Sir_aLex Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 For the people in the UK, there was a program on last night called 'Alan Sugar Tackles Football' and if you didn't manage to watch it, get on I Player as soon as you can. It was an extremely interesting watch, with Alan Sugar (someone who i don't personally like) looking at the poor financial management of the modern day football club. Two things really stood out for me and made me draw comparison to the Football Manager series...one showing that FM has it spot on and the other (if we are to believe what Harry Redknapp say's) showing FM has it all wrong. The first point was the financial struggle 99% of clubs face and the main problem highlighted by the program was the excessive wages paid by clubs to their players and this instantly hit a chord to me. In FM you are constantly hit with ridiculously high wage demands...even for a potential squad player/back-up 21 y/o regen who has yet to start a game for his 3rd division Lithuanian side who is currently on 2 peanuts and a can a coke a week yet still wants £50k+ to sign for your middle table Premiership team (slight exaggeration there i know.) As the game progresses, along with your team, it gets increasingly harder to balance your books each season...and according to the program last night, this rings true for real life. Yes, i know that it's also pretty obvious but the similarities to what i have recently experienced with my Southampton save is uncanny. Taking 4 seasons to get into the Prem, and spending a further 3 seasons as a middle table team, i was consistently in the black, racking in tons of money and being tight with my outgoings. Yet, to really push on, i had to spend more, i had to attract the high calibre player to play along side the youth i had built up. This, of course, lead to a huge rise in wages and even though i am now challenging for Champions League places, i struggle to make ends meat, making a loss each month and sequentially, going into the red. Therefore, SI has the financial struggle faced by clubs day in day out, spot on in FM according to this program. However, my second point from the program brings up a bit of an argument that FM is actually very different to what happens IRL and this comes from an interview Lord Alan did with Spurs manager, Harry Redknapp. When asked about transfer fees/player wages, according to Harry, no manager in the league has complete interaction with these and even went as far to say he 'couldn't tell you the wages of a single player on his team...' and that this is most likely the same throughout the league. In essence, everything financial is conducted by the Chairman of the club and agents. Managers are just there for the 'football side' which would include setting potential player targets, yet not the actual transaction. Obviously, this is just one mans opinion...but i feel Harry is a straight talking/no BS man so feel inclined to believe what he say's. You also have to look at situations such as Roman Ambromivich as Chelsea...where it is regularly said he controls everything at the club including buying players. In FM, you have virtually complete control on things such signings, how much you want to pay and player wages. (there are a few exceptions obviously) and as SI will regularly come on here saying they've changed this or done that as 'this is what happens IRL and i have no problem with that...all im saying is that maybe this should be looked at in more detail for future FM's in the series? Now, i'm not saying it should be completely like Harry said it is...come on, the game would just be insanely boring if so...but i just thought it would be an interesting point of discussion and change the general outline of 'this game is broke,' 'this is a bug' threads on this board! There we go...it's a bit of an essay but just my two cents i wanted to share with fellow FM'ers. And once again, if you didn't catch the program, i implore you to watch it...brings up so many more questions than what i have here! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWaRFeGa Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 Dave Whelans idea of 'No more than two players paid over £20,000' has always been a favourite on mine on FM! Can't see it happening IRL though. Certainly not for anyone other than the usual strugglers. Would love to see a Rugby League-style salary cap. Hard to make it work though, what with such difference in finances between top and bottom. Football is doomed... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_aLex Posted May 9, 2011 Author Share Posted May 9, 2011 Sorry, i must add, one of the biggest points of discussion i tried to raise here was what is the most appropriate level of 'realism' SI must add to the game in order to make it enjoyable? For example, point 1 explains that SI have the finances part correct to RL, yet this is something in game i can find quite frustrating...yet point 2 explains that SI may have it wrong to RL in order to make the game more enjoyable, something that makes the game better for me to play... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_aLex Posted May 9, 2011 Author Share Posted May 9, 2011 Dave Whelans idea of 'No more than two players paid over £20,000' has always been a favourite on mine on FM! Can't see it happening IRL though. Certainly not for anyone other than the usual strugglers. Would love to see a Rugby League-style salary cap. Hard to make it work though, what with such difference in finances between top and bottom. Football is doomed... Yes, exactly. I am a big fan of the NFL and their version of the salary cap works tremendously in promoting 'team fairness' if you can call it that meaning you will never have a sustained period of dominance from 2 to 3 teams... But like you said, it will never work in football due to the global 'brand' of the sport. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWaRFeGa Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 Yes, exactly. I am a big fan of the NFL and their version of the salary cap works tremendously in promoting 'team fairness' if you can call it that meaning you will never have a sustained period of dominance from 2 to 3 teams...But like you said, it will never work in football due to the global 'brand' of the sport. We could learn a lot from other sports - but we won't. Football is so ignorant! Rugby League players don't even tend to transfer clubs for fees anymore - they reach the end of their contracts, then either sign a new one or take up another clubs offer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidbowie Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 The AI can't even build a squad. The AI chairmen are too stupid to realise that they should keep building that upgrade despite being 500k in the red because they are about to get 40 million in TV money. The AI needs less control over the player, not more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_numbers Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 In essence, everything financial is conducted by the Chairman of the club and agents. Managers are just there for the 'football side' which would include setting potential player targets, yet not the actual transaction. According to Snoopy himself, his involvement in Spurs' attempt to sign Charlie Adam in the January transfer window involved Daniel Levy phoning him up to say 'We might be able to get Charlie Adam, are you interested'. It has been mentioned numerous times, and SI people have said they have toyed with the idea of further removing the manager from transfer negotiations, but so far not done anything. However, it does appear as though directors of football could make it in within the next 5 years or so. I prefer having control. Certain managers have insisted that they have greater control over who is being signed and how much for - this is reportedly one of the reasons Dalglish still hasn't signed a longer deal with Liverpool. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
