Add ways to spend money you earn as a Manager?

[Robbins]

If you really made it to the top as I did with York, I do get the possibility to negotiate for higher wage when my contract is reaching it's end.
Well I would like to spend that money that I earn.
I would like to spend them on charity so that I can raise my reputation in a way that I can be a respected manager, which might tempt players to serve under me.

I would like to spend my money on being a club owner as well as manager. So that I can decide how I want to expand the club in terms of stadium and facilities, as well as manage the economy, like getting loan from the bank for investments as well as managing the transfer and wage budget.
Say you have been managing a top club and you get nice fundings and you deside to start from scratch, investing and buying a small club, and you get to hire yourself as manager and have full control over the club. And if you are making a success, your investments can turn into a gold mine.

I think this would make the game even more interesting as well.
Since you earn money by being a manager, why not have the the ability to spend it on something, so that it becomes usefull?

I wouldn't be suprised if someone have shared a similar idea. I wonder what you all think.

[Carmi88]

Brought up hundreds of times, would notbe difficult to link 5 other threads wanting the same thing. Usually shot down as well, I'm fine with money being useless

[Eugene Tyson]

If you really made it to the top as I did with York, I do get the possibility to negotiate for higher wage when my contract is reaching it's end.
Well I would like to spend that money that I earn.
I would like to spend them on charity so that I can raise my reputation in a way that I can be a respected manager, which might tempt players to serve under me.

Name one manager in the whole world that does this?

You raise your reputation by winning games and earning respect, not buying it.

I would like to spend my money on being a club owner as well as manager.
So that I can decide how I want to expand the club in terms of stadium and facilities, as well as manage the economy, like getting loan from the bank for investments as well as managing the transfer and wage budget.
Say you have been managing a top club and you get nice fundings and you deside to start from scratch, investing and buying a small club, and you get to hire yourself as manager and have full control over the club. And if you are making a success, your investments can turn into a gold mine.

This is not Football Chairman, or Football Owner. It's Football Manager.

This wouldn't be good for the game, as a Football Management game. I don't know any manager who has bought a club or made investments. The closest is Niall Quinn who was appointed to the Board.

Again, this is not Football Chairman of the Board.

Since you earn money by being a manager, why not have the the ability to spend it on something, so that it becomes usefull?

I wouldn't be suprised if someone have shared a similar idea. I wonder what you all think.

They have - and you're not the first to suggest it.

The only thing wages do is for your reputation. A small time team won't approach you if your wages are higher than they can afford. Meaning the more you earn, the higher the reputation of the club that will hire you.




The only way for this to work - and I've brought this up everytime someone mentions being able to use your wages to buy something.


It would have to be at the end of a long career. Where you can retire that manager - and then you can choose which club to invest into. This then causes FM to add another manager for this club. And you are a new manager with 0 reputation and starting fresh.

But the club has been takenover by a rich chairman (the former you) and you now have that cash to play with at the club you've chosen.

[x42bn6]

This is not Football Chairman, or Football Owner. It's Football Manager.

This wouldn't be good for the game, as a Football Management game. I don't know any manager who has bought a club or made investments. The closest is Niall Quinn who was appointed to the Board.

Again, this is not Football Chairman of the Board.

Don't let the name dictate what the product can or can't do. It would be quite boring if Gmail could only do e-mail.

I think this game is about controlling a football club, not managing it. It's why we can become attached to our clubs and get frustrated when the chairman sells a player over our heads. Imagine a game where that didn't happen and you had Sir Alex Ferguson-like control over the club, and possibly a bit more.

[Robbins]

I was thinking you would need to have had success earlier in your career in order to have enough money to buy a club. So this would be how I want it to be on a later stage and not from the start.
But to those who is against this idea, it would be nice with a on/off switch for this feature and so everyone would be happy.
What gave me this idea, is that I often end up disagreeing the boards conclutions, like selling my best talents, and not being willing to expand the training facilities.
Managers are not supposed to do this, so being a club owner would give you these as added features. Being manager and owner. Anyone can be a club owner,
even though there isn't that many who is in the top leagues. But in the lower leagues, this is more common.

[Eugene Tyson]

That's part of the job, dealing with Chairmen that do things like this. It's part and parcel of the game.

