Which is the easiest team to manage? (Beginner)

[Al_Pacino]

I'm guessing Barcelona because of sheer ability or Man City because I could buy anyone I wanted?
This (Football Manager 2012) is my first management game since Alex Ferguson's Player Manager 2000 (or 2001?) on Playstation 1 so I'm looking for an easy ride to begin with....

Please be gentle with me, I'm new and I'm crap.

[Lawlore]

Yeah, I would suggest that Barca, City or Man Utd are probably a bit of an easier ride than most teams, simply because most transfer targets won't say no to you- even if you don't get to grips with every aspect of the game immediately, your side should still be strong enough to hold their own and be thereabouts come the end of the season. For them, the bigger challenge is dominating Europe, where the opposition are regularly at a higher level. I'd probably go with Barca as the domestic side of things isn't really as competitive as it would be for City. Also, no moody Tevez to deal with.

Or, if you're feeling a bit more adventurous and after not quite such a smooth ride, the other way to think about it would be to find a big fish in a small pond- someone like Charlton or Sheffield Wednesday, perhaps, who should blow most of the teams in their current division out of the water, but which then leaves you some scope for developing and improving them in the future, which is different to the challenge of keeping Barca as the best team in the world. You could probably put Crawley in the same boat, a division below.

It depends what sort of game you're after.

[Raybouldinho]

Tbh, starting with teams like Barcelona, Man City, Real Madrid etc etc isnt as easy as some would have you believe. The problem is that the expectations are so high and if those expectations are not met then you can easily be sacked for it. This could you leave you somewhat disenchanted with the game and not knowing where to turn next. 'What did I do wrong?' 'Is it my tactics, my transfer policy, my player/team handling?' etc etc.

If you were a regular FM player but just hadnt played for a few years, I would definitely recommend one of those teams to get used to changes in scouting and the transfer system (those teams ultimately have more money and that means it essentially opens up more parts of the game). You arent going to learn much about the transfer negotiation side of the game if you are managing in the Blue Square Premier and have no transfer budget at all, for example.

If you are completely new to FM, I would suggest playing as a team in the top division that you are pretty familiar with already, maybe the one that you support, if applicable. If not, I would suggest a team with a reasonable amount of resources but expectations that are also reasonable. You're looking a team that you can also develop and mould into your own within a couple of seasons and that you actually feel like its you that has built the team and therefore you are responsible for any success. I just dont get any satisfaction from taking over a team expected to win things and then just winning things from the off. Where do you go from there?

I would suggest teams in the EPL like Spurs, Sunderland, Aston Villa, Newcastle, Stoke and Everton. I believe the other teams are either expected to be title contenders or relegation candidates. In La Liga look at Valencia, At Madrid, Malaga (who have a sugardaddy chairman) or Villarreal.

I'm not too certain on other leagues, but there is a 'team guide' forum which basically tells you all you need to know about lots of different teams before you actually pick one (starting transfer budgets, board expectations etc etc) so take a look over there also.

[Al_Pacino]

Wow, thanks for the really in-depth replies!
Well I support Spurs, and my "second team" (does that sound ridiculous?) would be Inter Milano, but going by what you've said perhaps I should just start with Spurs?
I'm actually surprised by your (Raybouldinho's) post, and kinda worried. How easy is it to get sacked by the big teams? Like, if I don't win everything right away will I be booted?
And by that logic, maybe I should just pick a team that is expected to lose every game; wouldn't that be the best way to learn? But if I won some games would expectation rise suddenly?

Christ this is tougher than I thought. And I haven't even installed the damned game yet

[davidnio_422]

It depends on the expectations. Man City have an amazing squad and loads of cash so should be alright to at least achieve your first season expectations. Man U likewise will tolerate not winning the title 1st year, as long as you are there or thereabouts.

Teams to steer clear of : Liverpool, tough expectations for only 'very good' rather than excellent squad; Chelsea, highly impatient chairman. I would also tentatively add to that list Barca, as it is not that easy to get them to play their RL style and without a lot of tactical nous you may find yourself bullied.

I would suggest either Manchester club, Spurs, or I am told Hoffenheim is a good fun save. Failing that, just go anywhere, seriously. If you struggle, dont get too down, loads of people here will help you. Everyone struggles a bit (except Cleon with Sheff U) and if you get sacked, so what? The learning curve is fun in and of itself, and without losing a lot you wont enjoy the winning as much.

[jdrawmer]

I'd definitely suggest NOT going for a team that is expected to lose all the time, because the chances are being new, you WILL lose most of the time, if that is what is expected, and so you would be equally disenchanted as you would if you were sacked from one of the massive teams. I agree with Raybouldinho that you should manage somebody that won't tie you down with the expectations and also gives you scope to grow the club should you be successful.

