a top team where he won't play very often.

You can buy a player with the transfer only to go through at end of season...or ask for vice versa.

This is actually a superb idea for a thread and is well constructed to enable the easiest format for feedback

I don't have a whole bunch of time at the moment, but I shall try and add some thoughts of my own into the pot when I next get chance.

excellent, exactly the kind of thread we need

manager interaction, even though there are lot of options, 90% of them will be greyed out at any one time, so actually its very limited. I dont just want to play mind games with my rivals, i want to be able to do with any manager i come across, i want to praise his transfer acumen, or pick apart his style of play if i feel like it. the options need to be freed up

Player personalities, i still feel too little information is shown about player personalites. for example a player might be fairly determined, but i can see that from his determination stat

I don't want to be involved in the financial side of things but there is one thing that annoys me and that's the sponsorships. I spent 6 pretty successful years at Everton (taking them up to 9th in europe rankings) so expected a decent sized increase in sponsorship from shirt sponsors. Instead it goes up from 2.6m to 3.6m. Ok I get that that's a 40odd % increase which seems a lot but really it's just 1 player on 20k a week wages. And this is a 6 year deal so it's ages before i can hope for better.

Man U have had 6 pretty pathetic years but still lead the sponsorship in England, Juventus have 6 worse years in Italy and still get the most there. Looking at the small club to big club challenges things are even worse for teams moving up the leagues...I mean going from 10k in lower leagues to getting 100k or so when you hit the big time is rediculous. Would really like to see sponsorship be much more dynamic based on performances.

edit- will check how big teams sponsorship changes when it gets to end of current deal. MAN U's ends at end of season, liverpool end of next. Juventus in 2027 so no luck there.

A couple of things spring instantly to mind concerned with interactions between players and managers.

At the moment it's too black and white, you're either "favoured personnel", neutral or not on speaking terms and it's far too easy to get to "Not talking to you!" I'd like to see more layered levels - they don't have to be visible or too obvious, but have relationships which build or decay over time and have not speaking as an absolute last resort - at the moment it's too easy to tell a player they played well and if they're in a bad mood for it to quickly turn into "I'm never going to speak to you again". (And I'd like to see a player try that with Alex Ferguson or Harry Redknapp in real life!)

Similarly suggesting to a sixteen year old that they might like to learn from a world class player shouldn't really lead to them walking out of the manager's office saying "this conversation isn't going very well" if they don't want to be signing on at the DSS next Monday. I'd like at least to be able to fine them for insolence if they do. I understand that you don't want tutoring to always succeed but maybe there could be an option for the manager to insist the youngster try tutoring which could turn out well or badly?

Press conferences do quickly become very repetitive: more options are badly needed.

A couple of match engine things which irritate me are the attacking side win a corner, it's cleared, the attacking side get the ball back, pass it to the corner-taker, who is offside. Happens a couple of times every game. And high balls played up to a striker who bangs a header forty yards back towards his own goal, often setting up a chance for the other side.

My biggest ME one is the player tries to kick the ball out off opponent but instead opponent controls it which leads to goal.

And on the likes/dislikes for personel it is pretty layered = x out of 100.

- interaction with the F.A

1. I've yet to win a disciplinary reprieve despite contesting every one for a year, I just can't tell from looking at things in the match engine, and the commentator often disagrees with the FA, maybe make it a bit more obvious whether we should contest things or not.

Just a thought - when this option was first around several years ago (before disappearing and reappearing in it's new form, I think), it was stated that if you contest every decision, you won't be taken seriously, and so you should save your grievances for when you actually have a case. Contesting every decision might therefore NOT be the best way to determine if this ever does anything.

Not that I've ever had a ban overturned, but then again I've never seen an obvious mistake. Most of the reds are either reckless challenges or cynical fouls by the last man, and some of the others are maybe 50-50, in which case the FA will always side with the ref (after all the laws state "if, in the opinion of the referee...").

I don't really have any constructive criticism though (well I thoroughly agree that press conferences are terrible) - for me, the tactical side of things is the one part of the game in need of serious TLC, but that's apparently OT

Just a thought - when this option was first around several years ago (before disappearing and reappearing in it's new form, I think), it was stated that if you contest every decision, you won't be taken seriously, and so you should save your grievances for when you actually have a case. Contesting every decision might therefore NOT be the best way to determine if this ever does anything.

I tried just contesting the ones where the commentator says there's some doubt, but that didn't work either. It'd be nice if just once the commentator said it was clearly not a foul. Also I've never had the ass. man give me a clear appeal it, you'll win. either. My ass. man always seems to miss red cards and has no access to a tv!

- Transfers

* Not enough pre-arranged Bosman transfers. Aka too many average-to-good players end up on free transfer (even for a whole summer transfer window) without a single AI club offering them a contract. When a player isn't willing to sign a new contract with his current club and he's clearly good enough, many AI clubs should come looking to sign him right away. Instead you can more or less sign a whole squad of Free Players whose contract expired and nobody cared...

* AI clubs, especially smaller ones or from smaller nations, still sign plenty of aging players from around the world just because of high reputation

* Too many old players are willing to relocate to far-away places. You don't really see a local cult-hero leaving Costa Rica at 33 to join CSKA Sofia or Göteborg

* AI clubs don't seem to buy with a clear strategy in mind yet... If an AI manager plays 4-4-2 diamond, what's the point in him splashing the cash for the 3rd right winger?

