Too many players "want to move to a bigger club"

[Arkim]

League reputation- doesn't it just keep club reputation down below a certain level? So raising the reputation of the Israeli league, for example, due to Maccabi Hafia or someone winning the CL and WCC, wouldn't make all Israeli teams better.

A league of higher reputation will allow teams to attract better players and staff, thus potentially (depending on success of course) improving their club's stature and reputation. If all clubs within the league do this, the league's reputation increases and thus would allow for a better standard of football in all aspects.

Of course not all teams within the league would be better, however the chances of them becoming better/improving would definitely increase due to the higher reputation of the league.

Not sure if that's what you were getting at or maybe I misunderstood your question?

[grep]

Why don't you set up a poll ? That's IMO the best way to let SI understand this aspect is part of real life and therefore must remain but it must be tuned down by at least a 50%.

In FM09 was insanely modeled.

[AcidBurn]

Thing is its not a simple question, there is no yes or no answer. Some people seem to think that the success of one team in europe will lead to the league rep being increased. What other are suggesting is that success in europe can lead to better TV money, thats something that cannot be replicated as some league have an overall TV deal where as some teams negoiate their own deals.

[Nomis07]

No point in a poll, too many people still, wrongly, assume that a leagues rep increases because of single team success. On that basis, imo and justifiably so, SI would ignore it.

[Ranbir]

Are you suggesting if a team won the Champion's League 13 years in a row, increased its own reputation around the world, more people wouldn't be aware of the league said team played in?

[Nomis07]

No, i'm suggesting that it wouldn't necessarily improve the league and make it more desireable for foreign players. People aware of the league hasn't got much to do with FM league rep, it's all about ability to attract players etc.

Anyways, you're example is outrageous and unusual, so I don't see why SI should take such an example in account.

[Ranbir]

Outrageous and unusual? Not in Football Manager, which is the concern here.

The league's improvement in rep would only be the catalyst. There is the country's economic factor, state of development and league standard attributes to also consider and, I imagine, play an additional important role in the value a league has in whatever country.

[Nomis07]

Outrageous and unusual? Not in Football Manager, which is the concern here.

In how many games though? How many people's games have experienced a situation where a league with a low rep has went on to win the CL a number of times? Imo it would be a tiny percentage of the FM market, which begs the question, why change it for the sake of a minority?

How many people does this "problem" really affect? How many of the millions of gamers actually experience this situation? With that in mind, does it justify such work, which everyone seems to agree would be time consuming and difficult.

[Arkim]

In how many games though? How many people's games have experienced a situation where a league with a low rep has went on to win the CL a number of times? Imo it would be a tiny percentage of the FM market, which begs the question, why change it for the sake of a minority?

How many people does this "problem" really affect? How many of the millions of gamers actually experience this situation? With that in mind, does it justify such work, which everyone seems to agree would be time consuming and difficult.

You would be surprised at the number of individuals who are asking SI to make league reputation dynamic. Miles has also mentioned that they are aware of the concern and are looking it.

There have been numerous threads and posts regarding this topic and quite rightly so as FM is based on realism and it makes perfect sense to implement such a feature into the game. I don't see any harm being done in having this feature in the game as it can only add realism if implemented right and who wouldn't want the game to be more realistic? I personally look at this as a huge issue and a leap into a different level of gaming. Sort of like the leap from 2D to 3D as the intensity and satisfaction of playing the game would increase by quite a bit.

LLMers make up quite a significant percentage of the FM gamers, at least in my books and being one of them, I know for a fact it would definitely add more value for the money we spend. Take a look at the LLM section of the forums. We have a dedicated section just for those users. That says quite a lot really.

If your major reasoning for not including this in the game is because it is time consuming and difficult, well that's just not a very good reason, now is it? Considering the fact that every bit of work that goes into the game is time consuming and difficult. Developing a game of FM's caliber is extremely difficult and time consuming keeping in mind the complexity of the game's nature.

I think some interesting ideas have been discussed in this thread and should SI take into consideration what users have to say, they would find themselves in a great position as far the game's direction in terms of development goes and would make it that much better then it's competitors.

That's my take on the situation and I'm in favour of such a feature being introduced to series, regardless if it takes one or two years to fully develop.

[AcidBurn]

I don't think he is saying the main reason is because its time consuming and difficult, he is saying that one team winning the champions league does not all of a sudden make the league rep better.

