Is the Tranfer system abit of Joke in FM 2010?

[aderow]

even then i doubt they would sell them to real madrid for any fee.

True.

Should I be mad at the game that I had I had an 80 million pound bid accepted for messi like a day after I started a chelsea save?

[charlo116]

True.

Should I be mad at the game that I had I had an 80 million pound bid accepted for messi like a day after I started a chelsea save?

well thats not realistic but i doubt anyone's going to complain about that.

[dafuge]

So as he said I'll let ye go around in circles.

Unfortunately I think this one will continue to go round in circles.

People obviously have different preconceived ideas about how transfers work in real life, which is creating a lot of bias in the arguments put forward for the lack of realism in the transfer system in FM. With differing ideas over what is 'realistic' in the first place, discussing the way FM transfers work becomes very difficult.

Obviously if people believe that any big/rich club will choose a player they want and then bid until they get them, they will want to see FM act in this way, and with 'realistic' prices to boot, because that's what they see in the transfers that are completed in real life. This is why they cannot see that the examples they are using are unrealistic in the first place, they are ignoring the transfers that 'don't happen' in real life. They may well deem the way they are playing FM to be completely realistic, which is why we are having this debate in the first place.

On the other hand, the people that believe that big/rich clubs choose players based on their availability, or pull out of the deals when the asking price become too high and no longer represents value for money, will not see the problems in the current system that the others are seeing (provided they play FM this way). They are not denying that the problems are there, they are just suggesting that it takes an unrealistic action to get an unrealistic reaction. These sorts of people are probably happy with the current system as the problems do not affect them, but are wary about the potential knock on effects of it changing.

I'm not sure I can really add much more to this, I've already started repeating myself far too often. I think I'm out.

[HotshotUK]

I think I'm out.

dafuge is new Dragon Den

[nev147]

People are commenting which is great - but if people comment then they should at least read a few of the posts! The people that want a change - are saying it needs tweaking and are not saying it is broken. And ti the person that says we want a world calss theam for under £150m is just a silly comment.

Just one example - Elite players for the best teams then fair enough, but not the following.

In FM10 after one season you would struggle to get David Villa for less then £60m probaly more - yet real life shows us he went for £30m. This is just one example but for me this can be applied to a lot of players. And David Villa is a world class player - you can say the same about a class or two below his standard to a degree in FM. As History has shown that the sale Value for David Villa made by SI was wrong, and wrong by a big margin. Villa is just an example but this happens again and again in FM. I dont want to be able to buy anybody but I belive there are players out there that I believe realistically could be bought for around the £30-£40m mark but SI just over inflate the prices to the hilt IMO. It just needs tweaking. As as it stands the likes of Rooney, Messi, Ronaldo, should be in a league of their own - but it is players of the standard below or great players for average teams that is not realistic IMO. And players power should be more important when a big club approaches a smaller club. Like Barca and Villa.

So did SI get David Villa's sale value correct in FM10? And don't say it was down to Valencia's finacnes as that should be incorporetd in to the game.

And for me the Villa case can be applied to many players. And the Villa case is factual.

[thebigman1985]

The problem with too many gamers these days. To many games have been made to easy now players expect to have things handed to them instead of having to work for it.

i agree

football manager is a complex game, transfers are very complex in real life

i understand the fees are inflated but generally so are the transfer budgets to match

eg man united had a massive budget in game but everyone knows about the debt etc

i think generally the transfer system is reasonable, my biggest issue is teams paying 40 million for a player then using him about 10 times the next season

[Badass_]

For me , it's just surreal how people keep saying "if you don't want the clubs to act unrealistic then you shouldn't make unrealistic bids"...I mean honestly, what kind of f*** up logic is that? does anyone actually believes in this argument? does this argument actually make any kind of sense?

Let's stop for a minute and think...

Yes, I make unrealistic bids often. But why am I making unrealistic bids in the first place? what's the reason? It's because the club who owns the player I want already rejected 6 or 7 realistic bids. Now I could either walk away or keep bidding. And yeah I should walk away because it's stupid to pay more then 80mil for a player. But more importantly, there shouldn't even be a situation where I have to walk away because no club with the exception of a few would ever reject an offer of 40/50mil.

