Transfers - discussion on the mechanics and issues .

I dont know if this is directly a bug, but its getting more and more frustrating as i go on my save.

I play as Man United, and I have established a decent team after a year. Now I have somewhat of 20 million pounds left of my transfer budget, and I want to buy some nice talents I can match carefully into the squad.

But its near impossible to get a decent deal for most of the highest-rated talents around. Not even mediocre talents is possible to get for anything near marketvalue.

Example 1: Maximiliam Arnold from wolfsburg. 21 years, valued at 8-9 million pounds, and I offer 10. Wolfsburg negotiates right to 35 million pounds, without further negotiation possibillities.

Example 2: Julian Brandt from Leverkusen. 19 years, valued at 7-8 million pounds. Start negotiations at that value, but leverkusen bounces it right up to 60 million pounds! Impossible to get for less than 50. For a 19-year-old!

Example 3: Ruben Neves from FC Porto. 18 years, valued at less than 1 million pounds. Offer 5 millions, but Porto bounces it right to release clause of 35 millions! And by no chance, would they go less than it!

I could go on and on with examples, but I think I've proved my point.

Its riddicoulus that it's so damn hard to get these sort of players, they should be available for top 20 million pounds!

The transfer engine in this game is broken, and has been so without any fixes.

Please, please fix it soon! I like to build teams from talents and often end up with average age of 22-23 years within a couple of seasons, and when its so hard it takes away the joy I get from this game!

And I bet there are a lot of people out there like me, thinking the same thing.

If it wont get fixed I'll probably end up quitting these series!

I have never really found that function to be any useful, as it often is wrong.

But that being said, for the particular players, the reports came back with club will probably not sell this player. But thats okay, cause a respectable amount of money should persuade them.

Its just that the amounts required by clubs, and not just top clubs like the ones I mentioned, are all over way too high.

Its not often one sees teenagers move for more than 20m pounds. Of course it happens, but no way near to the frequency as this game makes it.

Thats why I think the transfer engine is broken. And the fact that the clubs aint willing to negotiate at all is also very annoying.

If the players I mentioned would be possible to get for around 20-25m I would accept it, but the prices are just so unrealisticly high.

I think there is no bug or unrealistic price.In the game there is no way to say that i do not want sell this player at this time because he is irreplaceable.Instead of this teams asking such ridiculous prices which can be acceptable in this case.

That just like what you do when other clubs trying to poach your talented youngster. Show me the ridiculous money....

If the negotiated counter offer is say 3-4 times the value then that just means they don't want to sell

Not sure that's a problem - especially not with Neves anyway.

Just try to unsettle the players as it might force the selling clubs hand into accepting a lower bid

I noticed in FM15 that you really need to scout before buying. I don't make an offer until my scout report shows 100& knowledge of the player. Negotiations usually go smoother this way.

I never get the entitled attitude that a user has the divine right to buy any player in the game. Actually, that's not true. You can buy any player in the game, but some you're going to have to pay ridiculous amounts to get. What exactly is so wrong about that? Messi and Ronaldo could probably be bought come the next transfer window, but I bet it would cost a fair bit.

Bottom line - if you just throw in a blind bid, you're going to have to pay an amount relevant to how much a team wants to keep that player. If you play the long game, declaring interest, chipping away at the other side, then you'll see how much they really want to keep him, and probably end up getting him for a reasonable amount. Nothing is broken about that.

I don't see anything wrong with the examples you've mentioned, why would AI clubs let you have there players cheap? If they don't want to sell then they ask for ridiclous money, just like I do when PSG enquire about my star right back, I say give me £60M they say no. How often do you hear managers in real life say "we'll only sell him for silly money"? All the time!

If you take your time, unsettle the player and wait until his contract has slightly less to run then you can buy almost anyone you wish, but you have to work on it.

The transfer system isn't broken, but your idea of how it should work is.

James Rodriguez' cost AS Monaco 45 mill. euros 2 years so I cannot see anything unrealistic in those cases that you've mentioned. Why should the clubs want to sell their biggest talents for less than £30 mill when they could help them to future glory and possibly be worth more in the future.

The only unrealistic demands in my opinion are those for 15-16 year old regens, since +£30 and sometimes +£50 mill for a 15 year old is a little out of line. I don't mind it too much though as it would otherwise be too easy to assemble a team of guaranteed future world beaters for very little money. This is really more an issue of it being way too easy (for AI teams and human players alike) to identify very young players with high potential ability and getting them to reach it (although AI teams are pretty poor at the latter).