If you don't want those things to happen, use the Editor or that in game editor to edit the chairmans attributes. Give yourself a cash injection every 6 months. Do what you want.

Far more important things to fix and add to the game to make it a real Football Manager game, than adding fictitious scenarios that are completely unrealistic.

[Eugene Tyson]

I was thinking you would need to have had success earlier in your career in order to have enough money to buy a club. So this would be how I want it to be on a later stage and not from the start.
But to those who is against this idea, it would be nice with a on/off switch for this feature and so everyone would be happy.
What gave me this idea, is that I often end up disagreeing the boards conclutions, like selling my best talents, and not being willing to expand the training facilities.
Managers are not supposed to do this, so being a club owner would give you these as added features. Being manager and owner. Anyone can be a club owner,
even though there isn't that many who is in the top leagues. But in the lower leagues, this is more common.

Are there club owners who are also the club managers?

If the board don't agree with your reasons that's part and parcel of the game. Sometimes they will agree with you. All you can do is request these things, and then it's in their hands.

I will sometimes ask my job for a new computer, or to invest in software, they don't always say yes.

You could go start your own football club? Start from the bottom of the leauges. Again, not sure if any manager in real life has created their own club and worked through the ranks?

[Robbins]

Are there club owners who are also the club managers?

If the board don't agree with your reasons that's part and parcel of the game. Sometimes they will agree with you. All you can do is request these things, and then it's in their hands.

I will sometimes ask my job for a new computer, or to invest in software, they don't always say yes.

You could go start your own football club? Start from the bottom of the leauges. Again, not sure if any manager in real life has created their own club and worked through the ranks?

I think how much influence you would have on the club, would be determined by how much % of the club you own. The club owners are those who hires the chairman,
so they use him as their tool to have the club going in the right direction, making them money. And if he is not doing that, then he is fired. One of the owners can be hired as chairman as well, giving more direct control if you are the one to be hired. Luckily when being chairman and manager you would have alot more club managing to do.

I think this would be interessting, I hoped more would think so.

[Eugene Tyson]

Name one person in the entire world that is both Chairman/Owner and Manager of the team?

It's completely unrealistic.

[Robbins]

Name one person in the entire world that is both Chairman/Owner and Manager of the team?

It's completely unrealistic.

1.
Xu Genbao (simplified Chinese: 徐根宝; traditional Chinese: 徐根寶; pinyin: Xú Gēnbǎo; born January 16, 1944 in Shanghai) is a Chinese football manager and a former international football player. He is the current founder, chairman and manager of Shanghai East Asia football club as well as also being the owner of the Genbao Football Academy

2.
Karol Łaszkiewicz - player, chairman and manager in one person in LZS Tarant Wójcin which was a Polish football club based in Wójcin.

[Eugene Tyson]

You could go start your own football club? Start from the bottom of the leauges. Again, not sure if any manager in real life has created their own club and worked through the ranks?

Xu Genbao (simplified Chinese: 徐根宝; traditional Chinese: 徐根寶; pinyin: Xú Gēnbǎo; born January 16, 1944 in Shanghai) is a Chinese football manager and a former international football player. He is the current founder, chairman and manager of Shanghai East Asia football club as well as also being the owner of the Genbao Football Academy

My quote is what he did.

As I said you could start your own football team and start from the bottom tier.

But you could just use the editor to do this - add a team into the bottom tier. And use in-game editors to make changes to transfers, training pitches, stadium etc.

[Eugene Tyson]

I've seen this idea shot down so many times.

In saying that, it comes up often enough perhaps for consideration. It would have to be an option. But I wouldn't use it, others would, it just wouldn't be for me.

I think, personally, that it's a complete waste of time, considering the amount of things that need to be fixed and improved on already. This would just add more work to be done, and perhaps hold up development of other features that are more pressing.

I don't agree with the game moving in that direction. But if it has merit for some people, then I suggest adding it to the FM13 Wishlist thread with a link back to this thread.

[Eugene Tyson]

Both your examples are people who founded clubs.

Not ex-managers who amassed a fortune in their managing careers and bought an existing club.

Should you be able to "found" your own team? Perhaps, that has merit.

I'd use editor for that though.

[x42bn6]

That's part of the job, dealing with Chairmen that do things like this. It's part and parcel of the game.