[4YNYH]

I'm playing with Debrecen from Hungary. It's impossible. Everybody wants to move to a bigger club. Nobody wants to renew his contract.

[Arkim]

I don't think he is saying the main reason is because its time consuming and difficult, he is saying that one team winning the champions league does not all of a sudden make the league rep better.

The second paragraph of his post seems to suggest otherwise, but I do agree that it shouldn't necessarily depend on just one team's performance. It should however take the results and success of one team's performance and depending on other factors (for example the national team's performance, for the sake of the argument), and reflect these variables in such a way that it doesn't limit the league from improving.

[AcidBurn]

In my opinion people are mixing up league rep with the clubs rep. What I mean is Porto won the champions league and their team was broken up and most stars moved on it did not make the leagues rep any better. Greece winning the european championships did not make their league rep any better, even if in the same season AEK had won the champions league most players in real life would still rather sign for midtable prem team than AEK.

[Nomis07]

There have been numerous threads and posts regarding this topic and quite rightly so as FM is based on realism and it makes perfect sense to implement such a feature into the game. I don't see any harm being done in having this feature in the game as it can only add realism if implemented right and who wouldn't want the game to be more realistic? I personally look at this as a huge issue and a leap into a different level of gaming. Sort of like the leap from 2D to 3D as the intensity and satisfaction of playing the game would increase by quite a bit.

That's the most important thing, if it's done right and the reasons provided in this thread aren't good enough. If you have a scan back through the thread, you'll notice that I agree with you, it should be done and done right, but I disagree with the oft mooted point that league rep should increase because 1 team does well.

LLMers make up quite a significant percentage of the FM gamers, at least in my books and being one of them, I know for a fact it would definitely add more value for the money we spend. Take a look at the LLM section of the forums. We have a dedicated section just for those users. That says quite a lot really.

how many LLMers are there in the LLM forum? 1,000? Now, how many ply their trade in a league whose top tier has really low rep? 10% give or take? Compare that to the sales figures and that percentage decreases further and further you'll see where I was coming from.

If your major reasoning for not including this in the game is because it is time consuming and difficult, well that's just not a very good reason, now is it? Considering the fact that every bit of work that goes into the game is time consuming and difficult. Developing a game of FM's caliber is extremely difficult and time consuming keeping in mind the complexity of the game's nature.

Like I said, have a look through the wwhole thread and not just one post, you'll see a variety of points and positions provided for me, so no, that's not my major reasoning. Hopefully you'll take the time to read through it all and see that i'm not just dismissing this idea, i'm dismissing the weaker arguments and if done right, i'm all for it.

[Ranbir]

I don't think anyone is suggesting Porto's success automatically make the Portuguese League as a whole attractive, but there must certainly be some growth and potential to increase; the reputation, the economic investment to the league and the standard as a whole. All long-term issues. I don't think any of this is being expected by players to happen over a handful of seasons but rather, a handful of decades. It won't cause major ruin or disrupt the 'reality' of people that only play 2-3 contemporary seasons.

[AcidBurn]

So if in your game say Salzburg won the champions league giving the league to potential to grow, what do you think should happen to realise that potential?

[Nomis07]

I don't think anyone is suggesting Porto's success automatically make the Portuguese League as a whole attractive,

I disagree, I think the majority are. Only a handful of people seem to distinguish league rep and club rep, and as a result the thread has gone round in circles.

I agree with the rest of your post.

[Arkim]

That's the most important thing, if it's done right and the reasons provided in this thread aren't good enough. If you have a scan back through the thread, you'll notice that I agree with you, it should be done and done right, but I disagree with the oft mooted point that league rep should increase because 1 team does well.

how many LLMers are there in the LLM forum? 1,000? Now, how many ply their trade in a league whose top tier has really low rep? 10% give or take? Compare that to the sales figures and that percentage decreases further and further you'll see where I was coming from.

Like I said, have a look through the wwhole thread and not just one post, you'll see a variety of points and positions provided for me, so no, that's not my major reasoning. Hopefully you'll take the time to read through it all and see that i'm not just dismissing this idea, i'm dismissing the weaker arguments and if done right, i'm all for it.

My apologies if it seemed as if I was bashing, I wasn't. I simply based my post on the previous post you made since it sounded like you were completely against the idea and thus changed your mind which questioned me to believe you were actually serious.

I still think that the presence of an LLM section says a lot, though. You also have to keep in mind the percentage of individuals who don't use the forums.