I agree with the OP the transfer system lacks realism and seems very scripted, it's even worse when trying to sell players I wouldn't mind paying 50m for a 16yr old regen if i could sell my top players for anything more than 20m!!, I think SI will need to spend a lot of time revamping the system as buying and selling is one of the main attractions for starting a FM save but at the moment the system is not engaging enough, with FFP introduced I think SI will need to revamp the entire system as we are seeing a lot of transfers based on the clubs current FFP status.

I agree with the OP the transfer system lacks realism and seems very scripted, it's even worse when trying to sell players I wouldn't mind paying 50m for a 16yr old regen if i could sell my top players for anything more than 20m!!, I think SI will need to spend a lot of time revamping the system as buying and selling is one of the main attractions for starting a FM save but at the moment the system is not engaging enough, with FFP introduced I think SI will need to revamp the entire system as we are seeing a lot of transfers based on the clubs current FFP status.

And again, you need to actually negotiate. Exact same issue. Why would clubs come in with a high offer to begin with? They tempt you in with a low offer probably expecting a rejection. Negotiate to what you would probably accept, plus a bit more. If they're willing to go that high, they'll negotiate back to you. If not, they'll move on.

Database size matters a lot. It sucks that there isn't more information in-game on how it affects things. If your database is too big, it's really hard to sell for anything approaching reasonable prices. If it's too small, it's damn near impossible to buy for anything approaching a reasonable price. If it's just right, it works ok, though there are still problems with valuation.

in regards to neves i tried to buy him in my first season. I didn't want to match his 17 mil release clause so i just unsettled him and porto just put him in reserves and played hard ball for a whole season. Although this did cheese me of I think it's an essential aspect of the game. coz the next season I just hit the release clause and got easy contract negotiations because he was still unhappy.

You have to scout people properly and work the transfers. Personally I believe that arsenal have been trying for years to get draxler but shalke are playing hard ball for that release clause to be met. so arsenal just went and bought Sanchez (happy days)

You can't get hot prospects on the cheap from respectable clubs if they're on long contracts. Even if you do unsettle them to the point they're transfer listed. Unless they have a rubbish director of football in charge

My main gripe is that the management NEVER steps in for AI clubs, but it can step in when it comes to you.

Manage a random low division club from a low reputation country and the management will accept offers on your behalf as soon as a 500K offer is made.

Make a 1M offer for a high PA regen in the exact same clubs and now they somehow have the luxury to be able to reply back to you that they want at least 6.

My issue is not with the negotiating process, but rather that at times the valuation is ludicrous. What is the realistic basis for valuing a 15 year old +£50 mill.? In real life that is unimaginable. Players like Anthony Martial and Martin Ødegaard are those who come closest and they are miles off. The only basis for those valuations is prescience of the players potential ability which obviously is unrealistic. Ronaldo was bought by United for £12.24 mill. as an 18 year old and I am convinced Barcelona would more than happily have shipped off Lionel Messi for anything above £10 mill. when he was 15.

In game, however, a 15 year old 181 PA GK who will be nowhere near Courtouis' ability when fully developed (according to Genie Scout) cannot be bought for less than £30 mill. after more than a year of negotiating (came in as a 14 year old regen for Leverkusen).

But as stated before, I guess this is a necessity as it is too easy to identify and develop young prospects so if the pricing was realistic building a future dream team would be too easy.

I'm actually enjoying the transfer system at the moment. I've recently sold top players both for well over 30million pounds (Di Maria and Mata - third season). As for buying players, I do the same thing as the AI when other teams come in for players I want to keep - jack the price up and don't budge. They then try and unsettle him and its game on.

The unrealistic transfers for me are for Lucas Romero and Eder Alvarez Balanta at the beginning of the game. Both can be bought for under 10million pounds and become beasts.

I don't think you should be able to buy 18-20 year olds, who are worth ~£10M, for £20M. That's double their stated value, but really you're going to want way more than that if you're the selling club??

They have a whole career ahead of them, and have clearly proven to be fairly useful if already rated > £5M. Also, I like that teenagers are getting more expensive in the game, as this is a natural progression from real life.

E.g. you see Luke Shaw going for £35M after 1 decent season, Chambers going for however much that was. These players will see bigger transfers in real life as teams get richer and try and find the best talent.

Only thing bugging me in the game is 16 Y/Os that people demand £20M+ for. These are bigger gambles, and should demand slightly lower fees.

My issue is not with the negotiating process, but rather that at times the valuation is ludicrous. What is the realistic basis for valuing a 15 year old +£50 mill.? In real life that is unimaginable

They are not valuations and shouldn't be thought of as one.

