ac13 Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 If it varies depending on the chairman then you could always choose a team which has a chairman with a low interference rating. If coaches/scouts recommend players why not have a chairman doing the same? The current transfer system is pretty frustrating anyway. Bidding 15m for a player valued at 3m and being rejected all the time. Having fringe players wanting to come to you only if you pay them 60k a week. If there were options such as I want player x whatever the cost, or if at a reasonable price, or if the club is willing to let him go on the cheap, and then if successful the wages were negotiated by a financial guy based on the squad status you plan on giving the player i wouldn't care if the prices were slightly different to what I'd have offered. You could also be required to justify the need for that player if you're new to the club/haven't built up much of a rep. Very few managers have anything to do with the financial side of the club. If people are going to say that ticket pricing, stadium expansion etc are not the managers job therefore must be left out why is this still part of the game? This I suppose would be some effort to implement but would make it more difficult to pay big chunks of money for the players you found in the -9/-10 PA section of the forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBKalle Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 If it varies depending on the chairman then you could always choose a team which has a chairman with a low interference rating.If coaches/scouts recommend players why not have a chairman doing the same? Exactly... Odds are the likes of Abramovich, Al Mubarak, Perez and even Moratti will just allow you to sign whoever you want, no matter how ridiculous the fee may be... On the other hand clubs like AC Milan or AS Roma will require you to operate with extreme caution, and you can forget to get all the revenue of TV rights and player sales as transfer budget for the upcoming season... Those who want to play God will have plenty of clubs where they still can do so... Also, let's just have it as an option, so the lovers of the "I call all the shots" pseudo-realism can have it their way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arsenalboy Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 If this was implemented, I would remove it (if possible) using an editor every single time without fail. It would seriously ruin the game for me personally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kieronbrown73 Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 The fun is most definaltly in the challenge. In my idea Human Players can still select the players they want signed by submitting a player request to the board they just have no dealings with the buying and contract negotiations of said player. Yes I agree that Director Stats will play a large role in the outcome but hey that real life simulation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kieronbrown73 Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 The Leicester Chairmen Milan Manderic on loaning James Vaughn from Everton "I have a good relationship with the Everton chairman and I said to him that my manager would like the player and your manager wants him to get additional experience so let's close the deal." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayahr Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 I'm not sure really if chairmen interfering in this way is special to the modern game. Even more I would dare to argue that it is actually the other way around and that today chairmen are less powerful than they were decades ago. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigcwwe Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 The commentators said on itv football last night that the Milan president gets involved every week with the team selections. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grade Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 Meh...the "a game should be fun, and ____ feature is not fun" philosophy can be applied to other proposals and bits that have been proposed and introduced during the years... Is the "spreadsheet training formula" fun? Hell no... that has to be the most time consuming and boring feature ever... But it's realistic [even though I think it's more up to the coaching staff than to the manager], so if it'll come back, we'll cope with that. Are press conferences a lot of fun after the first two weeks? At all, but real-life managers spend a lot of time answering to the same questions week in and week out... Etc etc. So explain me that: WHY is realism fine as long as it gives us "freedom", but it's suddenly a burden as soon as it interferes with our One Man Show? It's a game, yes. But if REALISM has been the key for the success of this franchise, then we shouldn't throw our toys out of the pram if the MOST REALISTIC feature in football management gets added to the game. To be honest, what's the point in claiming to be a FM genius, a tactical master etc when the game allows you so much freedom of action? Seriously... you can buy whoever you want, as long as you have money to do so, no matter how obscure that striker is, or how many strikers you already have. It's not rocket science... all you need is MONEY, the rest is piece of cake. Basically it's like winning an arm-wrestling contest against a bunch of teenagers... You're so much better it's no fun anymore after a while. That is all nice, but if you defend this, then scandals, corruption, referees carrying a team and hurting yours, should also be in the game. That is what your saying. Sorry, but if that happens it is the day I go for the competitors without in a blink and i'm not the only one that thinks this way. This is basically what ruins football in real life and should NOT be in the game, because it only creates more stress. Of course we all going to say cool when this first happens, but in long term game you cringe your teeth in stress. I don't know about you but I'm very fond of my teeth. It is like Press Conferences we all thought it was cool and all that, but after using it, it is plain boring, because first a real manger does not have 5 set of answers to answer a question and also, if you haven checked Press Conferences are boring in real life. If this is incorporated in the game, what is to say it is not another Board Confidence in FM08? I prefer that they mainly focus on the AI, 3D, ME and UI, improve that, then yet again putting more features. The AI in transfers and picking the team should be better, because if they improve their teams it is more challenging for us to beat the opposing team then beating the ME. More people would enjoy it. The 3D, we all agree that despite like it or hating it, there is a room for a lot of improvement? The ME is the only thing i defend that should be real, but few referee mistakes here and there, but make players act as they should. Things like the defenders in FM10 can't happen after 5 installments of FM. The UI personally I think should be more simpler and more graphical because an image can speak a thousand words. If those are focus I have no doubt that FM11 will crush the competition . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bongo-Bongo Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 Meh...the "a game should be fun, and ____ feature is not fun" philosophy can be applied to other proposals and bits that have been proposed and introduced during the years... Is the "spreadsheet training formula" fun? Hell no... that has to be the most time consuming and boring feature ever... But it's realistic [even though I think it's more up to the coaching staff than to the manager], so if it'll come back, we'll cope with that. Are press conferences a lot of fun after the first two weeks? At all, but real-life managers spend a lot of time answering to the same questions week in and week out... Etc etc. So explain me that: WHY is realism fine as long as it gives us "freedom", but it's suddenly a burden as soon as it interferes with our One Man Show? It's a game, yes. But if REALISM has been the key for the success of this franchise, then we shouldn't throw our toys out of the pram if the MOST REALISTIC feature in football management gets added to the game. To be honest, what's the point in claiming to be a FM genius, a tactical master etc when the game allows you so much freedom of action? Seriously... you can buy whoever you want, as long as you have money to do so, no matter how obscure that striker is, or how many strikers you already have. It's not rocket science... all you need is MONEY, the rest is piece of cake. Basically it's like winning an arm-wrestling contest against a bunch of teenagers... You're so much better it's no fun anymore after a while. Grade pretty much summed this up perfectly tbh. Lots of things that have been proposed for the game because they were realistic, yet now people dislike them, with Press Conferences fitting that role perfectly. The novelty wore off pretty quick there, and I can imagine it would be the same here if your chairman keeps picking the team for you or you're given no freedom over your transfers. Realism has proven in the past that it doesn't necessarily equal fun, and I'm pretty sure it would be proven again with features such as this. As for the difficulty of the game, I'm not going to deny that it doesn't become too easy as you progress, but I don't think adding features to hinder the human is the answer. The AI's ability in the transfer market and squad building is what needs to be worked to make the game more challenging. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RBKalle Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 I'm not advocating every chairman picking the team for every single match... That doesn't happen, at least to my knowledge. However some chairmen/DoF do interfere with the manager's work, by pressuring him to use this or that formation, or to play Player X rather than Y. And, more important than that... Chairmen/DoFs are in charge of the transfer market Managers can have input in it, providing a list of players [by name or by type], but it's up to the board/DoF negotiating the transfer and the contract. What about an option? Those who like to be in full control will leave it alone, but those who might want a different challenge could definitely use it. Sure there's plenty of other things to fix before adding a new-ish feature... but once the AI transfer stupidity is limited, having the board buying and selling players for your team could be easily done Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grade Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 I'm not advocating every chairman picking the team for every single match...That doesn't happen, at least to my knowledge. However some chairmen/DoF do interfere with the manager's work, by pressuring him to use this or that formation, or to play Player X rather than Y. And, more important than that... Chairmen/DoFs are in charge of the transfer market Managers can have input in it, providing a list of players [by name or by type], but it's up to the board/DoF negotiating the transfer and the contract. What about an option? Those who like to be in full control will leave it alone, but those who might want a different challenge could definitely use it. Sure there's plenty of other things to fix before adding a new-ish feature... but once the AI transfer stupidity is limited, having the board buying and selling players for your team could be easily done From what I seen in real life footballs teams that their chairmans interfere in the work of Manager, don't go very far. If they even succeed a good position at the end of the season, the relations between chairmen and Manger is in the sh*t and thus ends up the later resigning. It is pretty much what happened to Abromovich with Mourinho or Luis Felipe Vieira (SL Benfica president) and Quique flores in the last season. So incorporating this would most cases end up with player (manager) fired or resigned to not hear more of the dumb ass Chairmen moaning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr.rooney Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 I'm against this idea because, although it does happen in life (Hearts for example), ultimately this is a game and games are meant to be fun. If it were implemented alot of fun would disappear from working at clubs where the chairman interfered, and I wouldn't manage any club where the chairman interfered. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
solstar Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 I'm against this idea because, although it does happen in life (Hearts for example), ultimately this is a game and games are meant to be fun. If it were implemented alot of fun would disappear from working at clubs where the chairman interfered, and I wouldn't manage any club where the chairman interfered. And therefore you should have the choice of managing a lub that doesnt have interference but you shouldnt manage a club that does. So no managing Real Madrid, Milan or Barcelona for example. Pretty simple system imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kieronbrown73 Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 Press reports could read something like "Manager ABC resigned from club XYZ today amongst rumours that the Chairman made the role untennable by constantly overuling his decisions in team selection and the transfer market" The human player would then be aware that if the applied for the vacant role they could expect more of the same. In fact these media reports could be applied to every managerial departure my instant thoughts would be something like. 'could not match chairmans ambition' = highly unrealistic board expectations 'terminated by mutual consent' = board expect you to do things their way (like issuing ultimatam option) 'board are upset to see Manager leave and wish him well for the future' = supportive board This would then give the human player a better understanding of what sort of life they could expect at their potential new club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cynet Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 Would love to see a manager going on gardening leave when he applies for another job and the chairman suspending the manager until he gets the right compensation Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluesigns Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 Isn't it nice to see a thread where people are giving some genuine arguments about the payoff and respective balance between real life replication and entertainment. I don't think anyone is going to convince anyone else - you either crave the realism and the exact replication of real life or you want to be immersed in a fantasy world. Either is fine, as long as things are kept in perspective. I suppose it's the same as the distinction between those who have used the editor to create all manner of world leagues etc and those who have used it to add extra depth to existing league structures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scath Posted March 13, 2010 Share Posted March 13, 2010 WOW first time i have heard that one, i hope you learned your lesson:D Simple lesson - wait a few seasons of success before doing stuff the board doesn't like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.