[Nomis07]

No worries, I didn't think you were bashing me. Two examples;

Scotland

Rangers and Celtic in the CL final, Hearts and Hibs in the Euro final. All four teams maintain this level of success for a couple of seasons, of course league rep should increase.

Rangers win the CL, Celtic go out in the knockout stages, Hearts and Hibs don't make the groups of the Euro. This happens a fw seasons in a row. Raners might have won the CL, but the league standard, and as a result the league rep, shouldn't increase.

Yes it needs to be looked at, but not on the level a number of people have mentioned in this thread.

[grep]

You would be surprised at the number of individuals who are asking SI to make league reputation dynamic. Miles has also mentioned that they are aware of the concern and are looking it.

There have been numerous threads and posts regarding this topic and quite rightly so as FM is based on realism and it makes perfect sense to implement such a feature into the game. I don't see any harm being done in having this feature in the game as it can only add realism if implemented right and who wouldn't want the game to be more realistic? I personally look at this as a huge issue and a leap into a different level of gaming. Sort of like the leap from 2D to 3D as the intensity and satisfaction of playing the game would increase by quite a bit.

LLMers make up quite a significant percentage of the FM gamers, at least in my books and being one of them, I know for a fact it would definitely add more value for the money we spend. Take a look at the LLM section of the forums. We have a dedicated section just for those users. That says quite a lot really.

If your major reasoning for not including this in the game is because it is time consuming and difficult, well that's just not a very good reason, now is it? Considering the fact that every bit of work that goes into the game is time consuming and difficult. Developing a game of FM's caliber is extremely difficult and time consuming keeping in mind the complexity of the game's nature.

I think some interesting ideas have been discussed in this thread and should SI take into consideration what users have to say, they would find themselves in a great position as far the game's direction in terms of development goes and would make it that much better then it's competitors.

That's my take on the situation and I'm in favour of such a feature being introduced to series, regardless if it takes one or two years to fully develop.

I admire your patience in describing your thoughts that BTW I completely share and support.

Sometime, despiting not being a mothertongue, I give up explaining concepts in a so perfect way cause lot of kids answer here reporting their multimilionaire Manchester or Chelsea facts.

Those facilitated teams soffocate their imagination both their logic and there is no discussion with them.

I like playing quite low leagues, over there every single euro is vital to survive therefore having dynamics reputations would be fundamental and crucial...they will never understand anyway, being too busy moving milions of virtual euros

[Ranbir]

So if in your game say Salzburg won the champions league giving the league to potential to grow, what do you think should happen to realise that potential?

If it was just a single victory? Not much for the league, although the club itself might be able to attract a larger fanbase (which I assume is based on rep)

From what I see there are several factors at play with club and league although I don't know precisely how they affect things. So please only take this example in my own head where certain variables work the way I think, not the way they may actually do in Football Manager.

I've spotted these opening the FM Editor.

So assuming Salzburg managed to maintain consistency of CL victory of several decades, overtaking RM as the most successful CL team ever:

The reputation: While Salzburg's rep would become renown, so must the league that houses it. Greater attendance figures for Salzburg would filter to the rest of the league, particularly with TV, which I would assume infers overseas fans. A high rep club surely must represent this is a team followed all over the world, and so TV is, to me, the platform from which they would do that. It follows that watching Salzburg means you're watching Salzburg's opponents. Principle being, if Salzburg has repeatedly destroyed the clubs of England, Spain and Italy at the Champion's League, Europe's elite competition, interest in the Austrian game there must be.

Nation's Economic Factor: Honestly I have no idea what this precisely does so this might even play a part in what I suggest next; financial prospects for people wanting to buy clubs. Salzburg would probably be the first call for some rich owner, but I have no doubt the rivals might attract some rich buck to help invest to strengthen the squad but also the facilities to promote greater growth. Greater wealth would mean they can franchise better around the world to their growing fan base but also bring in greater talent which would naturally raise the playing standard of the league*.

League Standard: If this is a measure of local young talent, I would have no doubt that Salzburg dominating Europe would call for long term investment in the country's youth academies. The growing rep would mean more kids are encouraged into the sport, local authorities getting a lot more organised to help continue what might be a tradition, thanks to SV Austria Salzburg.

Level of Development: I assume this is getting into politics and the general economics of a country so I think it would be pretty bold to say that football can bring an entire nation into prosperity but I am a bold fella! I don't feel this has any direct involvement.

