Fan Confidence Fixes

I offer these up for free. Just quote me in the credits somewhere.

1) Friendlies should not affect fan confidence in any way. See this thread.

2) When playing a two-legged cup tie, fans should only have an opinion on the aggregate score, not each leg. For example, my fans were disappointed that my reserves lost 2-1 in the first leg, and that overrode the fact that I won overall 7-2 after thumping them in the second leg.

2a) Fans should have a similar expectation as the board and vice versa. If my board don't give a fig what I do in the Carling Cup, my fans shouldn't care quite as much. Or if my fans will care regardless then my board should take into account their own (the board) feelings in my monthly report. So following the above example my board, for about three months, kept telling me that the lowlight of recent times is my 2-1 loss to Bolton. In a competition the board don't care about. Make up your mind!

Here is the big idea. The fix. The bit you've read this far for.

As my board didn't care about the Carling Cup, and would judge me on other competitions, I played my reserves in the first leg. As above we just about lost causing a variety of issues. So assuming that the above two fixes (1 and 2a) are implemented we need to fix the fans understanding of playing a weakened squad. And that's where I come in.

Pre-amble

FM keeps track of your main players by virtue of their squad status, their CA and PA and their reputation. Their squad status is used to determine if they whine about being on the bench. Their CA and PA are used for Coach reports, team reports and as part of the actual match. Their reputation is used, by comparing with Teams reputation, to adjust what their expectation the player has of their squad status and if they will want to move to a bigger club. So far, so known. We can also manipulate this a little by putting players in U18s, Reserves, and the First Team.

The meat of the thing for the impatient

FM takes an average of the CAs of the players in the first-team squad. Purely adding up and dividing by the number of players. You could also take an average just of the players who are labelled Indispensible or First Team in the squad status. This is the benchmark.

Then take an average of the CA of the players who played in the match. Simple enough. Now by comparing these two figures you can use it to make the supporters "aware" of the type of squad you've put out.

Example

My first-team squad CA average is 160. For the Carling Cup I play a team of backup/youth prospects whos average CA is 120. This difference of 40 can be used in a number of ways to modify the fans expectations.

We can create a list of "if and then"s. If difference between squad used and main players > 30 then reduce expectations 50%. Complex.

We can compare my teams CA to the opposition CA and then use the response tables that already exists. So in my example if the opposition are averaging 160 and my players 120, then it's akin to Championship vs Premiership and adjust fan expectations that way.

You can just adjust it taking the team played CA vs the first team CA. So regardless of the quality of opposition my fans will pretend we are a Championship team. This works too.

Regardless of the method used, my fans would now "know" that I have put out an understrength side, compared to my strongest possible side, and we'd no longer have to suffer them being furious that a bunch of 17 year-olds have lost to 1-0 to Man Utd in a meaningless match.

I await the complaints about a wall-o-text. Hopefully I've been clear enough that you can all understand what I mean. I know I can be verbose and I do find it hard explaining myself with both clarity and brevity. I do feel it's a simple solution to a problem that has plagued FM for a while, and uses information already available within the database.

Anyone any thoughts?

VB

Yeah, I think that is a great idea. I had a similar situation when I was manager of Man United with aggregate scores. I lost the 1st leg of Carling Cup semi 2-0 to Arsenal and won the 2nd leg 3-0 but for several weeks the fans were kept going on about being unhappy with the 2-0 loss.

Overall, great post.

Agree completely with points 1 and 2a. I disagree with 2b though, why would supporters have the same expectations as the board?

I would add that the game needs to better consider transfers. I recently bought 4 15 - 16 yearolds for around 20k in total and the supporters are unhappy that they have not made a greater impact.

Also, cup expectations need to be a little more fluid. I remember losing to premier league opponants with League One Leeds and the board being unhappy that I did not get further in the tournament.

I disagree with 2b though, why would supporters have the same expectations as the board?