They are a quote designed to tell you to go away. The clubs don't expect to sell at those prices, they expect you to find other targets so they can keep their player. They don't want you to bid, they don't want to sell you the player, they want you to go away.

1. AI is very much open for negotiation. When I see a play quoted at 20 million, I offer them 100k. If they want to be silly, so can I. I usually end up getting these playing for like 5m, with add on adding up to 15m, but only if the player plays 50 games for me, and score loads of goals.

2. Some players are non-starter. I see 16 year olds quoted at 78m. No point moving forward from there. Just dtop it. To me, this is most common among German youngsters. You won't get everyone you want, but there are enough talent out there that it is possible for you to end up with 1-2 world class talent every year, which is much higher than the real life norm.

3. If you really want someone, you sometimes have to work for it. That could mean 1-2 years worth of courtship. Flirt with him every window. That could unsettle him. How long did Madrid flirt with Ronaldo or Barcelona with Cesc?

They are not valuations and shouldn't be thought of as one.

They are a quote designed to tell you to go away.

They are listed as Potential Value, and obviously it is a valuation by the selling team. Regardless, no team in the world wouldn't sell any 15 year old for +£15 mill.

Obviously not when they could get him for less than £5 mill. if they wanted.

They are listed as Potential Value, and obviously it is a valuation by the selling team. Regardless, no team in the world wouldn't sell any 15 year old for +£15 mill.

It is effectively a valuation but only because SI gave in to some users years ago, before that teams said "Not for Sale" and thats the way these quotes should be thought of.

Obviously not when they could get him for less than £5 mill. if they wanted.

Again teams IRL back off when quoted large prices, they recognise when teams don't want to sell and don't throw their toys out of the pram when they can't sign who they want.

It is effectively a valuation but only because SI gave in to some users years ago, before that teams said "Not for Sale" and thats the way these quotes should be thought of.

Call it what you want, these cases simply don't exist irl. Everybody is for sale for the right price, and for a 15 year old in real life that price is not over £15 mill. and that is even being extremely conservative. Anyone arguing such cases to be realistic seem to be completely oblivious to the real life uncertainty surrounding a 15 year old's future ability and just how much £15 mill. is.

As an example Lionel Messi (arguably the best ever footballer) in 2003 (age 15-16) was close to being released on a free due to Barcelona's financial instability just so that they did not have to finance his family's stay in Catalunya (http://www.givemesport.com/369519-barcelona-almost-let-lionel-messi-leave-for-free). Who thinks they would not have sold if a bid of £5 mill. came in? Now, why did no teams come in then for the future best player in the world when they could snap him up for very "little"? Obviously because very few had seen him play or even knew about him and no outsiders could possibly foresee that he would reach a level even close to what he did. At the time he simply wasn't worth that kind of money.

In Football Manager Barcelona would know his 199 PA right after the youth intake and would probably not let him go for less than his +£30 mill buy-out clause.

Edit:

Actually Shaw is an interesting example for this discussion (from Wikipedia):

"During the January 2012 transfer window, it was reported that Premier League clubs Arsenal, Chelsea, and Manchester City had shown interest in signing 16-year-old Shaw, with the then-Championship club reportedly valuing the defender at £4 million.[10] Southampton quickly responded to such claims though, with then-manager Nigel Adkins assuring the media that "Luke Shaw is a big part of our future plans", and claiming that the club had "no intention ... of letting any of [their] young players move on""

From the Independent: "An asking price of £4m is extremely high for a teenager who has not even played senior football but the market value for the best young players, and in particular, the best young English players, is rising all the time." (http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/arsenal-face-a-battle-for-saints-4m-teen-6287747.html).

From that we can gather that the Premier League sides were scared of by the announcement that £4 mill. wouldn't be enough although no such bids were actually made in the first place. £4 mill. was already considered "extremely high", so I wonder if a bid of £10 (2.5 the alleged valuation) would have been enough? It seems very unlikely that it wouldn't have been, but on a more factual note it appears that the threshold valuation scaring off potential suitors in real life was around £4mill and not +£50 mill.

It's really quite clear that there is blatant discrepancy between game and reality in this regard, but as previously stated it is sort of necessary to prevent the game from being too easy and I don't really mind it. I'm just not under the illusion that it's realistic.

The discrepancy lies when some users insist that they are entitled to buy any player they want and spit the dummy when FM doesn't let them.

RL transfers don't reach that level because clubs use common sense and don't pay those fees. Users that employ common sense when playing FM also don't have any issues, they recognise the other club doesn't want to sell and either move onto other targets or use the tools available, showing patience to wait until the appropriate time to get the player for a reasonable price.

The only users that have an issue are those that feel they have the divine right to sign whoever they want and don't like being told NO!

