Why an "Unsackable" option would be beneficial to players and SI.

The option could be introduced, and targeted mostly at beginners to FM, to help them be able to play plenty of matches against different teams, and experiment with tactics, without having to spend hours on re-building a new team they've taken over, or starting a new game, each time they are sacked.

The result would be that there would be far less complaints about how hard the game is, and the option would also be there for those who aren't beginners but wish to use it anyway, say if they are taking over a pretty weak team and want some leeway in learning how to cope in the lower divisions. At any point in their career, a manager could choose to untick the option to make it more challenging and realistic.

This would have no bearing whatsoever on winning or losing matches. It would just be very helpful, in view of how much time it takes on FM, to sort out your squad/hire and sack staff etc, at the beginning of each game (or season), only to get yourself sacked because you haven't been giving enough opportunities to experiment with getting your tactics and teamtalks right.

Is there a downside to this?

The option could be introduced, and targeted mostly at beginners to FM, to help them be able to play plenty of matches against different teams, and experiment with tactics, without having to spend hours on re-building a new team they've taken over, or starting a new game, each time they are sacked.

The result would be that there would be far less complaints about how hard the game is, and the option would also be there for those who aren't beginners but wish to use it anyway, say if they are taking over a pretty weak team and want some leeway in learning how to cope in the lower divisions. At any point in their career, a manager could choose to untick the option to make it more challenging and realistic.

This would have no bearing whatsoever on winning or losing matches. It would just be very helpful, in view of how much time it takes on FM, to sort out your squad/hire and sack staff etc, at the beginning of each game (or season), only to get yourself sacked because you haven't been giving enough opportunities to experiment with getting your tactics and teamtalks right.

Is there a downside to this?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by The Gaffovski:

Is there a downside to this? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not realistic

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">At any point in their career, a manager could choose to untick the option to make it more challenging and realistic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by The Gaffovski:

Is there a downside to this? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not realistic </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not that much in the game is anymore

Tell me if this is realistic

Jose Mourinho signs a 3 year contract with Inter Milan but in his contract it says he can't be sacked but a year later he decides to "untick a little box" so he can be sacked

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by The Gaffovski:

Is there a downside to this? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How would you get a new job if you fancied a new challenge?

It would be good for when you manage a team who has the highest ambitions. Like people have been complaining about Manchester City when they win Champs League and sorts and the board wants them to win everything every season, and if you don't, you get the sack. So it would be beneficial for unrealistic ambitions like that.

It certainly wouldn't hurt the game.

It may be unrealistic, but we play games to zone ourselves out of realism. And having a couple "unrealistic" options never hurts, it just adds to the fun.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by The Gaffovski:

Is there a downside to this? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not realistic </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Neither's you being the manager of a football club.

Some people need to get some perspective.

I am quoting from the FM08 box:

More realistic than ever

Meaning that the SI team want to make it more realistic not less

I think an unsackable "option" would be a great idea.

It could be beneficial to many people including those who only play the game to manage their favoured club and the beginner who would like time to play with a club to get a feel for the game.

Having a tickbox to toggle this option would then enable them to enter "the real (game) world" when they feel they are ready.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DJdeMarco:

I think an unsackable "option" would be a great idea.

It could be beneficial to many people including those who only play the game to manage their favoured club and the beginner who would like time to play with a club to get a feel for the game.

Having a tickbox to toggle this option would then enable them to enter "the real (game) world" when they feel they are ready. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly. Thanks DJ.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by The Gaffovski:

Is there a downside to this? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Some people dont want to use this option which to them means no one else should be allowed to. Other than that there are none.

Some might say its not realistic, but they are just deluding themselves if they think FM is in any way the same as managing a club. Its a game for crying out loud.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt:

I am quoting from the FM08 box:

More realistic than ever

Meaning that the SI team want to make it more realistic not less </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its an 'option'. That means that if you find it unrealistic...don't use it.

I probably wouldn't use it but think it would be a good idea.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt:

I am quoting from the FM08 box:

More realistic than ever

Meaning that the SI team want to make it more realistic not less </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In that case, for FM09, I suggest that the following improvements to enhance the realism:

The board negotiates all transfers not the manager.

Every gamer starts unemployed (i.e. you can't start at any team) and with no reputation.

No gamer input into feeder clubs.

Player attributes are completely removed so you have to watch training sessions to find out how good your players are.

All matches have to be watched for the full 2 x 45mins plus stoppages.