Hmm. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I was suggesting that real-life fans of, for example, Man Utd don't care that much about the Carling Cup because they have bigger fish to fry. That was point 2A. Point 2b is that if you keep fan expectations the same (and I feel they should because as fans we always want to win) then the boards monthly report shouldn't mention if the fans are unhappy, because it's a board report. And they clearly don't care that I didn't win one leg of a two-legged thing.

I would add that the game needs to better consider transfers. I recently bought 4 15 - 16 yearolds for around 20k in total and the supporters are unhappy that they have not made a greater impact.

Yep. Although again this could be combined into my idea by comparing the reputation/CA/squad-status of the players I've brought, to the Rep/CA/Status of my actual squad.

Also, cup expectations need to be a little more fluid. I remember losing to premier league opponants with League One Leeds and the board being unhappy that I did not get further in the tournament.

Odd that you had that. It does appear to be fixed in 09, as they get a little miffed, but understand why you lost to team x.

Well, it's a lot better than what it is currently doing.

My thread was used in the OP, so I don't need to rant again, but friendlies should not have an effect on the board. I fail to see why the board would be disappointed at losing a game which has no bearings on the future.

The idea of CA matched up to CA is very good, though. I like it.

1) I think the level of expectation just should be toned down. Eg. So if you loose it isnt a big deal, but if you win against a top team the fans would be fairly pleased.

2) But fans would be dissapointed if you lost the first leg, I know I would be. The result in the second leg should cover the bad result.

I want the 'Signings' section to be fixed, my fans/board are dissapointed that 'PlayerX' hasnt played many games, yet 'PlayerX' is 16years old and I bought him to put in my Under18s. There needs to be more leway for young kids, and if they do get alot of game time at 16-18 then maybe the fans can point this out and be pleased even if his performances are not the best. "XXX thinks PlayerX current performances have been quite good and can see him becoming a top player in a few years" so on.

Agree with with whats been posted about games and here is my attempt at a player rating system.

Im going to base the following rating system based on a top league club in any nation so it may need to be adjusted for lower league clubs:

Fans of top clubs dont care about the league cup, fans of middle or lower leauge teams dont expect to win it. Fans of about 4 teams per league expect to win it. Fans of most clubs dont expect to win the FA Cup and no fans expect the 16 yr old you have just signed to become a world beater just because he cost you 300k.

1) You sign a player for under a 1 million (regardless of age): Your fans arent going to expect, demand or be upset by the fact he isnt in the first team squad every week. In fact you have signed the next (gerrard, henry, rooney, messi , ronaldo's) they have just havent realised it yet. When the player breaks through you get the credit for your enspired vision. If he doesnt you didnt waste that much money.

2) You sign any player between 15-21 on a structured deal: See above

3) You sign a player for between 2 and 6 Million: He isnt going to play in the first team every week or even regularly but they are going to expect him to make between 10-15 apperances a season and at least 5 starts against weaker teams or in the leauge cup.

4) You sign a player for between 6 and 12 million: He should be making your 1st team squad at least 75% of the season and start at least 60% of these games. If he is young these increase over 2 seasons as his value does. If he's 29+ then his apperances should be decreasing with his age (with the odd exception)

5) You spend 12 to 18 Million: He should be starting most of your games, on the bench in the ones he isnt and only missing from the squad for very "low profile games" If he is over 28 then he should be a world class player and peforming as one.

6) And Finally, you can afford to spend 18 million + on a player: He's a world beater and should be starting every game you "need" to win and on the bench to turn a non important game, as player of his quality should. This includes the kids you know are going to world beaters, they cost a fortune therefore fans expect.

1+2+3: Fans dont expect miracles but want a decent performance when the player makes an apperance and/or expect him to devlop into a good/leading player at there club. The decision is based over time rather than in the 6 months following his siging which is unrealistic to be fair. Man U just signed 2 kids and I cant there fans saying at to Sir Alex he should have played them more.