The only users that have an issue are those that feel they have the divine right to sign whoever they want and don't like being told NO!

Instead of spouting the same nonsense repeatedly I invite you to refute the arguments that I have put forth. I have explicitly presented to you why the situation you insist on doesn't exsist.

The discrepancy lies when some users insist that they are entitled to buy any player they want and spit the dummy when FM doesn't let them.

RL transfers don't reach that level because clubs use common sense and don't pay those fees. Users that employ common sense when playing FM also don't have any issues, they recognise the other club doesn't want to sell and either move onto other targets or use the tools available, showing patience to wait until the appropriate time to get the player for a reasonable price.

The only users that have an issue are those that feel they have the divine right to sign whoever they want and don't like being told NO!

I 100% agree. I find the FM transfer system quite realistic. I can't buy just anyone I want, unless I'm prepared to throw unrealistic figures at clubs - which is exactly how it should be.

When I find some very highly rated/potential star at the age of 16, I don't expect to pay anywhere near the 150k he is currently "valued" at either. I usually find that a more realistic fee of around £5-10 million (or more!) is going to be on the cards - and that's only IF the club are even tempted to sell at all!

You can usually get an idea of it's viable from the scouts reports if they are likely to sell too. If you start getting messages like "the club are unlikely to want to sell this player as he is seen as a player with a lot of potential" (or something like that) - then guess what? They are going to quote silly prices for him as a mechanism to prevent the club selling players IRL they probably would never sell. I remember back in 2005(ish) when clubs were being quoted £40million + for the young Messi as a promising teenager so it is a realistic feature in my opinion.

This is something FM has really improved on in recent years. Before it, it was far too easy to build up a team full of potential stars and snap up clearly awesome regens for next to nothing based on paying just slightly more than their in-game value.

I remember back in 2005ish when clubs were being quoted £40million + for Messi as a promising teenager so it is a realistic feature in my opinion.

Instead of spouting the same nonsense repeatedly I invite you to refute the arguments that I have put forth. I have explicitly presented to you why the situation you insist on doesn't exsist.

What arguments? you have put forward nothing and refuse to accept the way it works in reality

What I have said is not nonsense in the slightest but its clear you have your own blinkered view as to the way it should work, all I can say is thankfully SI can see past it and have a good system in place.

At which point there is no point continuing the discussion with you so I won't waste any more time.

Look at it this way - you find a golden child in your youth team and the AI bid for him. Let's assume you cannot just refuse the bid but you have to put a price on him (as you say, everyone has a price). What price would you put? 3 or 4m? Or 25m so they'll go away.

Just look on the massive quoted fees as meaning "Not for sale. Go away"

If your Shaw example was used as a basis in FM then you would take your 20m and buy the 5 best youth prospects in the game. Every year. Maybe that's what you want to do, but I am content that the transfer system is a reasonable facsimile of real life.

...

It's simple and it all stems to your initial point of Barcelona knowing his 199 PA.

Scouting is plainly flawed and has always been.

And because some users were using scouting and larger databases in order to scout countries like Nigeria, Morocco, etc and get star players cheaper, others complained that "this isn't realistic and not how the game is supposed to be played".

SI, sadly, decided to budge to those complains and did that change. And I say "sadly", because two wrongs don't make one right. The main culprit here was cleary scouting and not people looking for players elsewhere. It was quite a surprise, because I don't remember any other instance of SI changing something just because of "he plays the game differently, please nerf" complains.

I think it was 13 that had this change for the first time.

And after that, you would have clubs in (i.e) Morocco with a total value of 100K deny offers like 5M, replying back to you with counter-offers of 15M. Completely nonsensical.

Big clubs asking for 30-50M for youth stars is only a side-effect of that change.

Although I can't find anything when searching for messi £40 million on google with the interval 1st Janurary 2004 to 31st december 2006 (https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lionel+messi+%C2%A340+m+transfer&biw=1236&bih=666&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A01%2F01%2F2004%2Ccd_max%3A31%2F12%2F2006&tbm=#tbs=cdr:1%2Ccd_min:01%2F01%2F2004%2Ccd_max:31%2F12%2F2006&q=lionel+messi+%C2%A340+million+), there is a massive difference between an 18 year-old who has broken into Barcelonas first team and a 15 year old who has recently come out of your youth intake as evidenced by my previous posts.

Shaw was recently sold as 18 year old (although almost 19) for above £30m, but as 16½ year old he was valued around £4m.

