Club Reputation after Sugar Daddy Takeover

In my save Arsenal have been taken over this season by a Slovakian Zillionaire. They finished 3rd in the league after us (Liverpool) and City which was their best finish since there real life second in 2005. Their reputation had dropped to 4* after the previous season and has now jumped to 5* after the season they were taken over. Is this correct? Even though a team wins nothing a board takeover can turn them into the highest rep club in the world?

Sounds about rigth. For instance it happend to City, and Chelsea before them. Another example is Anzhi. Who can say that they had heard of them before they got filthy rich?

yes of course a sugardaddy can increase reputation as the funds are available to spend on most if not all the players available. a bit like how man city irl and on fm can attract most if not every player because of cash

in my game. 3 sugardaddys are in the premier league aswell as the usual rich list of man utd, chelsea, man city and arsenal. they are sunderland (got taken over in 2014 by a sugardaddy) aston villa (taken over 2022 by a sugardaddy) and last week on my game 2025 (fulham). my game in particular is very competitive as there are 8 clubs including myself with money to spend (i havent checked fmrte myself) to see what my chairman is but i bought low and sold high so i have 700million in funds for transfers after not spending more than 2 million a season on youth. i have sold 10 world class players in the last 5 years in my game which has left me nicely balanced on cash and players.

Sounds about rigth. For instance it happend to City, and Chelsea before them. Another example is Anzhi. Who can say that they had heard of them before they got filthy rich?

I agree an increase is correct. But the biggest team in the world without winning a trophy?

Ok, I agree that it is a bit much.

How did they do in the Champions League the last 4 or 5 seasons? A place among the 4 best in the CL counts more towards world rep than a Premier League win does.

How did they do in the Champions League the last 4 or 5 seasons? A place among the 4 best in the CL counts more towards world rep than a Premier League win does.

Weren't in it last season due to 5th place finish, no further than Quarters previously.

They also overtook Liverpool & Barca who were both Finalists.

Well, then it's quite clear that a sugar daddy takeover can mean a huge increase in rep, doesn't it. I'm not seeing the logic in this myself, to be honest, but ... hey, it's not very important. And it's the same for everyone, so no big deal.

Well, then it's quite clear that a sugar daddy takeover can mean a huge increase in rep, doesn't it. I'm not seeing the logic in this myself, to be honest, but ... hey, it's not very important. And it's the same for everyone, so no big deal.

Well it is a problem really. Because although I have just won the Champions league, Arsenal can now unsettle players of mine because they are the bigger club.

Now, Man City are in this situation, could they realistically unsettle the likes of messi, Pique, Fabregas?

They can, yes - just like Man City can do now. In real football. You could to, if you were lucky enough to get a sugar daddy. It's not fair, but hey - life isn't. In the case of the Barca players, I think quite a few of them would not consider leaving Barca under any circumstances whatsoever. That is a very special club, with a very special standing in the footballing world nowadays. That said, Man City were certainly able to get players from them, right? Or snap up players barca were interrested in right in front of their noses. Money talks very well.

It's not fair, sugar daddies. But it happens. Get on with it.

I am agreeing with you that a sugar daddy should not automatically mean a huge increase in reputation, just like that. But I know also that a club with massive financial backing is an allmost unbeatable power in itself. Just look at Anzhi, and what players they can attract, just with money.

I'm not moaning, just stating it unrealistic. I for instance sold them Otamendi for 40mil. And he stated he was looking forward to the challenge of playing at a bigger club or at a higher level. So moving from league, domestic cup winners & Champions league runners up to a team not even in the champions league and at the time struggling in 9th in the league because you want to play at a higher level is realistic?

As I say this isn't moaning, it's actually worked to my advantage off loading unwanted players so far.

What IS realistic though, is the EXPECTED future of a club. meaning that a player will look at more than just current league standing or recent success when he chooses to switch clubs. If a club has a massive financial backing and massive future ambitions (world supremacy!) it will certainly make him think twice. And it is perhaps exactly this SI is trying to emulate if they give clubs a massive boost in reputation right after they have got a sugar daddy.