Let's say for argument's sake that you start as Barcelona, you get into the game, and the tactics / team talks etc come naturally to you, and you win everything - not much scope after that except to remain there and keep building good squads. IF you are somebody like Newcastle, then you still have the comfort of a strong squad and decent resources, but also if you become successful you have scope to keep driving that forwards until you are the top team, and then you can attempt to dominate europe - in its self, a good few years of a career right there.

Now my personal opinion is start with whoever you WANT to. If it fails, it fails - you get sacked and you accept a job elsewhere, probably lower down, but you'll have hopefully learnt something along the way to be a little more successful at the second job. Basically, treat the saved game that you create as an actual career where you take the lows and recover from them.

[Al_Pacino]

But if I started my game fully expecting to lose all the time, with no pressure from the chairman or whoever regardless of results; wouldn't that be a good thing? Or do fans have sway in this game?
ie - if I started managing Swansea, would I be sacked for not winning the league and the fans are freaking out? I mean is the game realistic enough in terms of real-life expectations?

Sorry for so many questions. I just remember being great at AFPM2001, but I've scanned through a few threads and sub-forums on here and now I'm crapping myself. It's like, real.

[Carmi88]

Wow, thanks for the really in-depth replies!
I'm actually surprised by your (Raybouldinho's) post, and kinda worried.

He has that effect on people Give yourself the highest rep and sacking won't be an issue unless your just really bad at the game

[stemlfc]

Wow, thanks for the really in-depth replies!
Well I support Spurs, and my "second team" (does that sound ridiculous?) would be Inter Milano, but going by what you've said perhaps I should just start with Spurs?
I'm actually surprised by your (Raybouldinho's) post, and kinda worried. How easy is it to get sacked by the big teams? Like, if I don't win everything right away will I be booted?
And by that logic, maybe I should just pick a team that is expected to lose every game; wouldn't that be the best way to learn? But if I won some games would expectation rise suddenly?

Christ this is tougher than I thought. And I haven't even installed the damned game yet

Some teams have trigger happy chairman. Barcelona, Chelsea and Liverpool are the biggest examples judging on games I've had this year. Daglish and Villas-Boas were sacked in October for being too far down the table. Barcelona always seem to have massive expectations (the price you pay for success).

Certainly going a bigger team isn't all that easy, especially when those expectations are misplaced.

[Al_Pacino]

Surely with a team like Barcelona, it'd be a case of winning 90% + of games as long as you have 11 players on the pitch? How hard could it be?

[jdrawmer]

But if I started my game fully expecting to lose all the time, with no pressure from the chairman or whoever regardless of results; wouldn't that be a good thing? Or do fans have sway in this game?
ie - if I started managing Swansea, would I be sacked for not winning the league and the fans are freaking out? I mean is the game realistic enough in terms of real-life expectations?

Sorry for so many questions. I just remember being great at AFPM2001, but I've scanned through a few threads and sub-forums on here and now I'm crapping myself. It's like, real.

You wouldn't be sacked from Swansea for being relegated (unless of course, potentially if it was a truely horrific season, where you got 0 points!). What I'm saying is, that you might not enjoy the game very much, and you might not feel like you're learning anything if you're just losing all the time. It might be easier to stay in the job, but all that will happen in your example is, you'll get relegated to the championship, and then have the same expectations as that of man u, man city etc, in that they'll expect you to bounce back with instant promotion again

[jdrawmer]

Surely with a team like Barcelona, it'd be a case of winning 90% + of games as long as you have 11 players on the pitch? How hard could it be?

Well, as with real football, if me or you turned up tomorrow to barcelona, they wouldn't be AS successful as with a professional manager in charge - so that basically means, you can't just turn up and put out a basic 4-4-2 with no changes, and expect to win EVERY game. Obviously they'll win some, if not most, but the learning curve is the tactics (the tactics for each individual as well as your overall tactics), and the team-talks etc.

[Raybouldinho]

Dont worry too much

Its a game afterall, one which you should be enjoying. The chances of you being sacked at most clubs will depend on a number of factors but ultimately failing to deliver the title when you have said thats exactly what you are going to do is more likely to see your job being insecure than telling a club you will achieve a respectable league finish and end up just below mid table. There is more margin for error.

[judicious]

Surely with a team like Barcelona, it'd be a case of winning 90% + of games as long as you have 11 players on the pitch? How hard could it be?

Mate, just download the game and get a save going with whoever takes your fancy and get to grips with the game... you're worrying too much!

[Al_Pacino]

Well, as with real football, if me or you turned up tomorrow to barcelona, they wouldn't be AS successful as with a professional manager in charge - so that basically means, you can't just turn up and put out a basic 4-4-2 with no changes, and expect to win EVERY game. Obviously they'll win some, if not most, but the learning curve is the tactics (the tactics for each individual as well as your overall tactics), and the team-talks etc.