What is it that people don't get? My point is that scouting is severely overpowered and therefore you know way too early if a player will become great or not, which naturally causes hugely inflated prices. In reality that is not the case, which is why you don't see 15-16 year olds go for more than £5m. I have repeatedly said that with the current scouting I don't mind the exorbitant prices as the game would otherwise be too easy. Do you not read my post, or are you just cantankerous in nature?

Edit:

What arguments? you have put forward nothing and refuse to accept the way it works in reality

I have showed that in real life the market for 15-16 year olds is at £5m at max meaning that any +£15m bid would get accepted immediately without any consideration. A £4m valuation of a 16½ year old player without first team football is considered "extremely high". How can a +£50 valuation then ever be in line with reality? How can you possibly believe that what you're saying is making any sense.

Name one 15 year old that wouldn't be sold if a bid of £15m came in if you can even name a well recognised 15 year old player?

SI, sadly, decided to budge to those complains and did that change. And I say "sadly", because two wrongs don't make one right. The main culprit here was cleary scouting and not people looking for players elsewhere. It was quite a surprise, because I don't remember any other instance of SI changing something just because of "he plays the game differently, please nerf" complains.

No amount of work on the scouting system will stop players using database editors/scouting tools to check for players with excellent potential abilities. If they want to do this then that's fine by me and I kind of agree that there shouldnt be enforced game restrictions preventing this, however I don't agree that the current system is directly as a result of SI pandering to people moaning to nerf it at all.

And after that, you would have clubs in (i.e) Morocco with a total value of 100K deny offers like 5M, replying back to you with counter-offers of 15M. Completely nonsensical.

Big clubs asking for 30-50M for youth stars is only a side-effect of that change.

I think this only goes to further highlight how wrong youa re that this was imposed directly to prevent players not scouting and looking for quick and easy buys. Its VERY realistic that clubs will be quoted highly inflated prices, especially for rich Premier league clubs. I've seen it many times over the past few seasons where players have had their valuations hugely inflated when Europe's richest teams come knocking.

It's more realistic to assume this is a side affect of the ever increasing agent power in football than anything SI has done!

No amount of work on the scouting system will stop players using database editors/scouting tools to check for players with excellent potential abilities. If they want to do this then that's fine by me and I kind of agree that there shouldnt be enforced game restrictions preventing this, however I don't agree that the current system is directly as a result of SI pandering to people moaning to nerf it at all.

I think this only goes to further highlight how wrong youa re that this was imposed directly to prevent players not scouting and looking for quick and easy buys. Its VERY realistic that clubs will be quoted highly inflated prices, especially for rich Premier league clubs. I've seen it many times over the past few seasons where players have had their valuations hugely inflated when Europe's richest teams come knocking.

It's more realistic to assume this is a side affect of the ever increasing agent power in football than anything SI has done!

No single teenager has had inflated prices for as far as I remember. Not until they were already on their starting 20s.

Most inflated prices are for fully developed players, something that isn't that common in the game as well actually. I haven't got to do 80M sales, although I've seen a couple over the years.

So the scale is kinda upside down for the game when compared to reality to be honest.

And well, even though it is indeed arguable for big clubs, it's still completely unrealistic for small teams. Especially when we are talking about VERY small teams. Imagine a team even worse than Skill S/N denying a 5M offer. Ye...not going to happen, ever.

Its VERY realistic that clubs will be quoted highly inflated prices, especially for rich Premier league clubs. I've seen it many times over the past few seasons where players have had their valuations hugely inflated when Europe's richest teams come knocking.

Yeah but no 15-16 year olds among them

Edit:

Most inflated prices are for fully developed players, something that isn't that common in the game as well actually

The funny thing is that sometimes if you wait till the players has developed you might get him cheaper than or around the same prices that his valuation was when he was 15.

Ok you get one more response

What is it that people don't get? My point is that scouting is severely overpowered and therefore you know way too early if a player will become great or not, which naturally causes hugely inflated prices. In reality that is not the case, which is why you don't see 15-16 year olds go for more than £5m. I have repeatedly said that with the current scouting I don't mind the exorbitant prices as the game would otherwise be too easy.

You never once directly mentioned scouting in your previous post, you hinted at it but were not clear at all.

Scouting is a different discussion and according to SI scouts & other staff are far less accurate that a lot of users seem to think. Personally speaking I'm not sure, I certainly feel that scouts/staff are still too accurate and maybe SI need to review the area further. On the flipside I've seen many, many players where the initial PA stars do not reflect the player at 25yo, how much of this is down to staff inaccuracy I don't know.

I have showed that in real life the market for 15-16 year olds is at £5m at max meaning that any +£15m bid would get accepted immediately without any consideration. A £4m valuation of a 16½ year old player without first team football is considered "extremely high". How can a +£50 valuation then ever be in line with reality? How can you possibly believe that what you're saying is making any sense.