niletaylor Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 good programme i enjoyed it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
encore69 Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 i might get shot down for saying this but SI could give us 2 options at the start of the game, that way we could choose the amount of realism 1. Managers control financial aspects (e.g. transfer fee, wages offered to players) 2. Chairman or Director of Football control financial aspects (manager sets target players) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manutdfan4lyf Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 Going to watch it now! iPlayer to the rescue Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_aLex Posted May 9, 2011 Author Share Posted May 9, 2011 i might get shot down for saying this but SI could give us 2 options at the start of the game, that way we could choose the amount of realism1. Managers control financial aspects (e.g. transfer fee, wages offered to players) 2. Chairman or Director of Football control financial aspects (manager sets target players) regularly there are threads on here from people suggesting this idea...the whole 'more realism' option where player stats are taken out etc etc not sure how you would implement it but i dont think it would be a bad idea...that way both hardcore and casual fans would get what they wanted... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_aLex Posted May 9, 2011 Author Share Posted May 9, 2011 I prefer having control. Certain managers have insisted that they have greater control over who is being signed and how much for - this is reportedly one of the reasons Dalglish still hasn't signed a longer deal with Liverpool. Oh me too but what i was trying to get at is that if in fact Redknapp is right, then the game should go further to emulate real life...because as it stands now, it's nothing like what is really is... if you get what im trying to say! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratboy Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 i might get shot down for saying this but SI could give us 2 options at the start of the game, that way we could choose the amount of realism1. Managers control financial aspects (e.g. transfer fee, wages offered to players) 2. Chairman or Director of Football control financial aspects (manager sets target players) I like this idea. You can let the ass man handle contract renewals and I've gotten the "As this is a big transfer, you could let the board negotiate it for you" button. I just can't see managers negotiating contracts and transfer fees for a club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzie MUFC Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 When Harry Redknapp mentioned how managers don't have control over wages & contracts, I have to admit the first thing that entered my head was "Well that would be a load off my plate if they implemented this in Football Manager". So sad... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aderow Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 If only FM was adjusted for inflation It has always been hard for me to keep wages down. Every other top propsect under 17 wants me to give them a 15k-20k a week contract. Its pretty ridiculous imo....but then again maybe its because I'm the richest club on the planet... Anyways, I think things like wage control would benefit from an improvement in the AI and in the interactions that we have with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ollie laaaaaaaad Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 For me this opens up an avenue to two other good ideas (a great thread btw) 1. can make our own contracts more fun, i hate the yeh i'll suggest more money for a bit of realism, oh yeh i'll accept now. With this feature you could have an interview for a job (like NFL games had in 2006!) and then the chairman either offers you the job or not, then when negotiating your contract you can say you want more control over transfers and whatever, and whatever you agree is what is implimented. e.g. play as an Ancelotti type manager who allows the chairman/owner to purchase him player and act more as a coach as he did with Berlesconi and Abramovich to a lesser extent, or as a more hands on aactually getting involved in the money as i know Roberto Martinez is. 2. Director of Footballs, if the club has one of these (more often the top clubs) you must consult with them and let them deal with it e.g. Camoli at Liverpool clearly handled the Torres/Carroll/Suarez deals and then the lower league managers without these DOF, deal with the transfers themselves 3. Gift Buys - if you have an interfering chairman, let them buy you supposedly gift players e.g. Torres, Shevchenko. If the chairman accepts the offer on behalf of club can be in the game then why cant this when its a well known fact chairman pertciularly at a certain London club and in the Spanish capital have this all the time I hate how far SI can get behind with these sorts of things has took them this long to implement agents, so i hope they catch up with this for next year, and more imporovements to player interaction/press and definetley International Management, dont worry, im not holding my breath Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik_m Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 If Man Utd start paying Rooney £20k instead of £200k, will he have a choice? No. Hes a footballer he cant do anything else so hell have to agree. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_aLex Posted May 9, 2011 Author Share Posted May 9, 2011 If Man Utd start paying Rooney £20k instead of £200k, will he have a choice? No. Hes a footballer he cant do anything else so hell have to agree. i'm pretty sure there is something in his contract that would not allow this... it's a bit like a contract at your workplace...they could cut your wages if they wanted...but they definitely do it by a big significant amount without offering you redundancy first...a bit like they would have to offer rooney a way out first! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
afced7 Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 Are you being serious? He could either move clubs and be on 200k a week again, or take United to court over breach of contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin23 Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 do people honestly believe a word that comes out of 'arrys mouth? lets face it you dont get to live in the most expensive house on the most expensive street in england by managing mediocre teams Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robioto Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 I watched it on the i player last night, it was a decent watch. What made me laugh was when Harry Redknapp said he didn't have a clue what players were on wages wise and that players were siging new contracts wthout him knowing. Rubbish IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
afced7 Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 If it is true, you can't blame Tottenham for not trusting Redknapp with anything to do with any money matters given his very dubious history. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llew_Arshavin23 Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 Dave Whelan... Whatta Guy A True Football Chairman. Does it for the Love not the Money! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomtuck01 Posted May 9, 2011 Share Posted May 9, 2011 Would have been a half decent watch if Lord Alan didn't tell us anything that wasn't already known. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.