It doesn't have to be.

If you don't want those things to happen, use the Editor or that in game editor to edit the chairmans attributes. Give yourself a cash injection every 6 months. Do what you want.

Far more important things to fix and add to the game to make it a real Football Manager game, than adding fictitious scenarios that are completely unrealistic.

It's not unrealistic for finances to be managed by someone at the club. It's just a question whether it would be a good gameplay experience to let the user mess around with it.

I personally don't see it as a terribly big deal and just provides the user with more ways to shoot themselves in the foot. But getting it right can be very satisfying.

There are certainly "more important" things to be working on, but why not demand everything?

[vlobben]

Tracking manage money earnt makes little sense. It's based on the assumption that gaining more money is the right way to play (and having ways to spend this money would only further that assumption). I'm only making scraps when i take over a team in BSN/BSS, so if managers are judged by the money they make, I am obviously failing big time.

In my opinion there should be no lifetime earned counter at all.

[MrPompey]

On the basis the game is about Football Management rather than wage management I cannot see how any investment of SI development time in this field would strengthen the game.

A salary earned to date counter seems interesting but perhaps as a Steam achievement. The current game exploit of never asking/negotiating for any salary rise exists because the less money the club spend on wages the more may be available to the team manager for staff / player salaries and transfer budgets.

Any reputation achievements should be only linked to footballing achievements - the clue is in the name of the game.

The danger of this changing is clear e.g. a future request for the simulations of manager's wives etc dont we play the game to escape this

[x42bn6]

On the basis the game is about Football Management rather than wage management I cannot see how any investment of SI development time in this field would strengthen the game.

A CEO is a manager in itself, and therefore "manages" a football team. So it's not outlandish to include it.

Being able to perhaps "earn" the right to control the club in a large way would be a gameplay benefit, in my opinion. Imagine delegating no money to your transfer budget for 10 years but instead investing in youth facilities.

In a lot of ways, it's like board interaction except your requests are always accepted.

[Barside]

A CEO runs a football club & he then employs people to manage specific departments.

[Eugene Tyson]

All it really needs is that the more you become embellished with the clubs history the easier and more accepting the board come to your requests.

After 20 years and countless titles and promotions, you should be able to ask the board for top facilities and they provide it without question.

Of course this relies on your reputation with the board.

Again, this could tie in with the whole "interview process" that people keep going on about.

I reckon you should have to make a series of "promises" with the Board. There are loads of Media questions on how you intend to run the club. I think these are ridiculous at this stage.


These are questions which the Board should be asking you. And if you don't deliver then you face the axe. And if you do deliver the board are more warmed to your requests.


At each contract offer, the Board should be making it clear what the expectations are for the season, not after you've accepted the contract. And there should be a set of queries from the Board on how you plan to move forward.

For instance, the Board could say "We're currently not meeting our Wage Budget with players"

You reply with

I will cut the transfer budget to accomodate
I plan to sell fringe players
I plan to reduce junior coaching
etc.

And if you don't do what you said the Board could be angered or reject a Board request later on - perhaps I say "I need more transfer money"

Board - "We're still over budget and you haven't fulfilled your promise to sell fringe players"


As you build a relationship with the Board you would get more trust from them. And after a while you could be going to the Board with a request and depending on your relationship and ability to fulfill your Contract Interview Promises, the Board would be reluctant or motivated to give you what you need.


And this could be used to have more or less say in how the club develops.

[x42bn6]

A CEO runs a football club & he then employs people to manage specific departments.

But he manages things in the same way that he has direct reports. He manages various managers. He makes (high-level) decisions that can impact the club, and sometimes overrides his subordinates.

Eugene, why not give the option for a user to "earn" the right to actively control these activities, instead of interacting with those to do those actions? That way a new user could take over an existing club and still have the option to control those options (after all, it's unrealistic in itself for Sir Alex to be displaced by a new user)?

In essence, a board that never refuses is the same as the requester having full control.

[Sikker]

I really don't get these kind of posts (requests/wishes). It's already in the game...

If you don't like your chairman to sell your players - set a high asking price.

If you want a new stadium - a new stadium will be built (the game helps you in the way that you need to show for a prolonged period of time that you can handle the finances and fans keep watching your games).