You are missing the point that no team would realistically bid £15m for a 15yo.

Arguing that a £15m+ bid would be accepted is mute when it would never happen, its a case of unrealistic input = unrealistic output. The bottom line is the bid should never be made and the next step is for SI to code the board to block users making that sort of offer.

It's really quite clear that there is blatant discrepancy between game and reality in this regard, but as previously stated it is sort of necessary to prevent the game from being too easy and I don't really mind it. I'm just not under the illusion that it's realistic.

Very well put, and the rest of your post was great also.

There is really just one issue at play here and it is the fact that AI and human both have too much certainty about the future potential of the player. AI asks for too much, and humans are willing to pay too much. Of course, "too much" is really defined by the quality of the player, and given the point about certainty about the potential of the player there is definitely a case to be made that the AI actually asks for about the right amount, and the human is also willing to pay about the right amount. If real life CA/PA worked as it does in real life then we would see teams paying much more and asking for much, much more than they currently do, such as the figures in Ylt's post.

So to me, both of the players (AI and Human) are acting logically within the framework of the game considering the information they have available. The issue is that this behaviour is not realistic in comparison to real life.

I think that the answer is for SI to re-balance the motivations and interests of the player, such that the heavily criticised "unrealistic inputs" aren't also amongst the most effective strategies. The most obvious change would relate to making it much harder to forecast the potential of the player (both for human and AI), especially in leagues that have a low (or perhaps just different) level of football.

In addition to this there is the issue of the board and their attitude to risk. Chairmen should care more about their money. For example, perhaps the risk tolerance of a board would affect how they were willing to allow you to structure the transfer. A risk averse chairman would be more likely to want performance related payments, for example, while a more risky one may just set a rough acceptable figure for that player (say, £15million.) The more I spend the more my chairman will be unhappy if the player doesn't improve, or if I try to sell him for a loss. I would like to go about my transfers with more concern that making bad decisions with other people's money could harm my career. Perhaps my chairman starts being more stingy with his money, or perhaps e even hires a director of football to take charge of transfers over my head. I think that would make me cautious about spending big on a young player, which is what we want.

Another idea to address the balance would be to expand on the boring question of "do you think this fee puts more pressure on him to succeed?" etc, and include a more widespread fallout from an expensive youth signing. There could be the effects of the pressure on the player, with more news and backroom representations of this. Perhaps the board wants you to play the player, but doing so angers your team because they feel he hasn't earned it.

I've mentioned before that I think reputation should be expanded such that it is possible to be well known but for negative reasons. In terms of this thread it would be interesting if a high profile youth signing could play really badly and as such become well known, but as a flop. It would also be interesting if as the manager I could have a high reputation but still have the negative record of having signed a flop. Maybe this would put more pressure on future signings, be a focal point of job interviews, or as mentioned above make the board bring in a DoF.

Similarly, it would be interesting if this reputation change would mean that some players could be worth more or less than 'usual' based on certain reputation traits, affecting my interests in the transfer market. For instance, if a player is currently a well known flop then regardless of their actual CA or PA they should cost less. Obviously he will still have that hanging over him, but I might fancy my chances of getting some performances out of him and instantly raising his worth. There are many possibilities.

Arguing that a £15m+ bid would be accepted is mute when it would never happen, its a case of unrealistic input = unrealistic output. The bottom line is the bid should never be made and the next step is for SI to code the board to block users making that sort of offer.

Or, you know, fix scouting so that the player isn't 100% certain that the player he is investing in is worth the 15M since he is a sure catch for the next 10 years.

Just an idea instead of ruining the game even more.

It's funny how for every other subject brought up the answer is "this is a simulator game, not arcade", but when it comes to players taking advantage of the shortcoming of the scouting system the reply is "we should impose limitations to everyone's simulation".

What next? You're going to ask for limitations when it comes to scouting foreign countries without the management's parental approval?

Yeah but no 15-16 year olds among them

.

No single teenager has had inflated prices for as far as I remember. Not until they were already on their starting 20s

Legal and ethical complications aside, I can't imagine any manager sitting in front of their board and seriously trying to request a silly amount of money to buy a 15/16 year old player so we already talking hypothetical.

As stated, it seems you have more of a problem with the scouting system (which I agree can be too accurate or easy to read - but not always 100% reliable) than the transfer system. The transfer system is basically reacting/predicting, based on behaviours and trends both within the game and IRL, of how the club would probably respond when put in such a ridiculous situation. In this hypothetical situation, I'm in agreement with how it acts and basically blocks the sale of all but certain future stars.