No choice of leagues/database size.

All leagues in full detail all the time.

The game should finish (i.e. Game Over) around retirement age of the manager.

If you're all so bothered then put it in the Wishlist

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt:

Tell me if this is realistic

Jose Mourinho signs a 3 year contract with Inter Milan but in his contract it says he can't be sacked but a year later he decides to "untick a little box" so he can be sacked </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tell me if this is realistic:

Shop-worker/office worker/builder or whatever, is appointed Man Utd manager, replacing Alex Ferguson. This was done out of the blue, with Ferguson not expecting the sack or having any talks of retirement.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by The Gaffovski:

Is there a downside to this? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not realistic </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its a Game. :shrug:

Taking over as Arsenal manager, Man Yoo manager, Chelsea, Gravesend, Basingstoke, Leyton or whatever other club you decide to take is not realistic - but you still do it.

The match engine is main part of the game that should be "realistic". Of course, everything to an extent, but still...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Small Print:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt:

Tell me if this is realistic

Jose Mourinho signs a 3 year contract with Inter Milan but in his contract it says he can't be sacked but a year later he decides to "untick a little box" so he can be sacked </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tell me if this is realistic:

Shop-worker/office worker/builder or whatever, is appointed Man Utd manager, replacing Alex Ferguson. This was done out of the blue, with Ferguson not expecting the sack or having any talks of retirement. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Should have read your post before I put mine up :rolleye:

As it would be an option, I'm not sure why anyone would complain about seeing it added. It's not as if they would have to use it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bongo-Bongo:

As it would be an option, I'm not sure why anyone would complain about seeing it added. It's not as if they would have to use it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You would think that would be the case, but when they put the Dream Team 'Harchester United' team in, even though it was an option, there was uproar and they eventually removed it for the next game. - Not that I could ever figure out how to use them as a team - but I was still impressed that they had put them there.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NepentheZ:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bongo-Bongo:

As it would be an option, I'm not sure why anyone would complain about seeing it added. It's not as if they would have to use it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You would think that would be the case, but when they put the Dream Team 'Harchester United' team in, even though it was an option, there was uproar and they eventually removed it for the next game. - Not that I could ever figure out how to use them as a team - but I was still impressed that they had put them there. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I remeber that well. I could never quite understand peoples problem with Harchester being there as an option. Whats next? A strop about the rolling autosave option? I mean, no manager IRL can go back a week or two in time if he crashes so it shouldn't be in the game as it's not realistic.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt:

If you're all so bothered then put it in the Wishlist </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know why your being so antagonistic, as I think it's a great idea.

Besides, I'd maybe even last more than a season with Liverpool

I love the irony...

The players who want an "unsackable" option are getting lambasted by others who say this is "unrealistic".

I wonder if any of these same "realistic" players have also used the player search list to find players/staff/other personnel without using the job centre to advertise or find players using methods outside of their own scouts?

I imagine the LLaMa's are laughing at the irony too.

I enjoy the game. I want to be immersed in it as much as I want. Having some in-game preferences would be nice to tick at the start of a game. We already have plenty of preferences with the data editor, why not another editorial preference?

don't see why ppl get so shirty with suggestions like this, if you don't like it u'd just leave it switched off!

I'm a long time player and actually think this would be a good idea.

I only ever play as 1 club, do 20-30 seasons or so with them then do the same on the next version. I might start a separate game with a different club or in another country. If I get sacked (not that I have for last few versions) it's just annoying have to add a new manager to the club then re-do all your lists/training etc.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DJdeMarco:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt:

I am quoting from the FM08 box:

More realistic than ever

Meaning that the SI team want to make it more realistic not less </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In that case, for FM09, I suggest that the following improvements to enhance the realism:

The board negotiates all transfers not the manager.

Every gamer starts unemployed (i.e. you can't start at any team) and with no reputation.

No gamer input into feeder clubs.

Player attributes are completely removed so you have to watch training sessions to find out how good your players are.

All matches have to be watched for the full 2 x 45mins plus stoppages.

No choice of leagues/database size.

All leagues in full detail all the time.

The game should finish (i.e. Game Over) around retirement age of the manager. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Also, the game moves in real time, so you only get to watch a game once or twice a week. It's ok though, cause you'll be watching training for 4 hours a day.