You can manage everything about training facilities and training itself (again the game helps you so you don't make stupid mistakes and spend way too much on facilities and such in a poor club that gets relegated. You need to prove yourself).

You can buy and sell whatever players you want (as long as the players in question wants to as well).

What more do you want in managing a club? You can almost act as a club owner already.
(Yes, some can be handled in a better way by the game)

[x42bn6]

I really don't get these kind of posts (requests/wishes). It's already in the game...

If you don't like your chairman to sell your players - set a high asking price.

A hack. You might not want to discourage bids. Just have full control over what prices players go for.

If you want a new stadium - a new stadium will be built (the game helps you in the way that you need to show for a prolonged period of time that you can handle the finances and fans keep watching your games).

Only if the board says yes. You might have a masterplan that involves not buying any players for 10 years, so can afford to take out a bank loan because all the money from your transfer budget will go directly to the interest payments.

You can manage everything about training facilities and training itself (again the game helps you so you don't make stupid mistakes and spend way too much on facilities and such in a poor club that gets relegated. You need to prove yourself).

In a similar vein to the stadium upgrade/new stadium idea above, it doesn't allows you to have precise control over the upgrade schedules.

You can buy and sell whatever players you want (as long as the players in question wants to as well).

Until the chairman goes over your head.

What more do you want in managing a club? You can almost act as a club owner already.
(Yes, some can be handled in a better way by the game)

Because "almost" is not the same as "as".

[Jay96]

I can't believe this gets debated so often.

IT IS A SHOCKING IDEA

[Sikker]

A hack. You might not want to discourage bids. Just have full control over what prices players go for.

Set an asking price you can live with...

Only if the board says yes. You might have a masterplan that involves not buying any players for 10 years, so can afford to take out a bank loan because all the money from your transfer budget will go directly to the interest payments.

Don't buy players then and you'll spare the money (OK - I know this probably won't help much as money not spend most likely will be paid out in too huge dividends. Something that needs to be worked on by SI).

In a similar vein to the stadium upgrade/new stadium idea above, it doesn't allows you to have precise control over the upgrade schedules.

If you can handle finances and shown results on the pitch then you have control. As I see it, it's a help so you don't make costly mistakes.

Until the chairman goes over your head.

He won't if you know what you're doing.

Because "almost" is not the same as "as".

Still don't get the posts...

Edit: not great at this quoting thing, but the post is a reply to x42bn6

[Eugene Tyson]

Eugene, why not give the option for a user to "earn" the right to actively control these activities, instead of interacting with those to do those actions? That way a new user could take over an existing club and still have the option to control those options (after all, it's unrealistic in itself for Sir Alex to be displaced by a new user)?

As I said, the board requests already get easier as your reputation within the game or with the club increases over time. The OP wants to use their in-game cash to buy a club or takeover it's board room. In truth, if you're playing that long and have been successful and have a good reputation with your club the options with the board requests are already easier. Providing the cash is already there there board get more lenient when you're successful.

Just have to make the Board Request.


I do believe that these should be based on promises between the Board and your reputation, as I stated earlier. That would be more realistic.

[Barside]

But he manages things in the same way that he has direct reports. He manages various managers. He makes (high-level) decisions that can impact the club, and sometimes overrides his subordinates.

A CEO deals with longer term strategic decisions whereas his department heads (managers) are charged with handling the day to day decisions in line with the bigger picture, I'm taking a punt here but I get the impression that you're either a student or someone you has fairly recently finished their time in education.

Being able to own/run a club in FM is a terrible idea yet you keep popping up with the same rhetoric & quoting the same example of it being unrealistic for a manager such as Sir Alex Ferguson to be sacked so an 'unknown' user can take charge of Manchester United so it's must be fine to add a feature like this.

SI have enough areas of football management to fine tune or implement & I would never want them to start down the road of managers gaining wealth that can be used to buy a club at a later point in their career, to start with I'd suggest that it has hardly ever happened in over a century of football & only a select few managers/former players either irl or in FM attain the wealth required (lots of deduction to be factored in after gross income over decades of gameplay) to even consider it as an option worth investing any time in.

Keep beating the drum & using semantics to further your misguided opinion if you want but it's a lame duck idea & long shall that remain the case.