If I had a player that I felt, based on the same info that the club making the bid had, was likely to be a big deal in the future then I would be reluctant to sell and quote silly prices back to the club making the bids to block them. That's not the transfer system that's broken, that's the attribute masking/scouting system that needs further development.

You never once directly mentioned scouting in your previous post, you hinted at it but were not clear at all.

My first post: "This is really more an issue of it being way too easy (for AI teams and human players alike) to identify very young players with high potential ability and getting them to reach it (although AI teams are pretty poor at the latter)."

I think that is pretty clear.

There are no +£15m bids because the actual market for such players are way lower as witnessed by the transfers of Martial and Ødegaard who by themselves are rather extreme exceptions. In real life teams have very little idea of the potential of unused (on first team or high level) 15-16 years players, which is why they are not worth very much. Teams do not keep their future stars because they reject massive bids, but rather because no one has much of an idea how good those players will get. In game however AI teams instantly pick up on how good a youngster will get creating these exorbitantly bloated prices and in game scouts are also far too reliable so human players very quickly discover the best prospects as well.

As you very well point out the very notion of +£15m bids for 15-16 year olds is absurd, yet you go on to defend that it is realistic when it happens in game. The game unrealistically forces this to happen because of unrealistic knowledge of player potential as I pointed out in my first post.

As you very well point out the very notion of +£15m bids for 15-16 year olds is absurd, yet you go on to defend that it is realistic when it happens in game.

I have never once in any post said a £15m bid is realistic.

A quote from another club is not in any way a bid and I have consistently pointed out that a user should not be making those bids.

I have never once in any post said a £15m bid is realistic.

A quote from another club is not in any way a bid and I have consistently pointed out that a user should not be making those bids.

The player wouldn't be doing that bid if a risk factor when it comes to a youth's development actually existed.

A good solution would be to have the PA of a youth regen be decided later in his life, around 21 years of age for example, and be subject to change with tutoring, quality of the coaches that work with them and others, while still having some random base values affect it to have some variety.

As you very well point out the very notion of +£15m bids for 15-16 year olds is absurd, yet you go on to defend that it is realistic when it happens in game. The game unrealistically forces this to happen because of unrealistic knowledge of player potential as I pointed out in my first post.

Considering the team do not want to sell it is realistic to stick a massive fee on a player. Heck, it's what I do myself all the time. (e.g. want to buy Zivkovic off of me? Pay up 50-60m or get lost.) It's a safe guard for clubs not letting their youngster walk when they feel they can be actually worth 15m in two to three years time.

The player wouldn't be doing that bid if a risk factor when it comes to a youth's development actually existed.

A good solution would be to have the PA of a youth regen be decided later in his life, around 21 years of age for example, and be subject to change with tutoring, quality of the coaches that work with them and others, while still having some random base values affect it to have some variety.

I don't disagree with that.

SI have told us this year that staff & scouts are wrong more often than right and yet as users the general feeling consensus is that scouting is too accurate. So either scouting isn't as random as SI feel or some combination of factors means as users we still find it too easy to identify talent.

Changing PA has been discussed to death for many years and is not in any way the solution but removal of PA stars might be leaving us simply with current attributes & ability. Whether a player improves or not would then be a total mystery only revealed by taking a risk on the player.

Changing PA has been discussed to death for many years and is not in any way the solution but removal of PA stars might be leaving us simply with current attributes & ability. Whether a player improves or not would then be a total mystery only revealed by taking a risk on the player.

I agree with the sentiment here, but we do also need a mechanism to evaluate potential. Opinions should still be a large part of it, and we need a visually easy way to classify what your staff thinks a player's top end is. This is what the stars do, though, so is it a game mechanics problem or simply that star ratings have become too elevated in the mids of most users? I don't really know, but I do know that we frequently run into users who put entirely too much stock in the star system. Would a text blurb be better than stars? Something like "could be a good League One midfielder" or something rather than a set of stars?

I have never once in any post said a £15m bid is realistic.

A quote from another club is not in any way a bid and I have consistently pointed out that a user should not be making those bids.

So now you're argument is that I should just not sign the player that I have scouted because if I do, it will be unrealistic because of the unrealistically high valuation that the selling club has imposed? That sounds paradoxical; that I have to stop myself from doing something unrealistic and then pretend the game is now realistic. I'd say id would be smarter to fix what is making the game unrealistic in the first place.

Edit:

Changing PA has been discussed to death for many years and is not in any way the solution but removal of PA stars might be leaving us simply with current attributes & ability. Whether a player improves or not would then be a total mystery only revealed by taking a risk on the player.