Not sure I'm a fan of this idea. You will lose a whole chunk of realism and enjoyment from the game. What do the games mean if you know you cant get sacked!?

some people do just buy it to manager thier favourite club and see how they do, not make themsleves a second life and career out of it(im afraid i do this.), so it would be good just for the people who want to pick up and play a season or 2.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by iacovone:

Not sure I'm a fan of this idea. You will lose a whole chunk of realism and enjoyment from the game. What do the games mean if you know you cant get sacked!? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In principle, I agree. You could do anything, and not get sacked. Buy players until the club is soooo far in the red, play about with stupidity on the pitch to earn records, etc, or just "Throw" games and it would mean nothing.

But for the people that want to manage a team, and get sacked for some of the following reasons, this would be a great idea.

Reasons Sacked for:

-Board Take Over

-Board Confidence Bugs

-Poor Players, but no transfer budget

-Too high expectations

If this option was here, these would no longer be a problem. I can't tell you how annoying it was in FM07 when I took over Billericay in the Conference South, Managed them for 12 seasons, getting them to Div. 1, when a new board took over and sacked me. That, in itself is unrealistic, because a new board would clearly see the good work I've done for the club, and would surely want to keep me as manager. In that scenario, this option would be fantastic.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by copperhorse21:

I love the irony...

The players who want an "unsackable" option are getting lambasted by others who say this is "unrealistic".

I wonder if any of these same "realistic" players have also used the player search list to find players/staff/other personnel without using the job centre to advertise or find players using methods outside of their own scouts?

I imagine the LLaMa's are laughing at the irony too.

I enjoy the game. I want to be immersed in it as much as I want. Having some in-game preferences would be nice to tick at the start of a game. We already have plenty of preferences with the data editor, why not another editorial preference? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Great post. I made a similar point a few above. Almost everything we do in FM is "unrealistic" to some extent. As I said, I think the main focus of realism should be the Match engine, the way transfers are conducted and training & tactics modules. (which, due to things such as the corner bug, and downloadable "cheat" training) are a massive problem, imho. Not weather or not the manager can have an "I don't want to get sacked" option.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt:

I am quoting from the FM08 box:

More realistic than ever

Meaning that the SI team want to make it more realistic not less </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Now you too can manage a team of circular blobs running round a pitch, just like Arsene Wenger!"

It's a game, even in other simulation games (not just football) alot of games have unsackable boxes.

I wouldn't use the unsackable option but I still believe it should exist.

as long as it doesn't work on multiplayers game i wouldn't really mind

It's a great idea considering, that it DOESN'T have to be active, so if you want it you get it... if you don't want it you don't get, it's as easy as that.

We should obviously also remove the

"allow first window transfer budget" (whatever it's named) option, not to mention the

"use real players" option!

I mean, how realistic is the game with THAT option unticked?

I swear, some people think that their way of playing is the only way of playing.

What do you care if someone wants to play like an idiot, getting all sorts of horrid records? Why should we care if someone manages to get Arsenal down to conference north without getting sacked and then gets them back up for the fun of it? It's not your game that person is playing, is it?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Some people dont want to use this option which to them means no one else should be allowed to. Other than that there are none.

Some might say its not realistic, but they are just deluding themselves if they think FM is in any way the same as managing a club. Its a game for crying out loud. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Couldn't of put it better myself

In principle, I'm not opposed to the idea of having an unsackable option in the game, the only problem I see is that, in practice, it might not be as straight-forward as simply putting in a tick-box option.

There are various in-game factors that count towards the board's confidence in your management, and therefore various factors which determine whether or not you get sacked. If this option were to be implemented would it mean disabling the entire board confidence module? If so, would this have a knock on effect on other aspects of the game? For example, if the code that is used to determine board confidence for the player also determines confidence in AI managers, would this mean that none of them either got sacked either?

The other option is to leave everything as it is but never have the board actually sack you. Although if everything else is the same this could lead to unrealistic rumours in the press of someone being lined up for your job if the board do pull the trigger etc.

It may not be as complicated as I'm making it out to be, only the developers can answer that, but if it is that complicated I don't see SI ever implementing it, as there wouldn't be enough demand (and therefore enough extra customers) to justify the effort. Because even though a lot of people in the thread support the idea in theory (myself included) most of them have said they wouldn't actually use it themselves. So you have to ask if it would really generate that many extra customers for FM09 or whatever version it's implemented for.

I personally don't think it should be an option.