* We might need a "patience bar" for contract negotiations... so we can realize when we'd better knuckle under the player/agent's requests if we want to seal the deal.

- Newgens

* More/better newgens for non-playable countries with playable national team... The odd top-notch newgen is still likely to come up, but the average quality of the national team drops noticeably once all the original players are gone.

* Barely ok newgens from smaller countries are too expensive if compared to the average price of a 1st team regular in the same league. e.g. a Norwegian newgen with ok potential (for the league, not for international football) can be valued from 250k to 750k, more or less the same value of established mid/high-level players.

- Scouting

* Scouts, even top-notch ones, will often recommend players with high potential but with terrible (almost unworkable) attributes. So they judge players with little attention to the gap between "now" and "future", while a good scout should know better, at least under the current scouting system...

* Scouts recommend established players pushing 30... often not even Starting XI material... Once again, competent staff should know better than wanting us to spend 10M for a 29yo guy who'd play a dozen of matches for us and then would just become a huge waste of transfer/wage budget.

* Scouts often recommend "prospects" who are 19 or 20... not eligible for HG status... and of course often not good enough for a reserve side.

(to sum it up... potential ability and reputation play too much of a role in scouting and recommendation, even at the highest level of scouting)

Regens:

On a recent save that i played until about 2025, there seemed to be way too many top regens and not enough "average" ones, pretty much every team i played against in Europe(even in the Europa League) had really great strikers for instance, i only have this anecdotal evidence but from what i've read around these forums it seems something that a lot of people have noticed.

Scouting Knowledge:

The way the entire system works doesn't make any sense to me, you can sign some ex-player as a coach or something that has permanent knowledge of a country or area even if he hasn't played or been in that particular country for years, yet a scout will quickly lose the knowledge of a nation that he isn't "natural" from.

My suggestion is that a scout shouldn't lose the knowledge of a country for the season, as soon as the new season starts and players start retiring and transfers and youth intake, then it makes sense that he needs to rescout the country to know the new talent.

Loans from a parent club:

You'll normally get a scheduled loan from your parent club during the season but if you try to get one of their players listed for loan, you normally still have to pay a fee and a considerable percentage of their wages, it kind of defeats the whole point of having a parent club.

Scouting

-Localized scouting. Clubs in the lower divisions should not be able to send their scouts outside the national borders. It should be limited to their local area.

-National roaming. When scouting a single nation, it should be possible to have it continue as long as we wish, so we don't have to renew it every 2 months or so. It's easy to forget (and annoying)

-Scouting budget. Sending a scout from England to Brazil should cost money. Sending him to London should be much cheaper

-Scouting knowledge. It shouldn't be reduced so quickly. That doesn't seem very sensible. Once you have been to a country and know its players well, you won't suddenly forget it all.

Board interaction

-When the chairman accepts bids over your head, allow us to make an ultimatum. Sell that player, and I leave.

--Better yet, allow us to talk to the board and try to talk them out of selling him, eg by explaining that he is key in a campaign to gain a CL place, which will give us piles of money

Player contracts

-More emphasis on weekly wages and less on appearance fees. I feel the latter is way over the top in a lot of cases, sometimes as much as the weekly wage. That seems very unrealistic, unless we're talking about Owen Hargreaves, Michael Owen or that kind of injury-prone players.

-Lower league players on part-time contracts should greatly prefer one-year contracts. It is the norm IRL and should be so in FM too. It should be very difficult to get them to agree to more than 1-year contracts. After all, a better offer may turn up than playing football for £100 a week.

Club finances

-Match-day expenses are just off the spectrum for lower league clubs, usually higher than wages. The financial balance itself is fine (clubs in deficit) but wage costs should be higher and match-day expenses much lower. Clubs should be making profits on match-day, not losses. That is just absurd

-As a club grows in size, it should get more sponsorships. Right now I think it's limited to the sponsorships set in the database, unless board changes and such introduce a new one. We should be able to get kit sponsorships and whatnot as a club grows huge

"5. (From ManUTactician247) Lower League players fussing over very small amounts of money"

I disagree with this. If I was on 10 quid a week, I would argue to get 15 quid all day long.

What I desire the most (that is not about the wanting ME/tactic programming) is a stronger connection between attributes and ability/potential ability, especially in youngsters.

As it is now, thousands of new players are added to the game every year, and their attributes are to a large degree completely randomized. Often, a player with -7 and above potential will have attributes that makes him useless. For instance, defensive midfielders are often small, fast and technical rather than big, strong and hard-working. Wonderkids come with 2 and 3 in most things apart from the pre-set couple of attributes, because their starting ability is below 100. Most of them will never be good players despite their potential.

This is counter-intuitive.

A talented youngster is a good football player, and good football players don't have weaknesses - not on this scale anyways. If you take a look at the Continental/World Class players in the starting season, most of them have very few attributes below 10, and many have few below 15. They are good at everything because they are excellent football players. After 5-6 seasons, the newcomers begin to replace the existing stars, and then you realize that there are very few central defenders, for instance, that have any attributes above 10 in other areas than Pace, Jumping, Acceleration, Strength, Work Rate, Team Work, Determination, Anticipation, Aggression, Tackling, Marking, Heading. There are only Stoppers left, in other words. This is caused by all new central defenders being created have those 12 attributes as a pre-set minimum requirement, while the others are random. And because they are random and there is a limited amount of total attributes to be spread out across the player's stats, all the others are well below 10 as a rule.