Game Importance: How important is the sport to the people? If a home club is dominating the world's finest, growing level of stature around the world, big money deals and a source of pride? I think the nation might take one of their most successful exports a little more seriously.

These are just some of my ideas. Of course I have no idea what those variables exactly do. Does economic factor play a part in the likelihood of sugar daddy club take overs? I don't know. Is a nation's Game Importance work with Rep to determine general attendance figures and success of merchandising? TV broadcasting? Does it consider overseas fan bases? Are some of those variables only specific to National teams with their attendance figures and level of expectations in tournaments?

I just saw that Austria itself already has a pretty high economic factor (one less than England) and is already considered a developed state and considers the game "Important". So really, it is only its League that has low rep and a low league standard.

*Let's just ignore the debate about foreign talent being a detriment to home-grown.

Edit: I think it is also a safe bet that quality of referees and officials will be determined by League Standard.

[Welsh Wizard]

As many people who take part in the challenges find out they have to sell players each year because they want to go.

In my Gundo save I'm in Wales and had to sell 5 first team players this season because they would not resign most went for around 100k but would be worth more in higher rep leagues. I managed to get 2.5mil for 1 but he was very good and would of been sold for alot more if he was in the prem. This happens in really life.

I have won the league 7 times in a row and the cups 8 and 7 times in a row. I have made the groups stages of CL 5 times and made the semi finals once but my rep is not good enough to sign anyone near as good as the players I have sold. I have 18mil in my balance but can't spend it on anyone as they are crap

Should league rep play such a big part on club rep? If it did not a team could increase there rep to well above others in the league which does not happen irl. in fact irl I think we would of got moved to the English leagues.

The way it is stops the unrealistic of a team being way better than teams in the same division.

But as others have said it takes more than one team to increase the league rep but should the club rep increase a lot more than what it does if the team does well in CL?

[boloslick]

back to the very first post... i manage Club Brugge - very successful etc. and of course players still wanting to leave....

my solution: do not ever ever sign players who are "very ambitious" and only rarely sign "ambitious"... these guys are guaranteed to leave the moment an EPL club is linked with them. Good personalities - determined, resolute, realist etc.

just avoid ambitious players... dont worry your team will still be hungry to win leagues/cups

[Elrithral]

So assuming Salzburg managed to maintain consistency of CL victory of several decades, overtaking RM as the most successful CL team ever:

The reputation: While Salzburg's rep would become renown, so must the league that houses it. Greater attendance figures for Salzburg would filter to the rest of the league, particularly with TV, which I would assume infers overseas fans. A high rep club surely must represent this is a team followed all over the world, and so TV is, to me, the platform from which they would do that. It follows that watching Salzburg means you're watching Salzburg's opponents. Principle being, if Salzburg has repeatedly destroyed the clubs of England, Spain and Italy at the Champion's League, Europe's elite competition, interest in the Austrian game there must be.

Nation's Economic Factor: Honestly I have no idea what this precisely does so this might even play a part in what I suggest next; financial prospects for people wanting to buy clubs. Salzburg would probably be the first call for some rich owner, but I have no doubt the rivals might attract some rich buck to help invest to strengthen the squad but also the facilities to promote greater growth. Greater wealth would mean they can franchise better around the world to their growing fan base but also bring in greater talent which would naturally raise the playing standard of the league*.

League Standard: If this is a measure of local young talent, I would have no doubt that Salzburg dominating Europe would call for long term investment in the country's youth academies. The growing rep would mean more kids are encouraged into the sport, local authorities getting a lot more organised to help continue what might be a tradition, thanks to SV Austria Salzburg.

Level of Development: I assume this is getting into politics and the general economics of a country so I think it would be pretty bold to say that football can bring an entire nation into prosperity but I am a bold fella! I don't feel this has any direct involvement.

Game Importance: How important is the sport to the people? If a home club is dominating the world's finest, growing level of stature around the world, big money deals and a source of pride? I think the nation might take one of their most successful exports a little more seriously.

Remove the assumptions and all you have is club rep. :confused:

[RBKalle]

Should league rep play such a big part on club rep? If it did not a team could increase there rep to well above others in the league which does not happen irl. in fact irl I think we would of got moved to the English leagues.

The way it is stops the unrealistic of a team being way better than teams in the same division.

Actually that's much more realistic and likely than you make it to be...

Rosenborg won the league 13 times in a row and 16 times in the last 21 years [soon to be 17 in 22 ]

Skonto Riga have the all-time record of 14 back-to-back titles.