I understand.
I think I'll boot up the game tomorrow and start off with Spurs. I don't really want to simply because I'm worried I'll get emotionally involved more than I'd like, but I know the squad inside-out so won't need to do any research etc.
If you hear nothing else from me you'll know it's because I punched my computer in the face. But I appreciate your help thus far.

[manutdfan123]

If you want an easy game then try Celtic or Rangers.

[Raybouldinho]

Surely with a team like Barcelona, it'd be a case of winning 90% + of games as long as you have 11 players on the pitch? How hard could it be?

Yes, indeed, but is that an enjoyable experience? Is that just an disenchanting as losing 90% of the time? Its a question for you and you only. As I've said, taking over at Barcelona and winnin 90% of the games I play with a squad of players I havent bought just doesnt really appeal to me. Obviously it appeals to many others, but I prefer a more considered game where I can either take over a team who arent expected to do much and make them successful or be successful for a while and then move on once I've got an increased reputation.

The truth is, the only way you will learn is if you are making lots of changes in different areas of the game. You will make mistakes, inevitably, but from those mistakes you will learn and become a better player of the game and ultimately a better manager. If you have a team that is winning all of the time from the first moment you pick up the game, you might find that enjoyable (and fair enough!) but you may not discover the joys that the game hides away as you wont be encouraged tinker and try things you wouldnt have tried otherwise.

Look at it this way. Barca have a 97,000 stadium. They are the biggest club in the world at the moment with the best facilities and the best players. Go to the board interaction screen and a lot of the options are already greyed out. You cant expand the stadium (well, you can ask, but it'll probably be denied), the training facilities, youth facilities etc etc. You cant really take the club any further than it is already...other than winning more trophies. So a lot of the news items and achievements that you might get from taking a smaller club, improving its facilities and stadium and standing in world football, you'll never see.

[ArranoBeltza]

Why not go with, say, Celtic- you'll dominate the league so you can get used to the game that way, and you will have money to make signings. Still, though, you'll have a challenge in making them a top team in Europe. With a team like that you'd get the best of both worlds: easy success along with team-building.

[Bob Sardinia]

An MLS team.. Pick whatever one you like the name of and go. Hardish to get fired, no demotion worries, fairly simple transfer market, everyone is in the hunt pretty much.

Beats the hell out of the other suggestions to take a Champions League level team and manage competing in multiple upper level competitions at the same time, while managing an insane amount of money which enables you to NOT learn how to get the most out of contracts.

[Raybouldinho]

MLS is pretty much a completely different type of game though. The only one that comes close to rules is the Aussie A League. It is so different to other leagues, that its almost a completely different way of playing the game.

[vincenzo incendio]

Juventus or Napoli in Italy.

[Gusano]

Mid-table European teams are the best teams to start with.

[tigerhgrrrrrr]

With big clubs come big expectations, you need a "fair" challenge. Personally I find lower leagues much more forgiving, and you can quite easilly sign a whole new squad on a tiny budget which is much better than your acquired squad. Whichever League choose a club financially secure as possible for that league, maybe a decent starting squad that covers your tactical / formational preferences and with a good Chairman who will tolerate mistakes. For longer save game try to get the best training & youth facilities and you need a reasonable size stadium thatisnt half empty.

My advice would be Crewe actually, it averages out as one of the best from the criteria above.

[Gusano]

With big clubs come big expectations, you need a "fair" challenge. Personally I find lower leagues much more forgiving, and you can quite easilly sign a whole new squad on a tiny budget which is much better than your acquired squad. Whichever League choose a club financially secure as possible for that league, maybe a decent starting squad that covers your tactical / formational preferences and with a good Chairman who will tolerate mistakes. For longer save game try to get the best training & youth facilities and you need a reasonable size stadium thatisnt half empty.

My advice would be Crewe actually, it averages out as one of the best from the criteria above.

yes but you hide in the shadows of european football. with a top division team you get the experience of continental competition and money management. with lower league clubs you're finances are poor until you reach the top division.

[hugo_rune]

Rosenborg in Norway - you're so much bigger than your competition in the domestic league that coming second is really unlikely But European competition will be a struggle - you might be good enough to get to the knockout stages of the Euro Cup though, if you get a luckyish draw.