The solution is simple: the game is based to a large degree on player types, and in order to create players that fulfills these requirements, SI needs to make sure that ALL attributes have a pre-set minimum for players intended to become top-division players. New players must become less random, and talented youngsters should not have any attributes in the red zone.

To be more specific: a -8 potential Target Man classical number 9 striker (that could become a leading Premier League striker) should of course have high attributes (15+) in Strength, Heading, Jumping, Off the Ball and Finishing. But sadly, if he does and the rest of the attributes are random, he will be useless as a target man because his Work Rate, Team Work, Passing, Creativity, First Touch, Technique, Decisions, Bravery, Aggression, Balance and Agility would have a high chance of being too low to allow him to function in his role. A target man should keep the ball in possession and allow the rest of the team to move forward into attacking positions, and to do that he needs to be more than just good in the air. This could be fixed by creating not only Target Man as a pre-set type where all attributes have a minimum if he is a good player (still allowing randomness in lower-division talents), but even have hidden sub-types where you have the powerful but creatively limited striker who needs to have crosses in the 6-yard box to be effective, as well as a technical, creative target man (strong but not necessarily that good in the air) and possibly also athletic players (like Nile Ranger is in RL) who also got speed.

I have opinions on a few more things as well - I will come back to them later.

I like most of the suggestions above. I have a point myself, but I'm not sure where it belongs.

Why isn't there something like a win-bonus in FM. There's apearance fee and goal bonus and a bonus for final league-ranking, but what about a simple win-bonus? Very common in football I think. Or is it in already and did I miss it?

It might be a general bonus that counts for every match and every player in a season, but I can imagine that in some matches, where the stakes are higher, one would want to add some incitive by promising a larger bonus to all, or some of the players, if they win the match.

A goal bonus seems a bit unfair to the rest of the team and tends to make strikers more selfish. A general win-bonus would be a better measure in my eyes. Or an assist-bonus, clean-sheet bonus not only for goalkeepers but also for defenders who are also responsible for that rclean sheet, such things.

O and I have one for the press conference/player interaction:

- About the questions when I get a new player in: How would I know if I like the guy or not. I won't find out during the game really, but I surely wouldn't know if we'd be best buddies when I just contracted him can I? Can I scout a player on "sympathy" or "likeability"? That seems a really silly question.

Just like the questions on how I like the oppositions manager. How should I know if it's a nice guy or not? Does he give to the poor? Does he beat his wife up? I dont know. For safety I always answer he's one of the good guys in football, but that's based on nothing. The 'mind-game'-questions in general may go as far as I'm concerned. I don't believe this happens a lot in real life and the influence on players morale or transfers would be next to nothing if it did happen. Very boring to answer those irrelevant questions every press conference.

I think you should make heights/ weight matter in this game. Because they are very important attributes in real life

Here's a cut and paste job of a thread I just opened. (PS to mods - feel to close thread as am cutting and pasting it to this thread).

11.3. Started as Ipswich Town. After a week or so, released public positive comment on Alan Smith which he accepted. He was on the transfer list since start of game. Newcaslte offered him for £1.8M. I offered Zero. They stuck on £1.8M. I offered it over 4 years. Maybe they would use it settle his contract? They accepted. Smith's was "very interested". My maximum wage for a key player was £20,000 or so. He was earning over double that at Newcastle. The negotiations began.

I had expected that Smith's agent would be aware that a significant wage cut would be inevitable. After all, he was "very intersted" and dropping down divisions. Surely his agent would have some idea on my club's wage structure? Nope. He asked for £20,000 more than what he was on already.

Two real life examples. First, Jimmy Bullard is currently with Ipswich on loan, is aware that if he wishes to join in the summer his wage will decrease significantly. If Hull ask for a transfer fee, that transfer fee will almost certainly go to Bullard to pay off his existing contract. If Bullard joins Ipswich, he will know before any negotiations begin, that he is facing a significant wage cut. Second, Kieron Dyer spent a month or so on loan at Ipswich and has said that he would like to rejoin permanently in the Summer, and that money isn't everything - in other words, he's only too well aware of the huge drop in wages at the outset. I can't imagine his agent beginning negotiations on the basis that he wants a higher salary at Ipswich Town than that which he presently earns at West Ham.

Also, loan move was out - Newcastle wanted all of his wages paid - end of story. Offering my max wage was not enough.

It would be better if some flexibility could be factored into transfer deals.

i would love the option of having a convo with a player during contract negotiations, be it either signing a new player and outlining his role in the team, ie young player you could tell he wont play right away but with hard work he will get his chance, or telling an old player he may not play every game but you need his experience in the dressing room, i know we have squad status at the moment but id love it to be more in depth. Also could be used for getting players to resign contracts, again for old players you could outline their future at the clubs, and for players maybe wanting to move on it could help persuade them to sign on by offering the chance to leave if a certain bid comes in, or if you fail to delivery success.

