Donki Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Anyone else find it annoying that when a player is bought for the U18 or reserves on a free or for a small fee the board feels it was a poor signing if they dont play in the first team? Could this maybe be addressed in the future patches? Surely the board could take the scouts/ coaches rating on future potential? Sorry if this has been stated before. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jams1234 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Since when did 1st team managers sign players for the reserves? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHilly5 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Quite often, l agree with the opening post but in many respects players bought for this purpose (especially at lower quality clubs) can bit a risk and possibly a waste of money if strengthening is needed, as the fans might not view the signing as necessary at that point for the club. Even on a free it takes up wage bill. However if the scout/coach report is glowing (i.e. a League 1 club signs a player with potential to rip up the prem) then the board and fans should be more lenient. At the end of the day though, if you get results on the pitch I don't think they board will look too much towards signings, especially if finances are good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomHAVFC Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Since when did 1st team managers sign players for the reserves? I've done it before. Signed a player with huge potential but litte CA at the moment. So I stick him in the U18's or the Reserves until he gets better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
4457 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Hasn't this been fixed for 9.2? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bieritarier Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Hasn't this been fixed for 9.2? Nope.. annoys me a little but as they aren'T completely fed up with you because of this it's not too bad. Should be changed nonetheless. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joop Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 To be honest, I buy youngsters all the time, and then put them in the -18's or reserves. I barely buy 'grown-up' players, since I think my team is good enough, so I like to look at the future. For example, last transfer-window, I bought 10 players under the age of 18. And ofcourse, are all said to be bad signings, while they are all labeled as possible leading stars for the Premier League... It would be nice if that was taking into account, because in the end, it does effect the overall judgement of the board... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neji Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I agree, I think it should be linked to the squad status. So if you buy a hot prospect, then the fans understand that he doesn't play right away. If you sign a first team player and he doesn't play, then they could get upset. Either that, or it could be done somewhat like press conferences where you tell fans and the media what to expect ie alot of game or one for the future. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomHAVFC Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Either that, or it could be done somewhat like press conferences where you tell fans and the media what to expect ie alot of game or one for the future. And that would mean the press conferences being expanded on which would be good as they're appallingly repetitive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joop Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I agree, I think it should be linked to the squad status. So if you buy a hot prospect, then the fans understand that he doesn't play right away. If you sign a first team player and he doesn't play, then they could get upset.Either that, or it could be done somewhat like press conferences where you tell fans and the media what to expect ie alot of game or one for the future. Indeed, my thoughts exactly. Or, if it would make things easier: Only judge the signings that are put in the first team. If they are in the first team, they, as board or fans, may expect the player to play a few games. But if they are in the reserves or youngsters, there must be a good reason for it, so they don't have to judge them... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
estoo Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Having a press conference to announce your new signings is a damn good idea, happens all the time in real life, so why not here? You would be able to answer what position you see him filling, how you see his squad role, and calm down his rivals for the jersey who think they're not going to get a game anymore. Or gently break the news to him that your about to send him to Bulgaria for 3 years to get an EU Nationality, lol. "But boss, I thought I was coming to play in London?" "Mwuhahaha, enjoy Sofia, I hear it's nice this time of year" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Walds Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Since when did 1st team managers sign players for the reserves? So every player you buy walks into your first team? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
celtic joe celtic Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 yip happens to me a lot bought a 16 year old and put him in the under 18s the board then sayed that he was a poor signing :S Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smac Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I agree, I think it should be linked to the squad status. So if you buy a hot prospect, then the fans understand that he doesn't play right away. If you sign a first team player and he doesn't play, then they could get upset.Either that, or it could be done somewhat like press conferences where you tell fans and the media what to expect ie alot of game or one for the future. I like the idea of letting the club/fans/media know the plan for a player. Would solve the problem and be a proactive way to handle the media. The underlying problem could be addressed as well, which would make the media necessary only in extreme examples: Such as buying an older player as backup/player-coach/tutor. Young players who aren't as good as the 1st team should obviously be 'in development' to fans and media, unless the manager explicitly states: "I know Bojan is young, but he's been brought here to go straight into the 1st team". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mackemforever Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 As far as I have seen on 9.1 (I don't like 9.2) this isn't much of a problem. At the end of the first season I signed about a dozen 15 and 16 year olds with great potential and only one of them is seen as a bad signing and thats only because he had to start a few first team matches due to injuries and he struggled. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james10448 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I sign about 2/3 players a season for my reserves as long as they are young and my scouts say they have good potential then i dont care what my board say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnfieldRoad10 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I just tend to ignore what the board and fans think regarding transfers. I'm in charge. My opinion counts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donki Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 The only reason I have a problem with it was because I thought the amount of transfer money you recieve depends on your past signings.... I could be completely wrong. I sign young talent all the time usually on a free or for a small compo payment. Thanks for your feedback guys. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackripper Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 i always buy players for my reserve tream and under 18s and i get the same message regarding there diapointed with so and so but i just ingore it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thompe Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 In my opion the fans should not rate players under the age of 20 unless the player has somewhat of a reputation and is playing games for your first team. Also, its wierd that they applaud you for signing some unknown schoolboy from the third world. How can your beer drinking fans know the potential of a 16 year old from Bolivia who has never played a game? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazzaroon Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Isn't this what the top managers do all the time? They scout players and when they think they have potential they buy them and put them in the reserves or in the u18's. It would be good for this to happen in the game. What about signing them on 'backup' or 'rotation' or even 'hot prospect' contracts, does that work? I have never tried the 'hot prospect' contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phnompenhandy Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 SAF just bought a Serb kid today and is letting him stay with Partizan fo rthe rest of the season - no intention of making MU 1st team yet. I have a strong squad in my current game, but I'm busy buying dozens of kids. My oldest reserve is 21 and the U18 side is full too - all buys for the future. And yeh, the idiot supporters are better than in FM08 but could still do with a bit of basic educating. Mind you, if you use an editor to check your supporter spokesman's abilities you'll see they're CA 1 PA 1 [sorry to let the cat out of the bag there ] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madlib Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Yup, this winds me up. I signed a few players around 17/18 who according to my scout have excellent potential but at the moment are not anywhere near good enough for my first team, so I slung them in the reserves and now I'm getting slated for making poor signings. It's stupid. Also, I feel the transfer system is lacking the feature to loan a player back to his club immediately after you sign them but perhaps that needs another thread... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Posted January 3, 2009 Share Posted January 3, 2009 Is this why the computer controlled teams hardly ever buy any youth players for the future? The AI consider them to be "poor signings" if they don´t go straight into the first team? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phnompenhandy Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 Is this why the computer controlled teams hardly ever buy any youth players for the future? The AI consider them to be "poor signings" if they don´t go straight into the first team? Now that is a very good question indeed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 I am actually quite surprised so few find this to be a problem. Or do AI controlled teams actually buy talented youngsters in your games? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.