Also in "better" leagues there have been periods of one team dominating: recently Lyon or Inter Milan.

In FM, as in real life, CLUB reputation should be much more important, flexible and dynamic than league reputation.

As said, Porto winning a Champions League didn't make Estrela Amadora as fancy as, say, Blackburn or Sampdoria, but for sure PORTO ITSELF did become a more desirable destination.

As for future FM: I'm not advocating SAS Ligaen becoming more important than La Liga should FC København "accidentally" win a Champions League, not even if that happened 10 times in a row.

BUT, in that case, good players may just want to play for FCK instead of dying to get stuck in some English/Spanish midtable act.

Clearly, the likes of Kaká or Cristiano Ronaldo won't pick FCK (or any other human-controlled Football Wonder) over Real or ManU, but those who are one or two pegs down the ladder should DEFINITELY evaluate a move there.

We should consider that, in the end, the chance of a relatively obscure team climbing up the ladder of European Football in FM is mostly limited to a Human Controlled team.

So it's just a matter of rewarding the achievements of A TEAM, without needing to (unrealistically) tune up the whole league because of one man's success.

Make it slow-ish if you will, but in the span of like, 3-4 years of good performances, the reputation of a team MUST grow in a significant way.

Honestly, it's not that fun playing "let's rebuild the team from scratch every year"...

[jakobx]

There is no denying that league reputation should change. Especially for those of us who play long term games (20-30 years). Currently its a bit pointless trying to play in one of the less desirable leagues because you can never really change anything. Sure you can become of of the richest clubs in the world but players for some reason dont want a piece of that money. And this is where the main problem is IMO. Money should be the most important thing in the game. If you offer a lot of money players should be interested in you. Sure reputation has to be a factor in this, but im certain that in real life you would be able to sign a vast majority of players regardless of the league the club is in if you offer enough money. Silly things like offering a player a 1000x raise and they still refuse should be a thing of the past. Im sure everyone would prefer to play for a club in slovenia if they payed them 60k a month instead of 60pounds a week in some african team.

[Themistofelis]

The easy solution is to put all championships in 17 and all countries "developed" and run all other leagues as background so changes will reflect everywhere .

[Elrithral]

There is no denying that league reputation should change. Especially for those of us who play long term games (20-30 years). Currently its a bit pointless trying to play in one of the less desirable leagues because you can never really change anything. Sure you can become of of the richest clubs in the world but players for some reason dont want a piece of that money. And this is where the main problem is IMO. Money should be the most important thing in the game. If you offer a lot of money players should be interested in you. Sure reputation has to be a factor in this, but im certain that in real life you would be able to sign a vast majority of players regardless of the league the club is in if you offer enough money. Silly things like offering a player a 1000x raise and they still refuse should be a thing of the past. Im sure everyone would prefer to play for a club in slovenia if they payed them 60k a month instead of 60pounds a week in some african team.

Your example of Africa and Slovenia rarely happens and those players happily sign for low rep leagues. The highlighted section, simple example that proves that wrong, Kaka to Man City, supposedly offering £200k+ per week and he turned them down. Money isn't everything, in fact your post doesn't actually have anything to do with League Rep, it has everything to do with individual player ambition, which if based on money, would be 0.

[TheMister]

Yes it needs to be looked at, but not on the level a number of people have mentioned in this thread.

Seconded here.

[jakobx]

Kaka is a bad example since we are talking about a player that has already earned a lot of money and will earn a lot of money in other clubs as well. Good players that play for ten times less than Kaka would gladly accept such an offer. I agree that players that are already payed obscene amounts of money are more likely to look at clubs reputation, but those players are very rare.

And no..players with good potential dont want to sign for low rep clubs no matter how much more money you offer them. Its a rule in FM and not an exception. They prefer to retire and work on a farm for a dollar a day instead of signing a multimillion dollar deal.

[charlo116]

Your example of Africa and Slovenia rarely happens and those players happily sign for low rep leagues. The highlighted section, simple example that proves that wrong, Kaka to Man City, supposedly offering £200k+ per week and he turned them down. Money isn't everything, in fact your post doesn't actually have anything to do with League Rep, it has everything to do with individual player ambition, which if based on money, would be 0.

gareth barry to man city? said he wanted to play CL football but Aston Villa were closer to that last season than city.

[Elrithral]

gareth barry to man city? said he wanted to play CL football but Aston Villa were closer to that last season than city.