Transfers

- A job interview. The choice of manager is very vague at the moment. The board of a club in search of a manager should arrange a round of job interviews (like 3 or something). In that interview they tell you their vision of the future of the club and they ask you about the way you aim to achieve those goals, how you want to play, what to do with finances, transfers, how you see your future (will you stay long term or is this club a temporary step to try and reach the top of football), those sort of things.

In that way the club can decide if you are the man for the job or not, and they can also hold you responsible if you dont make your promises true (so sucking up to their wishes just to get the job may backfire at some point).

- That clubs can offer managers a pre-contract that starts when their current managers contract rus out. I see lots of messages during a season about clubs considering their managers position (or fear their manager will leave) at end of contract, and manager such-and-such is the ideal candidate to replace him, but I can't show interest in those jobs. In real life it often happens that a manager indicates he's ready for a new challenge and won't renew his contract, or a board state that it's time for fresh blood come end of season and the contract won't be renewd. I.e.:Last year the manager of my local club FC Groningen (Ron Jans) decided to end his reign after 8 years at the club at the end of the season and ventilated that through the press. Couple of weeks later he signed a pre-contract with rivals sc Heerenveen in februari. So FC Groningen pre-contracted their current manager Pieter Huistra around that time also.

Board/player/media interaction

-I think a press conference after you resign (or get sacked) is missing. Or even a chance to talk to the squad or the board about it. In that way you can explain your motives ("I loved my stay at this club but I: brought the club all I think I can, want to try at a higher level, think it's time for a new challenge, am angry with the board, have no sufficient funds to achieve your goals, don't see a future here"). And maybe some questions on staff or players you'd want to take to your new club (if you have one already). Following this interview a news-message describing your views and summarising your career at the club.

Player/media interaction

I've been praising/declaring interest in Yaya Sanogo in an effort to prize him away from Marseille to my Arsenal team. I attended a Marseille game in which he scored and got man of the match yet in his player interaction 'praise previous performance' is greyed out with 'player didn't play well in his previous match' when I hover the mouse over the interaction. I think it might have something to do with the fact he was substituted after around 80 minutes.

I suppose my main criticism would be that every club seems the same, excepting of course expectation level due to reputation. People are attracted to a club for a reason in real life, and often geography has nothing to do with it; it's often about the style and character of the club. I would love to see each club in the game reflect it's unique personality, for example if you are manager of Barca, your team would be expected to play in a certain way; if you try to play a long ball style you would most likely be sacked and reviled for ever, irrespective of success. I would hope that chairmen/presidents would take into account your history in terms of playing style and type of transfers before appointing a manager so that clubs stay true to their style. Of course, if you are ultra successful, a la Mourinho, a lot of clubs will make an exception if you don't fit into their usual style.

I'd like to see each club demand a different approach to the playing squad too, some would expect you to promote heavily from your academy (and not just for economic reasons), whereas others and ambitious presidents might expect you to make galactico signings and DEMAND that you play them, so you would have to consider whether you could work under a certain president before signing. Of course, your past record should have a bearing on whether you would be deemed suitable by a particular president for their club; do you have a good track record in developing players, can you handle superstars. This could also filter down to which players want to join you, if you give young players a chance in the 1st team, more might be prepared to sign with you.

I'd like to see presidential elections form a huge part of the game espicially if you are managing Real or Barca, and in a wider context, these elections with their promised signings (which you as manager would likely have no say over) will impact on other clubs and players. Of course, you might be associated with the previous regime and be out, of if you were an opponent of the previous president, you might be in. If you manage a huge contintental club, you're not going to have full control over transfers, unless you are a huge profile manager who demands and negotiates for it upon signing. And if you are at a big club and your rival makes a big signing, then I would like it prompt your president into retaliating in the market. For example if Milan signed C. Ronaldo, Inter would probably try to respond etc. And if you are due to host the champions' league final at your stadium, this might have an impact on your transfer budget for that season as your board might be desperate for you to feature in the final etc.

I'd like to see a clubs' fans more involved in the game, demanding the board/manager make signings, saying your team is being left behind etc compared to other teams, concerns about other tycoons investiing heavily whilst their team isn't. And would it be possible for fans to have more of a memory? So that they remember great managers and players who have left and compare them to the new regime. And when you play at away stadiums if would be fun if the other fans let their feeling about you, if they have any, be known. Also, when you return to your old club with your new team or as an international manager to your old club, it would be good if you got a reception (good or bad) from your old fans

Lastly press conferences, if you are going to have them, they should have a massive impact in the game; the things you say should have consequences, fans/players have long memories, so, if you are rude about a club/player it should hugley hinder your chances of managing that club or signing that player later on.

It's basically a great game though

p.s if you are managing Milan, they have about 10 physios; they are obviously there for a reason irl (Milanlab) but the game insists you should only have the generic 3; it's not massively important to the game of course, but removing the whole one size fits all would a huge step forward imo in improving the game and making clubs unique and different from one another.

Scouting

*I would like to have the option of permanently placing a scout in a country (or hiring a scout that is already based there)

*I would like to be able to suggest how long a scout, scouts a Nation for. Also, how long he soends scouting each division i.e. 70% 1st div, 20% 2nd div and 10% 3rd div.