[AcidBurn]

I understand.
I think I'll boot up the game tomorrow and start off with Spurs. I don't really want to simply because I'm worried I'll get emotionally involved more than I'd like, but I know the squad inside-out so won't need to do any research etc.
If you hear nothing else from me you'll know it's because I punched my computer in the face. But I appreciate your help thus far.

http://community.sigames.com/showthr...n-North-London

Before you start you should check out the link I posted at the top, there are a lot of people willing to help in the Spurs thread. The good player and team guide forum is very helpful if you need any advice on who to sign or any opinions on who to sell. Spurs would be a great side to start due to his physical attributes Adebayor is one of the best strikers around especially when being set up by the pace of Lennon and Bale. Your real life knowledge of Spurs will also help some people do not like managing the team they support but I love managing Sunderland so go for it. Good luck dude.

[Al_Pacino]

AcidBurn - excellent, thanks for the link. That place will probably become a pseudo-Bat Cave for me

[AcidBurn]

AcidBurn - excellent, thanks for the link. That place will probably become a pseudo-Bat Cave for me

lol, it is for a lot of people. All sorts of advice available in there and there is usually someone around to answer pretty quickly.

[Motherlover]

OK, enjoy Spurs! I personally agree with ArranoBeltza and would have said go for Celtic, or elsewise Kobenhaven of Denmark. Both teams have squads and budgets with which you should be able to dominate the league. Spurs are certainly a class outfit with only moderate expectations, but the PL can be a harsh place if things start badly.

[Graham206]

Spurs can be great fun: two tips.
1. Niko Kranjcar is better than his stats suggest and can turn in great performances.
2. You need another left back. Benoit Assou-Ekotto is fine, and Bassong is decent cover but they both go away on international duty together for long periods and if you don't sign another left back you'll have to waste Bale there when he's far more effective in a more attacking role. (I suggest Defensive Winger, support.)

[Slawbawn]

The way I learnt to play the game was chucking myself in the deep end. I had a short play around with the big guns, e.g. Man Utd. After that I went lower down the leagues looking for teams that weren't expected to do much in their leagues and tried what I could. Best way to learn is by doing it the hard way, IMO.

[ArranoBeltza]

I understand.
I think I'll boot up the game tomorrow and start off with Spurs. I don't really want to simply because I'm worried I'll get emotionally involved more than I'd like, but I know the squad inside-out so won't need to do any research etc.
If you hear nothing else from me you'll know it's because I punched my computer in the face. But I appreciate your help thus far.

If you know the squad then that's a good way to go. I actually have had trouble getting an enjoyable save going as a team that wasn't either Spurs or Athletic Club just because I don't know the players as well and always end up signing players I don't need.

[Magicz]

Go for Spurs mate, they're quick, agile and have great strikers.

As previously said though, get another left-back.

Good luck

[Gandy]

I’d say West Ham. You should easily romp the Championship, you have a little bit of coin to spend, and the team is fairly strong itself. Spurs would also be a great place to begin, but the Premier League is a lot tougher competition than the Championship.

[rancer890]

An MLS team.. Pick whatever one you like the name of and go. Hardish to get fired, no demotion worries, fairly simple transfer market, everyone is in the hunt pretty much.

Beats the hell out of the other suggestions to take a Champions League level team and manage competing in multiple upper level competitions at the same time, while managing an insane amount of money which enables you to NOT learn how to get the most out of contracts.

MLS is probably the last place a beginner would be trying to learn the game, unless he/she is a fan of MLS itself. And this version of FM has its own share of problems in MLS, so it'll probably just frustrate the player (like it's really frustrating me).

[Things Could Get Messi]

The best place to start is at the club you support, so in this case Spurs. You will already recognise all the players, know whos good and who isn't.

[DWCallaghan]

If you want an easy game then try Celtic or Rangers.

Not that easy a game mate, you think coming 2nd is ok in Scotland ? NO CHANCE lol. My mate won everything with Man City season 1, incl Champs League, but then started a new save at Rangers and won zip, nada !! and the Finances in FM12 are not great at the OF.

[DWCallaghan]

Start at the team you support and just see what happens.

[TheMaestro]

If your not aware, you have the choice of previous experience, such as ex pro, amateur, automatic and semi pro. Deciding which you select does effect how you are viewed at a club. So say for example, if you decide to Manu, Real, Barca etc, to have more backing of the board you may want to start as an ex pro as you have more respect and as you will see, when your appointed you won't be greeted from the fans with a 'who the hell is this guy?'

[bolulu]

Here's a word of advice; do NOT pick a team in the Spanish League. They have all sorts of number restrictions that other leagues don't have. Even the English league is a little restrictive. Go for a team in the French or German Divs; you have no problems there.
Try Hoffenheim or Evian.
Also, look for teams that have very few rivalries as these games cause a lot of pressure.

[Arsenal Rule]

Currently Barcelona for sure, ive never had problems winning with them. To be fair this reflects real life

[Ratboy]

Mid-table European teams are the best teams to start with.

^^^This^^^