Hopefully we got that part out of the way for good...

Now, the second part: Is it realistic that clubs reject offers of 40mil/50mil ? The answer is no, no matter the player. Only very few clubs today can refuse a bid like that. Sure, there are a few clubs who can and it's totally justifiable because A, they don't need the money, B it just isn't worth it because they have amazing players who will bring money trough trophies. But the rest of them? they would accept that kind of money with eyes closed.

Don't put your spin into it...that's how it is in real life.

that's it for me.

[Rista]

Couldn't agree more Badass.

I love my car and would never sell it for it's real value, or 30% more of it's real value because it would be hard for me to find another used car with the same features, same color etc that I want. But if someone offered me twice the money of it's value, I would bite their hands off! Similarly, I understand clubs not wanting to sell and asking a lot more than the player is objectively worth but they should still be accepting REALISTIC big money offers most of the time. It's mind boggling to me that anyone can say the AI should reject 80m, the world record transfer fee, for a past his best defender in his thirties on the basis that "they don't want to sell right now"!

While I can totally see how hard it must be for SI to find the right balance in the transfer market, especially with human managers involved, I do see this as a bit of a cheap way to make the game more challenging.

[dafuge]

For me , it's just surreal how people keep saying "if you don't want the clubs to act unrealistic then you shouldn't make unrealistic bids"...I mean honestly, what kind of f*** up logic is that? does anyone actually believes in this argument? does this argument actually make any kind of sense?

Maybe I'm getting caught up in the level of hypocrisy. My argument (which it seems clear you do not understand) is that it takes a hypocrite to criticise the current 'silly asking price' system, not that the system itself is perfect. I'm not defending the system, I'm defending the criticism of the system, by using the argument that it is hypocritical.

Anyway, that's my logic explained. I don't mind if people don't understand it, but I'd be interested to hear if it is incorrect.

[TSH]

They do, but only when they think it is worth it. What they won't do is bid 'over the top' like we do.

We bid over the top because clubs don't accept normal fees. It's the system's fault, not ours.

One more example. When Van de Sar went to United, the reported fee was £2m. The exact fee was not disclosed, so let's assume it was £10m. Hell, let's assume it was £15m. After all, we are talking about one of the best keepers in the world, which ended up being a major player for United.

Now, I want to sign a brazilian keeper. He is 20 years old and a pretty good player. He is not a wonderkid or anything, just a good young player which shows good potential.

As we all know, teams from Brazil tend to sell their players. They need the cash. On the other hand, players from Brazil dream of playing in Europe.

The value of this player is 3,2 euros and I am Man U. My scout reports say that he would be really excited to join a club like Man U.

So I bid the initial fee. They reject. Fair enough, I say, he's a good player, they probably want more.

I bid 5m. Reject. I bid 7m. Reject.

Hm. I go a bit overboard. I bid 10m for a good but very young and uknown keeper from Brazil.

They reject.

Of course I won't be paying that, but I decided to see what would be the breaking point.

18m ladies and gentlemen. They want 18m. For a young, uknown player, who is not even the best youngster out there. He is not a wonderkid, as I have said, and there is no interest from other teams, which would justify his value going up.

Now compare all these with the Van de Sar example and you have one more proof why the system is messed up and unrealistic.

The other proof, of course, is SI's silence.

[Badass_]

Maybe I'm getting caught up in the level of hypocrisy. My argument (which it seems clear you do not understand) is that it takes a hypocrite to criticise the current 'silly asking price' system, not that the system itself is perfect. I'm not defending the system, I'm defending the criticism of the system, by using the argument that it is hypocritical.

Anyway, that's my logic explained. I don't mind if people don't understand it, but I'd be interested to hear if it is incorrect.

And what I don't understand in your argument is how I am a hypocrite. This is not personal, but your logic is completely flawed. In fact if anyone, you're the hypocrite for saying that it's the user's fault, not the game. Again, nothing personal.

It's not a question of not understanding your logic...your logic is simply corrupted.

[Badass_]

18m ladies and gentlemen. They want 18m. For a young, uknown player, who is not even the best youngster out there.

.