*It would be useful if we can select for a scout to scout a national annually and bi annually.

*We should be able to ask the scout to find a specific player (not asking to look for attributes) i.e. find me a determined defensive midfielder, attacking fullback, etc.

*Graphical Global view of current scouting and knowledge would be useful.

Academy

*We should have the option of telling the academy to focus their training in a certain way i.e. work on technical attributes, develope players to be athletes, etc.

*Internaional academies - some clubs have this across the globe. The top clubs should be able to set a couple of these up

*We should be able to see (or have reports) the players that are coming through. This way, we know what to look for when making tranfers (i.e. The academy reports that there are some promising fullbacks coming through the ranks.

Pre-season

*It would be nice if a countries FA would approach your Board and ask them if they would like to tour their country. Most tours consist of at least one game against a Nation's or Leagues XI, with a couple of league games as well.

*Irl most teams have training camps abroad. It would be good if we could spend a few weeks away here, where they players train harder due to their being less distractions.

*If you setup a regional friendly cup, it would be good if the game recognised this, i.e. This friendly cup pits some of the top North West clubs together in what should be a very competitive competition.

Internaional

*Training, this happens irl so should happen in the game.

*Having your coaches/assman scout some of your players.

*More information on the race to host the World Cup/European Championship.

Tactics

*Allowing us to place a player wherever we want them (not the pre-set positions). If I want a RB to player more centrally, I should be able to move him over a little bit. Currently I would have to change the width options which would change the entire team.

I would like to see SI address the existing skins. I don't wish to download non SI skins in case they interfere with the game. The two alternatives of white and dark, in my view, are not completely awful but I would like to have more options on this front. For example, enlarged club's crest, photo of selected football grounds, photo of relevant trophy, simple old style "grass" background - everyone would have thier own ideas.

Agree with point made above that if there is a controversial decision in a game, you should receive accurate info from assistant manager on the decision as he, in real life, would have the benefit of TV replays etc.

After January transfer patch is released, would like to see option of starting from Jan 1 with tables up to date as per real life to that date. The game can start to feel "old" by mid March/April as the season in real life ends.

Would like to see SI maintain up dates for patch releases as they did with 11.3 - it helped quell the mayhem and speculation.

An option to get a potential transfer target to change his mind. There is currently nothing a manager can do if the target's agent simply says his client is not interested. In certain cases, wouldn't it be better if an offer could be made anyway? Or if you had the option to discuss your plans for the future with the target/agent or show him around your club, or explain how you would help him adapt to life in the area etc? In other words to have a chance to "sell the club" to the player.

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/262049-Relegation-Battle!

I think this is really good and should be implemented.

I've been feeling the same in recent years - SI seems to get ME working for 3rd patch, but next year it's like starting all over. ME is the thing that needs to be touched the least - only tweak minor bugs that's still appearing in 11.3 to get clean, fully working ME for 12.0 version, instead try to advance management experience:

- transfers/contracts

- today you can't make an offer when player is not interested. Why? You could make the offer, he could tell you his not interested, but may accept your existing offer in 2 weeks if no other offer is made or other club interest disappears. You should still be able to make an offer.

- Assistants should advise you if the contract should be renewed or not and what wage and status they think player deserves

- staff should be more flexible about their roles. If coach is skilled in scouting and money is good and club has good reputation, why turn down an offer?

- player interaction

- players giving feedback in case you use them wrongly (e.g. in case player feels you play them out of position or with orders that have poor effect to his performance, he could point it out). It cuold be very helpful for players who are not very experienced in tactics department

- staff interaction

- now pre-match advice takes over whole staff advice screen, you see no other suggestions 2 days before match. why? It could be separated on your screen, but advice about recommended signings, player positions, training etc. should still be present whether there's match going on or not.

- assman could suggest lineup for coming match, concerning player injuries, saved tactics, fitness levels and form.

feeder clubs

- sending players on loan to feeder club is the easiest loaning opportunity, but there's no indicator if he's going to get playing time or no. There should be dialogue about that, when player is offered to feeder club, then feeder club manager gives you answer about what role he sees this player having in coming season. When it's just backup/bench warmer, you may withdraw your loan offer

As far as boardroom and stuff is concerned I started this thread a while ago which I'll repost again to save people clicking the link if they can't be arsed.

Was thinking about Football Manager last night (this is how exciting my life is) and the boardroom interaction part of the game.

At the moment you can go in and request to update training facilities, youth facilities, stadium or get more money for the team and if the board deny your request you can issue an ultimatum and then that's it. With some clubs, especially lower league clubs who have a talented manager the club they would not want to lose the manager, but at the same time wouldn't want to overspend on the things being requested. That's why I think there should be a secondary (after ultimatum maybe) option to ask for future moneys to be directed into a certain area.

For example I am playing as AFC Hornchurch at the moment and I want my Youth Facilities to be upgraded. The money's not there so I either give an ultimatum or leave it. Instead I'd like to be able to say something along the lines of "I understand we don't have the money right now, but I'd like any future funds to be directed into the youth development of the club."

This would be cool as it allows you to plan long term what type of club you want to build. You can request future money for transfers if you want, the new stadium or upgrades you need or to develop the youth and training facilities. You can already request (or you could in FM10) upgrades to facilities as part of your contract negotiations, but this would add a secondary level to boardroom interaction when the money isn't there beyond the "back me or sack me" thing we have at the moment. Think of them as boardroom promises (we have manager promises to players already) that you can use in your negotiations with the club.

