Contracts - Discussions on the mechanics and issues

Something that I feel is really lacking in FM right now is the way in which contract negotiations are handled - particualrly when signing new players.

We have all seen scenarios where we have a bid accepted for a player, along with a number of other clubs and the player makes unrealistic or excessive demands and the negotiations fail, only for him then to accept a much lesser wage at another club. While I accept that players will want more from a big team, or value an important playing role over wages, the way it's inplemented just doesn't seem right.

It seems to me that when negotiating with players (and clubs for that matter) the bids submitted shouldn't be considered and handled by the player (or club for bids) as entirely independent from each other as appears to be the case now, and there should be certain feedback from the player (or club as applicable) on what other people are offering.

So for example if you offer player X a contract at the same time as club Y, player X should be able to use the offer from Club Y to leverage a better deal for himself, or to force you to make a better offer. So if you low ball him, but he gets a higher offer elsewhere he should be able to say to you that you need to match or beat that offer or he's gone.

Similarly he should consider the two offers in tandem, so if Club Y offer him 20,000 per week in wages, and you offer 25,000 for the same role he should take that higher offer assuming the two clubs are of equal stature. He certainly shouldn't take the lower offer from a club smaller in size and reputation though to you as currently happens.

For example, Dani Alves would only take offers near 100k p/w from me (Leipzig after being promoted to the Bundesliga) after his Barcelona contract ran down, which I couldn't afford. He then goes and signs for 20k p/w with Corinthians. Similarly Vagner Love wanted 30k plus from me yet then signed for a club in Costa Rica or Paraguay for 5k p/w when I wouldny pay it.

Surely that would never happen in real life - if anything he would take a pay cut to stay at the top level rather than drop down so low.

Wouldn't it make sense for him to assess my bid by reference to the other offers he receives - and so wouldn't turn down 20k and a squad role for a Bundesliga club for 5k in a low rep league elsewhere.

It would be great as well if players were more explicit about what their priorities were when considering an offer. For example players of a certain age would state that they prioritised contract length or role over starting salary. Or that ambitious players with a reals able reputation would only move to champions league teams or somewhere they felt they had a shot at a trophy. Or the more mercenary players would state that they wanted wages over anything else. This could be coded in as a trait more common for players from developing countries perhaps - so Brazilians or Africans would be happier to move to the middle East or Eastern europe then players from developed countries who only want to play in the most prestigious leagues during their prime - with a preference for pay days as they age.

For other players, they might turn down a more lucrative offer to play for their boyhood club.

Perhaps some of those things already factor into the contract evaluation and player interest, but it's not something that appears too clear to date. It seems to me that players interest is all a bit arbitrary, and as long as your reputation reaces a certain point, then X player will want to play there for X amount of money.

Surely it would be bette of intangibles played a bigger and more prominent role, and for players hidden traits to factor into things more and have a more visible outcome on contract negotiations etc.