That's nothing. There's a gk in my game worth 21mil. Probably the best gk in the game, I'll say that. Sale value? 116mil and not one penny less.

[dafuge]

And what I don't understand in your argument is how I am a hypocrite. This is not personal, but your logic is completely flawed. In fact if anyone, you're the hypocrite for saying that it's the user's fault, not the game. Again, nothing personal.

You bid unrealistic amounts but then complain about the lack of realism in the transfer system, that's hypocrisy in my eyes.

I guess the disagreement over this issue is why this thread has been going round in circles. It's probably best that we both accept that we won't agree and move on. I'd still appreciate someone else telling me if my logic is 'corrupt' here though.

[Badass_]

You bid unrealistic amounts but then complain about the lack of realism in the transfer system, that's hypocrisy in my eyes.

I guess the disagreement over this issue is why this thread has been going round in circles. It's probably best that we both accept that we won't agree and move on. I'd still appreciate someone else telling me if my logic is 'corrupt' here though.

First of all, and I think I've already said this quite a few times, I DO NOT bid unrealistic amounts right away, I bid them when I have no other option but to either do that or walk away.

How can you not understand that the lack of realism in the transfer system is what causes my unrealistic bids and not the other way around?

[dafuge]

First of all, and I think I've already said this quite a few times, I DO NOT bid unrealistic amounts right away, I bid them when I have no other option but to either do that or walk away.

How can you not understand that the lack of realism in the transfer system is what causes my unrealistic bids and not the other way around?

I never said you did, I just said you made them. I'm just suggesting that you are not acting like a real life manager would. The only thing 'causing' your unrealistic bids is your lack of sense to find value for money and your refusal to walk away. This is the bit I am classing as unrealistic, although it might actually make sense in terms of playing it as a game rather than a simulation, which is why you do it.

[Neji]

You bid unrealistic amounts but then complain about the lack of realism in the transfer system, that's hypocrisy in my eyes.

This just seems like a red herring tbh. It doesn't matter whether it's hypocritical or not, the system isn't perfect and so should still be worked on (along with the balance of AI transfers, as you pointed out earlier). I'm sure game testers are told to do unrealistic things all the time to test the mechanics, if they applied this logic, they'd just leave it because users shouldn't be doing it.

FWIW, I play it like you, as a simulation and I very rarely spend over the odds. So you're right that I wouldn't notice it unless I was putting in unrealistic bids but as I said, it doesn't really matter in terms of getting the system as realistic as possible.

[Badass_]

I never said you did, I just said you made them. I'm just suggesting that you are not acting like a real life manager would. The only thing 'causing' your unrealistic bids is your lack of sense to find value for money and your refusal to walk away. This is the bit I am classing as unrealistic, although it might actually make sense in terms of playing it as a game rather than a simulation, which is why you do it.

So, tell me something, if from now on I only make realistic bids...will the other clubs start to accept offers of 40/50 mil and stop asking for 80/100mil?

No.

So, it seems to me, that if you take "my unrealistic actions" out of the equation, the transfer system is still unrealistic. If it is still unrealistic, then it isn't me who's causing it. If there's something wrong and it's not me who's causing, then there's a problem with the game. If there's a problem with the game, the game needs tweaking. If the game needs tweaking and you say that it's the user fault, then you're the hypocrite.

As I said before, your argument's logic is corrupted. It's not even an argument, it's a fallacy.

[dafuge]

This just seems like a red herring tbh. It doesn't matter whether it's hypocritical or not, the system isn't perfect and so should still be worked on (along with the balance of AI transfers, as you pointed out earlier). I'm sure game testers are told to do unrealistic things all the time to test the mechanics, if they applied this logic, they'd just leave it because users shouldn't be doing it.

FWIW, I play it like you, as a simulation and I very rarely spend over the odds. So you're right that I wouldn't notice it unless I was putting in unrealistic bids but as I said, it doesn't really matter in terms of getting the system as realistic as possible.

Like I said earlier, I'm not saying that the system is perfect. I'm just trying to say that it is a difficult system to criticise with a good argument.

I think I've got far too caught up in what makes a valid argument here, I've started arguing for the sake of it

Apologies to Badass_, I really should have just sat back and allowed him to let off his steam without responding a long time ago. I'll drop it now, GD isn't really the right place for that sort of discussion.