Yeah, and Lucas Neill to Liverpool, but then on the flip side you have Matt Jansen to Crystal Palace when he had the chance to join Manchester United. There's examples for both situations, jakobx seemes to be implying that every single footballer (other than really highly paid players) would choose the money, which couldn't be further from the truth.

Kaka is a bad example since we are talking about a player that has already earned a lot of money and will earn a lot of money in other clubs as well. Good players that play for ten times less than Kaka would gladly accept such an offer. I agree that players that are already payed obscene amounts of money are more likely to look at clubs reputation, but those players are very rare.

Examples of players who aren't paid loads that chose smaller teams and less money. Simon Davies to Spurs instead of Man Utd, Matt Jansen to Crystal Palace isntead of Man Utd, Zacardo/Barzagli to Wolfsburg instead of one of the big four in Italy........

These players weren't on fortunes and ignored wages/reputation. What you suggest is fine, but you take it too far with the point that every footballer (except the really highly paid players) would follow the money, which is quite clearly wrong.

And no..players with good potential dont want to sign for low rep clubs no matter how much more money you offer them. Its a rule in FM and not an exception. They prefer to retire and work on a farm for a dollar a day instead of signing a multimillion dollar deal.

That has nothing to do with reputation, that's to do with lack of interest. They retire because no-one's interested in them, they don't reject your contract and then decide to retire.

That's it, for me, in this thread though, the discussion has went round in circle for long enough imo.

[charlo116]

Yeah, and Lucas Neill to Liverpool, but then on the flip side you have Matt Jansen to Crystal Palace when he had the chance to join Manchester United. There's examples for both situations, jakobx seemes to be implying that every single footballer (other than really highly paid players) would choose the money, which couldn't be further from the truth.

no of course not, perhaps there needs to be some kind of personality attribute that will determine whether a player looks for money more than reputation, if there isn't already. I think you mean Kewell to Liverpool, and thats right because he had multiple offers and Liverpool wasn't the highest but they were a team he supported growing up.

[jakobx]

That has nothing to do with reputation, that's to do with lack of interest. They retire because no-one's interested in them, they don't reject your contract and then decide to retire.

It has all to do with reputation. No club with a high reputation wants him because of low CA, but he rejects a club with low reputation despite being offered huge amounts of money. You cant say no one is interested if im trying to buy the player.

Just look at Notts county to see what money can do (or any rich arab club). They are able to sign players that wouldnt even go to championship sides in FM. Its all about the money is all im saying.

[AB-forever]

Yeah, and Lucas Neill to Liverpool, but then on the flip side you have Matt Jansen to Crystal Palace when he had the chance to join Manchester United. There's examples for both situations, jakobx seemes to be implying that every single footballer (other than really highly paid players) would choose the money, which couldn't be further from the truth.

Examples of players who aren't paid loads that chose smaller teams and less money. Simon Davies to Spurs instead of Man Utd, Matt Jansen to Crystal Palace isntead of Man Utd, Zacardo/Barzagli to Wolfsburg instead of one of the big four in Italy........

These players weren't on fortunes and ignored wages/reputation. What you suggest is fine, but you take it too far with the point that every footballer (except the really highly paid players) would follow the money, which is quite clearly wrong.

Those players you suggest were already at quite big clubs (well Championship level or higher, right?). I think jakobx is trying to say that decent players at smaller clubs or younger players at not-so-good clubs would happily go to a Welsh team who reached the group stage of the CL 5 times if they were offered 100 times their current wages. Which doesn't currently happen in the game.

[AcidBurn]

no of course not, perhaps there needs to be some kind of personality attribute that will determine whether a player looks for money more than reputation, if there isn't already. I think you mean Kewell to Liverpool, and thats right because he had multiple offers and Liverpool wasn't the highest but they were a team he supported growing up.

There already is I manage Villarreal and tried to sign a player, there were already bids accepted for him from Real Madrid, Barcelona and AC Milan. All these teams have higher rep than Villarreal, he said he wanted 63k a week so I offer 100k and he signed with me despite him saying he wasnt interested in a move. I am pretty sure the 100k was the main reason he joined me.

[mm007]

Some great theories here indeed. I think if SI really would want to implement this, they would find a way... didnt have to be smthg complicated. Just a reflext that if a team of a certain country manages to win the CL 5 years in a row, then, its league would increase its reputation... sounds logical to me; whatever arguments are out there.

Anyways, looks like SI is not doing so soon at all...