Obviously this would only usually happen with the right chairman and work if the manager was well-respected or built up enough credit with the club to be trusted with the long-term direction of it and wouldn't happen all the time.

Also the interaction with players and managers has too many options grayed out a lot of the time. One really frustrating thing is that after a match a manager will have a go at me and then when I click on him all the options are grayed out. Especially when it comes to mind games and direct rivals the post-match needs to be improved. Managers don't just stop talking about a manager directly after the game and move onto the next one.

Manager turnover

currently there is just ONE WAY to change club, and it's waiting for another club to sack their manager so you can apply or be approached... More often than not it's a "now or never" deal, as the option to join at the end of the season is a rarity.

So it's either getting sacked/resigning or jumping ship in the middle of the season.

It doesn't take much to understand such a career isn't remotely realistic, and such disjointedness kills the idea of "planning" our project at any club... No real-life manager has ever risen to the top by leaving his previous club during the season, much less during a building-up phase...

Just think of Mourinho leaving Porto weeks before their Champions League final because Chelsea came knocking at his door and they couldn't wait for july... Isn't this silly?

Also, winning cycles do finish, clubs want something new... long-serving managers like Guy Roux or Sir Alex are the exception, not the rule... So getting a new contract almost by default, as long as we're doing fine, isn't that great either... Knowing we're there forever if we want to doesn't encourage us to move, and we always build for the future, and the more we build the less interest we have in moving on.

We need AI to offer contracts "from next season" more often, we need boards to change "for the sake of it", we need AI managers wanting to move, we need more reasons to change club ourselves.

Manager turnover

Also, winning cycles do finish, clubs want something new... long-serving managers like Guy Roux or Sir Alex are the exception, not the rule... So getting a new contract almost by default, as long as we're doing fine, isn't that great either... Knowing we're there forever if we want to doesn't encourage us to move, and we always build for the future, and the more we build the less interest we have in moving on.

I think that would be a really bad idea, simply because it's not fun. There have always been problems with people saying they were fired for "no reason", and no one has ever thought "oh great, time for a change" afterwards. A lot of people get quite attached to their club and players. For playability reasons alone, players shouldn't be fired just for "a change" (well maybe with takeovers being an exception).

I think sometimes big clubs should be sacking for different reasons other than "your not successful enough". I mean, Capello was sacked for being to defensive at Madrid. The fans and board didn't like it. I think there should be more pressure (especially at bigger clubs) for doing things a certain way (Barcelona won't be happy if you turned them into a Stoke-style team), playing certain players (for example, I doubt Abramovich and Chelsea supporters would be happy if Torres was barely playing), and these - coupled with bad results or just a poor performance in one competition - could get you the sack.

If you've done a fairly average job - not bad but not pushing boundaries or showing development or bringing in enough success - your contract could be just left to expire.

I think sometimes big clubs should be sacking for different reasons other than "your not successful enough". I mean, Capello was sacked for being to defensive at Madrid. The fans and board didn't like it. I think there should be more pressure (especially at bigger clubs) for doing things a certain way (Barcelona won't be happy if you turned them into a Stoke-style team), playing certain players (for example, I doubt Abramovich and Chelsea supporters would be happy if Torres was barely playing), and these - coupled with bad results or just a poor performance in one competition - could get you the sack.

If you've done a fairly average job - not bad but not pushing boundaries or showing development or bringing in enough success - your contract could be just left to expire.

I agree with the point that in big clubs (Real, Barca, ManU, Arsenal, Chelsea, Inter, Bayern etc.) the bar should be high. Only domestic title is not enough and I believe that if such club is not reaching to CL finals/semifinals for 2-3 years something needs to be changed. In smaller clubs you can get board feedback like "they're disappointed, but they understand why team lost in 4th round...". Well, Abramovich will not understand. If you don't win, it doesn't matter why.

Playing style shouldn't be involved - as long as you're winning, no one's complaining.

Transfers/Contracts

Player Offers - I doubt a manager would recieve all of these random offers for players. These are annoying and flood the inbox, so we should be able to filter the type of offers we get. A new option somewhere to select what position/age/price you are looking for, and only recieve offers of those kinds.

Comparing

Minor menu change, with a group at the top listing every player in your team.

Right-click > Scouting > Compare With > Team Name > Your Players
                                     > Players you have clicked on as normal

Transfers/Contracts

Player Offers - I doubt a manager would recieve all of these random offers for players. These are annoying and flood the inbox, so we should be able to filter the type of offers we get. A new option somewhere to select what position/age/price you are looking for, and only recieve offers of those kinds.

Comparing

Minor menu change, with a group at the top listing every player in your team.

Right-click > Scouting > Compare With > Team Name > Your Players
                                     > Players you have clicked on as normal

If I am to buy an important and talented player from an AI club, priced at, say, £5m - I need to bid upwards of £15m in order to get their board to start talking. This has become better in FM11 than in previous versions but it is still difficult to sign players from clubs which doesn't struggle financially.