[Badass_]

Apologies to Badass_, .

No apologies needed. It's all good.

[djwilko6]

hyp·o·crite

noun \ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit\

Definition of HYPOCRITE

a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

Wether Dafuge is right or wrong he is not being a hypocrite.

[dafuge]

As I said before, your argument's logic is corrupted. It's not even an argument, it's a fallacy.

You are probably right. I've been too busy trying to devalue your argument when there was no need to, I was probably being a bit rude. Apologies.

I don't think there's anything I can add now without repeating myself (have I said that before? ), so it's probably best I leave this one to the rest of you.

[Rista]

It's not hypocritical IMO. Using that logic, Real Madrid should never have bid 80m for Ronaldo or 56m for Kaka or 43m for Zidane because it's "unrealistic" and doesn't represent value for money. All those players were "not for sale" but were sold because the money was too good to refuse even if they're one of the biggest clubs in the world.

I do see what dafuge and others are saying. Madrid would never have bid 50m on, say, Huntelaar, which is the unrealistic behaviour of human players in FM that people are speaking of, but that's BECAUSE a much more REALISTIC and lower price would have been accepted by his club in the first place. If Ajax rejected 17m and asked 30m perhaps Madrid would have walked away, but that's the whole point. They didn't and they accepted an already big money offer for a player of his caliber.

If the AI were more willing to accept realistic offers, then neither those who only pay value for money nor those who are willing to overpay to get the player they want would see a problem with the transfer system. That means its the system that it's at "fault" and not the user in my view.

[Badass_]

It's not hypocritical IMO. Using that logic, Real Madrid should never have bid 80m for Ronaldo or 56m for Kaka or 43m for Zidane because it's "unrealistic" and doesn't represent value for money. All those players were "not for sale" but were sold because the money was too good to refuse even if they're one of the biggest clubs in the world.

I do see what dafuge and others are saying. Madrid would never have bid 50m on, say, Huntelaar, which is the unrealistic behaviour of human players in FM that people are speaking of, but that's BECAUSE a much more REALISTIC and lower price would have been accepted by his club in the first place. If Ajax rejected 17m and asked 30m perhaps Madrid would have walked away, but that's the whole point. They didn't and they accepted an already big money offer for a player of his caliber.

If the AI were more willing to accept realistic offers, then neither those who only pay value for money nor those who are willing to overpay to get the player they want would see a problem with the transfer system. That means its the system that it's at "fault" and not the user in my view.

I concur

[Stomalomalus]

People are commenting which is great - but if people comment then they should at least read a few of the posts! The people that want a change - are saying it needs tweaking and are not saying it is broken. And ti the person that says we want a world calss theam for under £150m is just a silly comment.

Just one example - Elite players for the best teams then fair enough, but not the following.

In FM10 after one season you would struggle to get David Villa for less then £60m probaly more - yet real life shows us he went for £30m. This is just one example but for me this can be applied to a lot of players. And David Villa is a world class player - you can say the same about a class or two below his standard to a degree in FM. As History has shown that the sale Value for David Villa made by SI was wrong, and wrong by a big margin. Villa is just an example but this happens again and again in FM. I dont want to be able to buy anybody but I belive there are players out there that I believe realistically could be bought for around the £30-£40m mark but SI just over inflate the prices to the hilt IMO. It just needs tweaking. As as it stands the likes of Rooney, Messi, Ronaldo, should be in a league of their own - but it is players of the standard below or great players for average teams that is not realistic IMO. And players power should be more important when a big club approaches a smaller club. Like Barca and Villa.

So did SI get David Villa's sale value correct in FM10? And don't say it was down to Valencia's finacnes as that should be incorporetd in to the game.

And for me the Villa case can be applied to many players. And the Villa case is factual.

We bid over the top because clubs don't accept normal fees. It's the system's fault, not ours.

One more example. When Van de Sar went to United, the reported fee was £2m. The exact fee was not disclosed, so let's assume it was £10m. Hell, let's assume it was £15m. After all, we are talking about one of the best keepers in the world, which ended up being a major player for United.