I was playing as Arsenal in one of my previous saves. After I had some success for a few seasons, a new board took over, with a sugar daddy chairman. The board immediately cleared all of the clubs debts, starting building a new stadium (yes, even if the Emirates wasn't that old!), upgraded every facilities that could be upgraded, greatly increased the amount of coaches, physios and scouts I could employ, and gave me a massive transfer purse .... all without me asking for any of it. Fair? No. Fun? Yes. Needlessly to say there was very few players anywhere that would not consider coming to play for me. Including most in the Barca first team.

it does say when you ask the board for more wage budget that you wish to do it to attract bigger name, so presumably the available funding is part of reputation.

It happens in one of my saves too to Tottenham, who even got Mourinho from Madrid. Their reputation boost makes them #1 in the world, but they soon drop back to normal (behind Man Utd, etc.) after a year due to lack of silverware.

I think the problem is one of scaling:

The boost that they've put in is probably correct for a club like Anzhi - who move from "complete unknowns" to "known by many followers of world football" in a single bound. But the rep boost needs to become increasingly less significant as you go up the scale.

Man City went from standard Premiership club with a few interesting signings, to rich but not respected under Hughes. They couldn't land a big name on the strength of money alone - they had to wait until they got Champion's League football.

Man City went from standard Premiership club with a few interesting signings, to rich but not respected under Hughes. They couldn't land a big name on the strength of money alone - they had to wait until they got Champion's League football.

City signed Robinho, Adebayor, Tevez, Kolo Toure, Yaya Toyre, David Silva and Mario Balotelli before gualifying to champions league. So are you saying they are not big name -signings?

they are now but they werent really at the time (except robinho and adebayor). tevez was at west ham and ballotelli wasnt that big a name

no they are greedy moneygrabber signings

tevez was at man utd, and fergie stupidly stalled on contracts, and no one knew who ballotelli was

Some people did know who Ballotelli is, If you follow italian football. And Yes, they were all big name signings. Even their rep would take a hike due to the exposure but they were definately big as they rolled in

Kolo came from minnows Arsenal, where his biggest achievement was an unbeaten season, so yeah. He needed the exposure of Man City. And his brother Yaya was at a small provincial club in catalonia. Bar-somethingorother. Tevez was at english minnows Man United, and Balotelli certainly wasn't seen as the hottest property in Italy, and one of the best young players in the world. Not at all!

The simple fact is a big buyout like that will make a mediocre club into a big deal. It'll make a giant temporarily look bigger than Jesus. Look at Chelski. When roman came in they were 4th in the league but in no way competing. They were a cup side. For a year or two, they were suddenly the biggest club on the planet, and could seemingly buy anyone.

If Arsenal started a little ahead of where Chelski were when Roman came in, why shouldn't they be catapulted into the #1 slot temporarily?

If Arsenal started a little ahead of where Chelski were when Roman came in, why shouldn't they be catapulted into the #1 slot temporarily?

Because Arsene Wenger wouldn't buy any big name or offer a big contract.

Because Arsene Wenger wouldn't buy any big name or offer a big contract.

Because Wenger has never bought big players or paid big wages, right?

It's not like the current setup is a direct result of the Emirates move and a longer term plan, which would become irrelevance if a sugar daddy took over, is it?

I mean, can you see Wenger spending a forune per week on Sol Campbell, bringing in stars like Davor Suker? Thierry Henry was a semi star, and cost even more as the hugely rated Chris Sutton when he was brought in. Wenger certainly didn't go out and buy Pires, a french international. He would have never dreamt of buying in the man pushing Oliver Kahn for the German #1 shirt, would he? Can you really see Wenger bringing in a name like Marc Overmars?

Happens all the time on the game. Man City's reputation in real life is sky high because of their takeover.