[x42bn6]

Set an asking price you can live with...

If you set a player's price at, say, £20m, then the chairman might still sell at £10m.

Setting the value to, say, £80m, might discourage bids between £20m and £30m, say, which you might be comfortable selling for but it would depend on context.

If you can handle finances and shown results on the pitch then you have control. As I see it, it's a help so you don't make costly mistakes.

The board sometimes refuses if they can't expand and need to build a new stadium.

It would be cool if a user in full control of the team could take out a loan and live frugally for a decade or so.

Costly mistakes? Why does the game need to prevent you from doing that? You can sign an amateur player for £100m if you can afford it. Of course that would be an expensive mistake.

If you want to shoot yourself in the foot, the game should let you and you should pay the consequences.

He won't if you know what you're doing.

See my first point.

As I said, the board requests already get easier as your reputation within the game or with the club increases over time. The OP wants to use their in-game cash to buy a club or takeover it's board room. In truth, if you're playing that long and have been successful and have a good reputation with your club the options with the board requests are already easier. Providing the cash is already there there board get more lenient when you're successful.

Just have to make the Board Request.


I do believe that these should be based on promises between the Board and your reputation, as I stated earlier. That would be more realistic.

Ignoring the spend-my-own-money bit, it's not unreasonable. Spending the club's money is reasonable.

It's still inferior to the board idea because some of us have big ideas about their club and there exist financial strategies where you can mix your footballing actions with backroom actions. That's the level of control some of us want.

The board becomes a "hack".

A CEO deals with longer term strategic decisions whereas his department heads (managers) are charged with handling the day to day decisions in line with the bigger picture, I'm taking a punt here but I get the impression that you're either a student or someone you has fairly recently finished their time in education.

I've been working for 2 years...

A CEO is responsible for grand strategy, reporting to the Chairman (if they are different people) and/or the board (if one exists) and/or shareholders (again, if they are different). A CEO can incorporate the role of a President and/or COO, who are responsible for various day-to-day roles. Some CEOs hold responsibilities like CFO and CIO as well.

However, a CEO is still a manager. He manages people like the President, COO, CFO, CIO, Executive VPs, regional CEOs, and so on. He can also have ideas of his own, such as deciding a new stadium is important (an idea that might be too large for any C-class executive to make, since it involves more money than a COO controls, and too much business knowledge for the CFO to handle). Some CEOs are hands-on, while some are happy to stay with strategic control. Steve Jobs, for example, was known for being very hands-on. Warren Buffet, on the other hand, is rather hands-off when it comes to running everything that he owns outside of his hedge fund.

A CEO doesn't have direct responsibility over low-level teams but can still intervene. Some CEOs will intervene on a low-level. Hence a CEO can easily be seen as a football management figure.

For those who are essentially Chairmen as well, they might intervene a whole lot. Look at Abramovich.

Being able to own/run a club in FM is a terrible idea yet you keep popping up with the same rhetoric & quoting the same example of it being unrealistic for a manager such as Sir Alex Ferguson to be sacked so an 'unknown' user can take charge of Manchester United so it's must be fine to add a feature like this.

Why is it a terrible idea? Because it's unrealistic to the game's name?

SI have enough areas of football management to fine tune or implement & I would never want them to start down the road of managers gaining wealth that can be used to buy a club at a later point in their career, to start with I'd suggest that it has hardly ever happened in over a century of football & only a select few managers/former players either irl or in FM attain the wealth required (lots of deduction to be factored in after gross income over decades of gameplay) to even consider it as an option worth investing any time in.

Keep beating the drum & using semantics to further your misguided opinion if you want but it's a lame duck idea & long shall that remain the case.

If you ignore the own money bit and focus on the idea that using the club's money to perform actions not typically associated with a football manager (and even then such a defined role is blur nowadays, look at Steve Kean, who might essentially become "Vice-CEO"), that might become a very fun thing to do. No more frustration (bad!) with chairmen selling over your head. No more frustration (bad!) with clubs refusing to do nothing with that huge pile of money you've made through transfers. And so on.

[Sikker]

If you set a player's price at, say, £20m, then the chairman might still sell at £10m.

Setting the value to, say, £80m, might discourage bids between £20m and £30m, say, which you might be comfortable selling for but it would depend on context.