When that same club shows interest in MY top players, though, their bid is so low it is insulting me. If they want £30m for Aguero, I want at least 20m for my player when they are bidding for him. But they bid "market price" and that's it! Annoying. I now understand why there are so few transfers and so little team building in the world of AI managers. While it is perhaps realistic that clubs don't replace their teams every 4th or 5th year like I do, it would be a better gaming experience if players actually changed clubs - so it wouldn't be a bad thing even if it wasn't entirely realistic.

Another related problem is that clubs sign new contracts with their most highly regarded players very often - maybe even every year - and that is unrealiistic. The result is that there are even fewer signings in the gaming world. This could be fixed easily by having players refuse to sign new contracts (if they are happy with it) until the last year of their contracts, as well as the board not letting you offer new contracts to players who already have longer contracts, unless the players (or you) ask for permission to do so. And even then the player should hesitate signing a new contract with your club if it A. Isn't performing to expectations, B. Isn't big enough for his ambitions, C. Haven't won enough competitions, D. He isn't playing enough, E. He wants a new challenge, F. He wants to move on in order to further his career, G. He is stepping down after a long career, H. any crazy reason players would have to not sign for you...

This is how it is done in the real world.

I think that would be a really bad idea, simply because it's not fun. There have always been problems with people saying they were fired for "no reason", and no one has ever thought "oh great, time for a change" afterwards. A lot of people get quite attached to their club and players. For playability reasons alone, players shouldn't be fired just for "a change" (well maybe with takeovers being an exception).

Hmmm, another case of "realism matters only as long as it doesn't clash with our fun" double-standard?

Seriously, I don't care if we get attached to our club and the chairman suddenly decides he want to shake things up... I'm not saying it should happen overnight, at least not with "balanced" Chairmen... But guys like Jesus Gil, Gaucci or Zamparini have been known for their infamous "moodswings", so one week the manager was a genius, one week later he was sitting on a bench in a park.

Ancelotti loves AC Milan, and the other way around... They just thought it was time to move on. They decided "this is our final season"

as long as you're winning, no one's complaining.

Not true... some fans expect to win and to do so IN STYLE...

Transfers/Contracts

The biggest problem here with me is the fact that so often clubs are interested in my players, without me putting them on the transfer list. I raise their asking price, and some clubs drop off, and some remain. Even the media states, Man U are interested in Generic Player, and would have to pay £30 million to get him.

SOmetimes these players are wanted for a year by the same club (At times on and off) but then if i ever go to offer them out, i get a ridiculous offer of like £10million.

Surely if they have been hinting at buying a player for a year, know his asking price, have stated in the media that they want him, then why would they not buy him given the fact i have offered the player they want.

Also in FM11.3 i duno why but i seem to get NO offers for players unless i have offered them out.

The biggest frustration is then seeing a worse, stats wise, performance wise player, get bought from one computer team to another for a highly inflated price.

That's one of the things that frustrate me to no end. The AI can be interested in players for years, but almost never put in a bid. I put them on the transfer list, and still no bid. All that happens is that more clubs are interested. But nobody bids. But his value decreases. So I try to offer him out for a bit over his asking price. If he's a very good player some bids usually come in - but for (much) less than I offered him around for. On the other hand, if I'm trying to buy I player, more often than not I have to pay out the nose to get him. It's very frustrating and I hope this gets sorted for FM12 (mainly the no bids thing, paying much I'm okay with if it's a great player). Not sure how many years I've said that though

Please just make all the features the game has now work together and work correctly. That is all I wish for.

New features cause more bugs and the game play is in decline. Please just take what you have already and make the game work as one...not little bits and pieces that seem unrelated.

You would not build something which had parts that did not work correctly and then add more and more parts. You would get everything working well and then add new things.

Being innovative and creative is all well and good but you must have the base set up correctly first.

Please...no new features until the game you now have out works as you and the customers want it too.

Thank you.

True that. AI teams are interested in one of my players. He's established player, aged 28, part of national team, good experience etc. One of my key players. Game thinks his value is some £3,3m. Bids come in around £3-4m. Big clubs like Lyon and Bayern are interested, especially Bayern. van Gaal himself declares couple of times his admiration etc. I negotiate bids and ask £12m for the player. Clubs withdraw, but player page still shows they're interested. Other managers still attend to my games to see his game.

After negotiating the deal the player transfer status says 'asked price is £12m'. It means that Bayern knows I want £12m for the player, they still want the player but they see no point in bidding because they are not willing to pay £12m.

Now, the point is that PERHAPS I'd settle with £10m. But during this process there's no bid at £8m or £10m made by Bayern. AI sees transfers too straightforward - all or nothing. In case £12m is asked, there's nothing more logical than offering some 10-20% less. It's normal business.

In case I want to buy a player, I check few things:

1) Player value

2) Squad role

3) Club declarations about transfer possibilities ('club does not want to sell the player')

When player is regarded as 'indispensable' and 'club does not want to sell the player' it's obvious that I have to pay 2-3 times more than his value to get acceptance. Perhaps I even have to put in that kind of bid that would make the board react and accept bid on behalf of management as manager is very reluctant to let this player go. For some reasons AI clubs ignore this available data and think that they're getting this player for his actual declared 'player value'.

This has to be one of the best ideas for a thread in a long while.