Now, I want to sign a brazilian keeper. He is 20 years old and a pretty good player. He is not a wonderkid or anything, just a good young player which shows good potential.

As we all know, teams from Brazil tend to sell their players. They need the cash. On the other hand, players from Brazil dream of playing in Europe.

The value of this player is 3,2 euros and I am Man U. My scout reports say that he would be really excited to join a club like Man U.

So I bid the initial fee. They reject. Fair enough, I say, he's a good player, they probably want more.

I bid 5m. Reject. I bid 7m. Reject.

Hm. I go a bit overboard. I bid 10m for a good but very young and uknown keeper from Brazil.

They reject.

Of course I won't be paying that, but I decided to see what would be the breaking point.

18m ladies and gentlemen. They want 18m. For a young, uknown player, who is not even the best youngster out there. He is not a wonderkid, as I have said, and there is no interest from other teams, which would justify his value going up.

Now compare all these with the Van de Sar example and you have one more proof why the system is messed up and unrealistic.

The other proof, of course, is SI's silence.

Here is my take.

David Villa will go for £60m, but in real life went for £30m. Now, Barca started having problems with Ibra quite quickly, and I imagine they identified Villa quite soon, being Spanish, the best poacher in the world, and playing for a club in need of money. So they would surely do what we have the opportunity to do in FM - spend half a season or more unsettling the player until he puts in a transfer request. You can get players for far less than they are "advertised" at.

The unrealism stems from people confusing a realistic sim with an arcade style. In reality, transfers do not take a few hours, they take many, many days of work to push through. So, in FM, if you scout a player, and then make a bid, then the fee will be unrealistic. Surely it is fair to reward those who spend time on their signings? So, if I decided at Christmas that I wanted David Villa to partner Rooney at United, I would start my move at the end of the Jan transfer window - praising, admiring, eventually declaring an interest and making a bid to be rejected, so that, come June, Villa now wants to move to United and will hand in a transfer request to join.

To counter the second quote above, the price also depends a lot on many factors. What part of the season are you making the bid, how important is that player to the clubs season and how easy is it to replace him. In my Bayern game, I decided that I would stick with my GKs and work on Adler for the season so I could get him cheap next year. When I placed my first bid, the asking price was perilously close at just over £15m. Now, in January, Leverkusen are second in the league, mainly due to the performances of their GK. They are not going to let him go, and my unsettling bids this time encounter an asking price that has risen to £27m. Now, come the summer, I will be bringing him in for, hopefully, about £7m. It depends on when too.

Saying this, one thing I would like to see more thought given to is the replacement scenario. A team will not sell you a player until they have replaced him. So, I would like to see asking prices drop more dramatically if you exchange a player in the same position as the one that you are buying. In the Adler case, for example, if I were to have offered Michael Rensing as exchange at the start of the year, then the asking price would have dropped by a couple of million.

[grade]

Like I said earlier, I'm not saying that the system is perfect. I'm just trying to say that it is a difficult system to criticise with a good argument.

I think I've got far too caught up in what makes a valid argument here, I've started arguing for the sake of it

Apologies to Badass_, I really should have just sat back and allowed him to let off his steam without responding a long time ago. I'll drop it now, GD isn't really the right place for that sort of discussion.

We all can agree that the system isn't p+perfect and there is flaws to the system, as you said in previous posts. I think we agree on that. Now I'm with Badass and other users who have showed few examples. a youngster that is not a wonderkid, can have asking price from their club quite unrealistic (50 millions and above). I have seen in FM10 a few occassions this and I started to offer the player what the player values.

[Badass_]

We all can agree that the system isn't p+perfect and there is flaws to the system, as you said in previous posts. I think we agree on that. Now I'm with Badass and other users who have showed few examples. a youngster that is not a wonderkid, can have asking price from their club quite unrealistic (50 millions and above). I have seen in FM10 a few occassions this and I started to offer the player what the player values.

The other day I even went as far as praise the the club's manager like 10 times and try to unsettle the player as much as I could. Still, he was worth 21 million and they would not sell him for less then 116. And he's a gk.

[Brend]

Just a quick reply this time, rather than one of my patented longer replies...