I've never experienced an offer lower than my asking price. As such the chairman will not accept a lower bid than your asking price.

The board sometimes refuses if they can't expand and need to build a new stadium.

It would be cool if a user in full control of the team could take out a loan and live frugally for a decade or so.

Costly mistakes? Why does the game need to prevent you from doing that? You can sign an amateur player for £100m if you can afford it. Of course that would be an expensive mistake.

If you want to shoot yourself in the foot, the game should let you and you should pay the consequences.

I guess you just proved my point there. If you can't handle finances then the game "helps" you by not allowing to build a new stadium/training facilities...

[Eugene Tyson]

Ignoring the spend-my-own-money bit, it's not unreasonable. Spending the club's money is reasonable.

It's still inferior to the board idea because some of us have big ideas about their club and there exist financial strategies where you can mix your footballing actions with backroom actions. That's the level of control some of us want.

You have that control - make a Board Request.

I don't know any manager who also runs the club, and makes the decision and puts into action the building of a new stadium, or the building of a new training ground.

It simply does not happen. That's not how football managers work in the real world, and that's not how it should work in the game.

[Barside]

Why is it a terrible idea? Because it's unrealistic to the game's name?

This is a simple point but one that you are not willing to accept, the game came into existence to provide the most accurate representation of football management, what you & a few others constantly propose is to take the game away from that core goal by adding aspects of the football world that are not within the remit of the manager.

The developers of the game do not appear to think the idea has any creative or commercial merit, whenever the idea is brought up it gets panned & I am yet to have a single friend or acquaintance who plays FM mention that what they would really like is an option to assume the role or responsibilities of a club chairman.

It's a bad idea, end of, full stop & beyond the point of any worthwhile debate.

Edit: If anything there is a bigger draw towards having more of our current responsibilities taken on by an AI controlled director of football (other job titles are available) role where it is realistic for the club to have such a position.

[20leGend99]

Sir Alex Ferguson has a few shares in Accrington Stanley! Not that I want to be able to spend fictional money on random stuff in game.

[Robbins]

I do not see the idea as a problem if it was optional.
There is a lot of denial here, it is better to imagine how it could be done, instead of how it won't work.
I think you can add anything into the game as long as it is implemented the right way.
It is realistic to start a new club, have players come play, manage the team, and turn it into a football team that dominates the world.
The teams didn't appear out of thin air.
Once your team is professional, you as a founder and manager could also be the Chairman and owner.
I see the value in this, it would be fun to take the Managing to a deeper level for those who would find that interesting.
And SI could implement it and make it work if they wanted to.

[themadsheep2001]

I do not see the idea as a problem if it was optional.
There is a lot of denial here, it is better to imagine how it could be done, instead of how it won't work.
I think you can add anything into the game as long as it is implemented the right way.
It is realistic to start a new club, have players come play, manage the team, and turn it into a football team that dominates the world.
The teams didn't appear out of thin air.
Once your team is professional, you as a founder and manager could also be the Chairman and owner.
I see the value in this, it would be fun to take the Managing to a deeper level for those who would find that interesting.
And SI could implement it and make it work if they wanted to.

Its a hell of a lot of work to be optional, and to be honest I cant see SI going down this route at all.

[Barside]

I do not see the idea as a problem if it was optional.
There is a lot of denial here, it is better to imagine how it could be done, instead of how it won't work.
I think you can add anything into the game as long as it is implemented the right way.
It is realistic to start a new club, have players come play, manage the team, and turn it into a football team that dominates the world.
The teams didn't appear out of thin air.
Once your team is professional, you as a founder and manager could also be the Chairman and owner.
I see the value in this, it would be fun to take the Managing to a deeper level for those who would find that interesting.
And SI could implement it and make it work if they wanted to.

Think about the idea of starting a new club from the ground up.

What level would you have to start in & does that level exist on the official database? In most cases the lowest playable league is not the entry level for new clubs
How long does it take for a new club to establish itself in its own domestic structure? You're talking decades.
How many new clubs go to the wall or reach a point that they can no longer grow without a transfer of ownership to a wealthier individual?
Would you really like to see your game end after 2 years when your club goes bust or you lose your controlling interest?