But if it's implemented, make it so that if someone has 'unsackable' ticked when they start their game, they're not eligible for any Hall Of Fame records.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeyt:

Tell me if this is realistic

Jose Mourinho signs a 3 year contract with Inter Milan but in his contract it says he can't be sacked but a year later he decides to "untick a little box" so he can be sacked </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh for fudge sake!! Its a game. As soon as you click continue its not relistic oterwise I should have shed loads of coaching badges by now!!

I see this request brought up every once in a while, myself included. Unlike managers IRL, I don't work for the money, I want to "build" and "grow" a team at my own leisure. If I want to take 20 years to do so, then what? Unsackability sure is not realistic but I still don't see why other folks insist on shooting the idea down everytime it's brought up. After all the "unrealistic" league I have on my PC have nothing to do with other "realistic" leagues and I dont' see how my unsackable manager would diminish the enjoyment of others who like to live on the edge.

On the other hand, in short of simply checking a "sackable" box, thus rendering the issue black and white, I have suggested before that SI build in a "tolerance" meter. Either different clubs would have different tolerance and patience level towards managers (so for those who want to take it slowly, they could select to the manager of those particular clubs), or the users could check a particular tolerance level across the board at the beginning of the game. So for some, the tolerance would be tuned to the "reality" while for others the tolerance could be 2 or 3 horrible seasons before one gets sacked, or even more.

From the marketability standpoint I see this potential feature quite appealing to more people who are not master tacticians. In many video games, you could select easy, medium, hard level, which basically translate to the player being easier/more difficult to get killed. Because not everybody has the fast fingers but still want to play the game. I would apply the same logic to FM.

To me, for every build of FM, I seldom played the game again after getting sacked, coz the thoughts of spending many many hours IRL building a team and losing everything in a few hours just makes me sick....

This is a recording...you don't need a sackable option, all you have to do if you want to continue managing the same club after getting the sack is retire and re-enter the game as a new user; you'll even have the benefit of the "honeymoon period" every new manager has with his new team...this is a recording...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gunnerfan:

This is a recording...you don't need a sackable option, all you have to do if you want to continue managing the same club after getting the sack is retire and re-enter the game as a new user; you'll even have the benefit of the "honeymoon period" every new manager has with his new team...this is a recording... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And those who want to keep the history/records of their manager?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sirdez24:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by gunnerfan:

This is a recording...you don't need a sackable option, all you have to do if you want to continue managing the same club after getting the sack is retire and re-enter the game as a new user; you'll even have the benefit of the "honeymoon period" every new manager has with his new team...this is a recording... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And those who want to keep the history/records of their manager? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, they get to choose which is more important to them. Besides, in most cases, if you've gotten the sack, there isn't a lot of history. But if they insist, they can always keep a notebook.

Here is an idea. When you think you are getting sacked, then just restart the game. Its pretty simple really.

But its just an idea.

Cheers

This should absolutely be an option. I don't believe however that it should be changeable once the game starts - if you want to change it, you need to start a new game.

I know you can reincarnate yourself and immediately take over the job your previous self just got fired from, but that's not the same.

Also, if you're talking about realism - how is the board being extremely upset about a Community Shield loss the day after, forget months down the line realistic?

What's the point of unsackable?

It's the same as cheating when you come back to saved game before matches and keep playing until you win.

Board confidence should be improved to be reasonable and I don't see why this unsackable should even be an option.

Unsackable? Unthinkable!

People are saying that this is unrealistic but that is a joke if it was a box with the option to tick and untick this would be great for alot of people. Is it realistic that at the unticking of a box you can change every player in the world to a made up name, I don't think so. If its optional it shouldn't even bother people who do not want to use it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Macyst:

What's the point of unsackable?

It's the same as cheating when you come back to saved game before matches and keep playing until you win.

Board confidence should be improved to be reasonable and I don't see why this unsackable should even be an option.

Unsackable? Unthinkable!

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

At last, someone on my side

I dont understand why some people are so against the idea of having an option that only other people would use. What is wrong with you? It doesnt affect you in any way it only helps someone else.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jakobx:

I dont understand why some people are so against the idea of having an option that only other people would use. What is wrong with you? It doesnt affect you in any way it only helps someone else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Technically, it's cheating.

Oh and by the way, there isn't anything wrong with us

There's a lot of narcissistic people here. Who cares how others play the game? There should be an option for players that want it and if you don't then just untick it, simply as that.

So yes there definitely should be a unsackable option.