Much akin to real life. Actually removing it completely would be quite interesting. Scouts could then report player ratings, which could be masked, and give some small indications as to what they think of the player based primarily on their current attributes and performances. For example along the lines: "This player has good technical abilities and is likely to develop them further."

The: "This player could be a good Championship player" also seem too revealing unless there was a rather significant chance that this wasn't the case of which maybe a small chance of him getting better and a bigger chance of him not making it. Here I am mainly talking about 14-16 year olds straight from the youth intake. Otherwise so precise reports should take much longer (maybe up to years for very young players) to be produced either through the player being at your club or continued scouting. Not necessarily constant scouting, but regularly over a long period of time.

I don't disagree with that.

SI have told us this year that staff & scouts are wrong more often than right and yet as users the general feeling consensus is that scouting is too accurate. So either scouting isn't as random as SI feel or some combination of factors means as users we still find it too easy to identify talent.

Changing PA has been discussed to death for many years and is not in any way the solution but removal of PA stars might be leaving us simply with current attributes & ability. Whether a player improves or not would then be a total mystery only revealed by taking a risk on the player.

I wasn't talking about completely customizable PA values.

Think of it like the current system for the database players who have those -1, -2 values and have a random PA ranging.

A number like that is attributed at youth gen.

Then tutoring, coach quality, ambition and professionalism give a bonus (with a range factor for each) when at the ripe age and the players finally rolls for his value.

Let's say a player has a potential range between 160-200 PA.

I'm pretty sure that everyone would pay 15M for that 200 PA, but not really for the 160, so there's the risk factor there, especially when you don't have good tutors, etc. (and in my opinion, tutors should be able to allow players go a bit higher than their PA, at least in mental stats, if we accept that every person does have physical limitations. This would reflect that.)

Obviously some balancing factors would be needed to keep PA distribution within current values.

Well it seems my post has been deleted, I suppose I could have expected as much. Here is a less antagonistic version.

Anybody who says "unrealistic input etc" has no credibility.

Ylt if you check your PMs then you will be saved a mighty headache while browsing this forum.

The player wouldn't be doing that bid if a risk factor when it comes to a youth's development actually existed.

A good solution would be to have the PA of a youth regen be decided later in his life, around 21 years of age for example, and be subject to change with tutoring, quality of the coaches that work with them and others, while still having some random base values affect it to have some variety.

I kind of agree with PA not to be definitively set until his development starts to slow down, say the age of 21/22. The issues with that is, by which time, the players CA is already either well on it's way to matching (or falling short of) his PA, which is supposed to be vague and in most cases it wouldn't be realistic to then extend his PA drastically. Even if you could, most of us would decide the player wouldn't be worth the time or risk of developing him further beyond this age because realistically he wouldn't see much of a stat increase. Even if this was acceptable, you would probably have to open the door to some pretty extreme stat changes in considerably short spaces of time, late on in a players' career. It could work and may even be more realistic in that it's effectively making player attributes more dynamic and more like form that actual set attributes.

Either way I inclined to agree that it's scouting or the definitive display of attributes that's the crux of the problem here rather than the transfer system it's self.

I agree with the sentiment here, but we do also need a mechanism to evaluate potential.

Do we though?

Given you already know CA through stars & attributes how much do we need to know about their potential? how much do staff/scouts know IRL? Surely its just a case of trial & error, some players improve, some don't.

IRL the focus seems to be much on their current ability and their age whereas in FM users focus much more on PA. IMO SI need to shift the focus of users away from PA and onto CA/attributes.

That doesn't mean we couldn't have opinions in some form, maybe on the scout report just something simple like "Player can improve" or "Player has reached his limit" similar to what we have now in some places.

So what is the complaint here? That you (seemingly) have to pay over the odds (how much is that anyway?) for young potential stars?

So basically we are at an impasse here: SI have allowed you to bid on players that teams previously would not have entertained offers for (at logical market valuations) and there was a giant moan up from the user base. People felt that no player should be untouchable: that if you offer enough money, most players could be bought. So SI said fine, that's valid, and now you *can* pay silly money for a youngster. Is that entirely realistic? No. It used to be more realistic before when a team would just not accept your bid if they didn't want to sell. The current system that we now have is a trade-off. You can bid stupid money for a youngster and pay it. You shouldn't do it, but it is a game, after all, and people apparently would rather have every player buyable for some level of money than not. So don't pay it. You don't have to pretend it is or isn't realistic.

The larger issue is finding players that would cause those silly quotes to begin with. That is something that can be tweaked as the series progresses to make it harder to identify top-tier talent.