If people really thought about the idea I'm sure they'd come to the same conclusion that many other have done already, the feature offers little return for the investment required & at best will only be used to push through financial decisions that will result in an easier gaming experience.

[JojoVillaHursty]

This subject has been debated to death, this is a football managment simulator. SI have much more they have to concentrate on to keep the game as great as it is and make it even better, instead of adding another role to the game that is not exactly realistic the only person who I think got close to spending money on a club is Harry Redknapp to Oxford United if that is even true.

[Barside]

This subject has been debated to death

Apparently not.

What I would be interested in seeing is what people think a club chairman should be doing, how this would be implemented in the game & how it improves the game.

[JojoVillaHursty]

What I would be interested in seeing is what people think a club chairman should be doing, how this would be implemented in the game & how it improves the game.

It could always be a tab under confidence, So how the fans are reacting to what the chairman is doing, say he sells a key player for £5million the fans could be calling for his head.
This could also effect chairmans selling up.

[tomtuck01]

Awful idea, gets abused by well over 90% of people who comment.

[x42bn6]

I guess you just proved my point there. If you can't handle finances then the game "helps" you by not allowing to build a new stadium/training facilities...

But it doesn't let you build a new stadium if you can handle them. Especially if you have a long-term plan, and are trusted.

You have that control - make a Board Request.

I don't know any manager who also runs the club, and makes the decision and puts into action the building of a new stadium, or the building of a new training ground.

I don't think many do (although some managers might petition for them), but that's not the point - why restrict what the game can do to the scope of a typical football manager?

It simply does not happen. That's not how football managers work in the real world, and that's not how it should work in the game.

See above

This is a simple point but one that you are not willing to accept, the game came into existence to provide the most accurate representation of football management, what you & a few others constantly propose is to take the game away from that core goal by adding aspects of the football world that are not within the remit of the manager.

What's wrong with changing the goals?

A goal can be a barrier, inflexible or even wrong.

The developers of the game do not appear to think the idea has any creative or commercial merit, whenever the idea is brought up it gets panned & I am yet to have a single friend or acquaintance who plays FM mention that what they would really like is an option to assume the role or responsibilities of a club chairman.

The reason why it's brought up is because there's demand for it!

Is that not worth considering?

Also, anecdotal evidence is always cool.

It's a bad idea, end of, full stop & beyond the point of any worthwhile debate.

Why?

Edit: If anything there is a bigger draw towards having more of our current responsibilities taken on by an AI controlled director of football (other job titles are available) role where it is realistic for the club to have such a position.

I think it would annoy people who don't like having control taken away from them.

Some people play this game like a Director of Football, no? Why not give them that full capability?

Think about the idea of starting a new club from the ground up.

What level would you have to start in & does that level exist on the official database? In most cases the lowest playable league is not the entry level for new clubs
How long does it take for a new club to establish itself in its own domestic structure? You're talking decades.

You can play an FM game for game-decades.

How many new clubs go to the wall or reach a point that they can no longer grow without a transfer of ownership to a wealthier individual?

You can't predict the future, so this can't be answered.

Would you really like to see your game end after 2 years when your club goes bust or you lose your controlling interest?

That doesn't have to be game over. The user could simply continue on with a different role (i.e. a manager, or perhaps another chairman).

If people really thought about the idea I'm sure they'd come to the same conclusion that many other have done already, the feature offers little return for the investment required & at best will only be used to push through financial decisions that will result in an easier gaming experience.

I've thought this through aplenty and combined with the sheer number of times this pops up, think that this idea has merit for some form of inclusion.

It won't necessarily make it easier. It allows the user to shoot themselves in the foot more times. The game doesn't become necessarily easier if you take a more hands-on approach to training - you could get it wrong, and it takes time - time some users don't have patience for. So giving users the ability to use a (possibly-new) feature does not necessarily make things easier.

[Cleon]

I don't think many do (although some managers might petition for them), but that's not the point - why restrict what the game can do to the scope of a typical football manager?

Just remind me what the games called again.....

It makes no sense to take the game in the direction of been able to spend the wage you earn, none at all imo.

[Ackter]

It's a bad idea because it's a bad idea.

Stop looking for things to argue about (and it's always the same few things in every thread).

This thread is now pointless and going in circles so I'm closing it.