4+5: Fans expect more from these players, the cost a decent chunk if not all of your transfer budjet, they should be performing to a high standard in every game they play. They should be fighting for a 1st team place and you as manager should be rotating them into your squad on a regular basis. Wayne Bridge fits nicely into this category and city fans expect to see him start most games until the end of season.

6: Fans expect what you have paid for, this kind of player comes once a season for some clubs and once a generation for others. If he is a striker the expect 20+ a season, from an attacking midfileder 15 assists and good wing play, from a defended many crunching tackles and not so many goals conceeded. If he isnt playing you have made an error of judgement as a manager and deserve the criticisim you get. For this see Torres, Berbatov, Keane (I know!), Huuntelar (sp).

Well thats turned into quite an essay!

Vonblade, some good ideas, but I disagree on a couple of things:

Regarding point 1, I disagree, specifically in relation to Celtic's friendlies. I checked the other thread as linked and it turns out a few other people think exactly the same. Since Gordon Strachan's been in charge, a lot of fans have reacted very badly to the results. To say it simply doesn't matter to fans oversimplifies the matter. Look at the press reaction: after a few terrible, terrible performances in friendlies a couple of years back there was infamous 'split crests' in the sports pages of some tabloids (no, seriously). The press is certainly not exactly representative of fans opinion, but can certainly affect it. This can't surely be something that affects only one club.

Anyway, what I would say is that it's an oversimplification to say that friendlies don't matter at all to the fans. There are loads of factors that would influence the importance fans put on the results: for example, the managers history at the club (do they trust him yet); the number of new signings being bedded in (has he signed a load of players - do they all look useless?), etc.

Bad results will however be quickly forgotten with a good start in the league.

Secondly, regarding Point 2 - I'm also not entirely convinced. If you lose the first leg, why shouldn't the fans be disgruntled if you played badly and lost? Maybe the unhappiness could however be modified by the fact the team subsequently 'made up for it'?

I have something to add though depending on the fans aspirations say like in a cup is to go far in it and you field a weaker side, there could be a statement added like 'The fans are dissapointed that we didn't play our best side, something along those lines'

Good ideas though.

Secondly, regarding Point 2 - I'm also not entirely convinced. If you lose the first leg, why shouldn't the fans be disgruntled if you played badly and lost?

Because, by using the system outlined, they'd realise I'd fielded an insanely poor team compared to my EPL winning stalwarts, and so would understand why we just lost.

I must say I'm quite disappointed about the amount of replies to a fix for a known issue. Perhaps I should have called my thread "OMG dis iz teh suxx0rs!"

Its well known that EPL teams do field weaker sides in cups. e.g. Carling Cup, Early rounds of FA Cup (See blackburn, Man Utd, Arsenel etc) And the fans dont moan at a loss or a weak win because they see that its the fringe/youth players and thus expectations are lowered. I agree with VonBlade on the matter that it should be viewed on the aggregate scoreline.

I agree with VonBlade and think this would vastly improve the game.

when buying a young player for a big price, i'd like a press conference.

hopefully it'd provide an option to try and explain to the fans that hes an investment for the future then its up to the fans to recalibrate their opinion on the player. it could also affect the players confidence/morale.

when buying a young player for a big price, i'd like a press conference.

hopefully it'd provide an option to try and explain to the fans that hes an investment for the future then its up to the fans to recalibrate their opinion on the player. it could also affect the players confidence/morale.

This is another thing i would like to see in the game. Too often than not i sign a good 16-17 year old player only for him to play for my u-19s or reserves and then the fans call him a abboration.

Would love a press conference to unveil new players at the club, Also to call a press conference whenever possible to discuss injuries,loans etc.

Well, the fans might not just be disappointed to 'see' a CA (cup match) < CA (normal) team lose the match, they might also be disappointed about the CA split (i.e. only the reserves playing) itself and then flame you for the arrogance to think you could win with this team or for not caring about the result. I don't believe fans just don't give a darn about lesser competitions. Silverware remains silverware.