My main gripe would be with the agents. I would like to have more communication with them, or the players concerning them. The reason is I currently have Phil Jones on 30k a week, and went to offer him a new contract, but his agent has ‘hatred’ in our relationship, and demands 150k a week, no less. I’m pretty sure, as Phil Jones is only 21, that he would accept around 60k-70k a week, and that the agent is damaging his chance at staying at his current club.

That’s only one specific example. Perhaps being able to directly offer a contract to a player instead of going through an agent, or asking a player to sack his agent?

Gandy, I was frustrated that young players I wanted to sign from clubs with less reputation didn't want to join my club, but to think about it it's fairly realistic. Take current Dortmund Borussia young squad. Many of them are being connected to big clubs, players like Götze or Grosskreutz who are not even 20 yet. They've openly declared that it's better for their career to stay where they are at least for next 1-2 seasons. Very logical.

Same with agents. Probably couple of them are really annoying and demand unrealistic wages but in the same time the player sticks with his agent and you can't get around it. Tough luck, nothing to do.

Implementing these things to FM in realistic amount makes game more interesting. You can't play the game so straightforward any more. You can't sign always the same players with every save game you start. Some players just say no. You have to find your way around it, manage your club in situation that's given to you.

I believe (and IIRC it's been confirmed by SI multiple times) that AI transfer policy is one of the hardest and trickiest things to get right in the game. Programming this so that it follows simple human logic, squad building policies etc without causing any completely unrealistic transfers is a huge task, I agree.

This thread is a breath of fresh air compared to some of the other ones that constantly pop up.

Gandy, I was frustrated that young players I wanted to sign from clubs with less reputation didn't want to join my club, but to think about it it's fairly realistic. Take current Dortmund Borussia young squad. Many of them are being connected to big clubs, players like Götze or Grosskreutz who are not even 20 yet. They've openly declared that it's better for their career to stay where they are at least for next 1-2 seasons. Very logical.

Same with agents. Probably couple of them are really annoying and demand unrealistic wages but in the same time the player sticks with his agent and you can't get around it. Tough luck, nothing to do.

Implementing these things to FM in realistic amount makes game more interesting. You can't play the game so straightforward any more. You can't sign always the same players with every save game you start. Some players just say no. You have to find your way around it, manage your club in situation that's given to you.

I believe (and IIRC it's been confirmed by SI multiple times) that AI transfer policy is one of the hardest and trickiest things to get right in the game. Programming this so that it follows simple human logic, squad building policies etc without causing any completely unrealistic transfers is a huge task, I agree.

That’s fair call, and I do recognise it would be difficult to code. A few other examples would be Lukaku and Neymar wanting to stay at their clubs to develop (I think, I know Neymar’s dad wanted him to go to West Ham at one point as a stepping stone to Chelsea, oh how we can dream). Maybe a message from the agent or some sort of interaction from the player would help in this area.

But players already at my team, with their agents demanding 120k extra per week (which would mess up my already tight finances) without having any interaction is just silly. I can only suggest that we have a bit more interaction with the agents, or the players concerning the agents. (And I am not having a go at the feature, I understand it’s new, and I am quite fond of it even with it’s issues).

When setting your tactics, you define your player roles (eg advanced forward, attack; or deep lying forward, support, or target man etc). Those remain constant (unless you change your tactics) and you place your players accordingly. I would like SI to consider a change to this methhod. What I would prefer to see is you defining each player's role on the player screen, not on the tactics screen. So, for example, if you have Conor Wickham, you can tell him his role is an attacking advanced forward and when you pick him, he performs that role.

Hmmm, another case of "realism matters only as long as it doesn't clash with our fun" double-standard?

Not at all, there is only one standard when it comes to games, and that's the fun aspect.

The "realism" aspect is anything but, when people talk about realism they really are referring to what is known as "suspension of disbelief" - which actually doesn't have much to do with actual realism at all (cf. all the role-playing game forums talking about how "realistic" or "unrealistic" a spell is).

The moment you put "real" realism (yes I know that sounds silly) before fun is the moment your game fails.

I would really like SI to iron out some of the small bugs / annoying thing in the ME and really make sure the ME works even better than it is now (11.3) instead of having to wait 3 patches before it's finally at an acceptable level to play.

Also keep up the good work I enjoy reading this thread, hope SI picks out the good suggestions here !

Scout reports/player search

--We should be able to select "minimum wage" and "maximum wage" as fields that we can add in a custom screen, just as we can select Club, Min asking price, et cetera. This would be very useful, especially for lower league clubs with poor finances. If a player is willing to join but wage demands are too high, he can't be signed. Would be nice to have this information available in the list itself so we don't have to check each player individually.

--It should be possible to get scout reports on our own players too. The assman or coaches may not have great skills in judging player ability or potential, but the scouts usually do.

Training

There has been some work on this for FM11, but not enough. I think the area simply needs a solid overhaul. It needs to be better connected to tactics and separated in team and individual training. Some of that was done for FM11, but its effect is questionable (so it has been reported at least). Maybe two (or three) separate panels are needed in training. Team training, individual training and alternatively also tactical training. It's an area that is too separate from the rest of the game right now. Aspects such as training, youth development, tactics, football philosophy needs to come more together so that you, the manager, can set your stamp on the club.