Unrealistic bids are often made, in part, because of realistic bids being rejected. I like the Gallas example: Arsenal turn down a bid of his value, a bid of twice his value, and so on. This is endemic to the system itself that those bids get turned down. Finally, the worst part: Arsenal is managed by Arsene Wenger. He has sold better players at a younger age for less money. It's part of his transfer philosophy. And yet, despite that, Gallas still cannot be had for a reasonable price, despite being, in Wenger's eyes, past his prime. Also, where was the pestilential chairman? Surely a businessman of sufficient calibre would recognize that Gallas is rapidly losing his value, and would step in to ensure that the club's long-term future would be secured by accepting a large transfer bid.

Furthermore, everyone who says you should put some effort into making the player unsettled, and so on...

How realistic is it to suddenly praise a player three or four times in quick succession, while also praising the manager three or four times in quick succession, just to get a bid accepted?

[AcidBurn]

In my opinion it is hard to use one player such as Gallas as an example sure the one guy posted with a stupidly huge asking price but I got him for 3.5 million and I think Dafuge got him for a decent price, what I want to know is why did it differ so highly from one game to another?

Another thing that has bugged me about the transfers is I tried to sign Fabregas he is worth 30 million so I bid that and increased by 5 million with each bid up to 40 million, Arsenal reject them all so I bid 30 miillion up front and 20 million in monthly payments, Arsenal say they want 72 million up front and 25 million in monthly payments. I pull out of the deal and straight away bid 57 million up front and it is accepted, I figured maybe they just want cash up front so once again I withdrew and straight away I bid 27 million up front and 30 million in monthly payments and they accepted and I signed him. How can Arsenals valuation of him differ so much in less than 2 days of game time. He went from have a value to them of 97 million to 57 million and he was not unsettled in anyway. Just seemed a bit strange.

Next was a young fullback from Spurs I bid his value of 6 million which was reject so I kept bidding up to 22 million and still no negotiation flat out rejected so I left it. Then within a week Juventus bid 10 million and it was accepted, I matched the bid and got him for 10 million this was around 4 days after bidding up to 22 million. Once again the player was not unhappy or unsettled in anyway. How could his valuation to them decrease so much over a few days?

I think there are lots of unrealistic bids being rejected the only solution would be to have clubs outright reject any offers for players they do not want to sell.

[GioGio85]

The example of the Spurs fullback shows how frustrating the transfer system can be.

I guess you have to assume that at the point you bid, the club dont want to sell, only to change their stance for unknown reasons a few days/months later.

[thebigman1985]

We bid over the top because clubs don't accept normal fees. It's the system's fault, not ours.

One more example. When Van de Sar went to United, the reported fee was £2m. The exact fee was not disclosed, so let's assume it was £10m. Hell, let's assume it was £15m. After all, we are talking about one of the best keepers in the world, which ended up being a major player for United.

Now, I want to sign a brazilian keeper. He is 20 years old and a pretty good player. He is not a wonderkid or anything, just a good young player which shows good potential.

As we all know, teams from Brazil tend to sell their players. They need the cash. On the other hand, players from Brazil dream of playing in Europe.

The value of this player is 3,2 euros and I am Man U. My scout reports say that he would be really excited to join a club like Man U.

So I bid the initial fee. They reject. Fair enough, I say, he's a good player, they probably want more.

I bid 5m. Reject. I bid 7m. Reject.

Hm. I go a bit overboard. I bid 10m for a good but very young and uknown keeper from Brazil.

They reject.

Of course I won't be paying that, but I decided to see what would be the breaking point.

18m ladies and gentlemen. They want 18m. For a young, uknown player, who is not even the best youngster out there. He is not a wonderkid, as I have said, and there is no interest from other teams, which would justify his value going up.

Now compare all these with the Van de Sar example and you have one more proof why the system is messed up and unrealistic.

The other proof, of course, is SI's silence.

your comparing a promising keeper in his teens to van de sar who was mid/late 30's when utd signed him

probably last year of his contract too?

[charlo116]

In my opinion it is hard to use one player such as Gallas as an example sure the one guy posted with a stupidly huge asking price but I got him for 3.5 million and I think Dafuge got him for a decent price, what I want to know is why did it differ so highly from one game to another?

Another thing that has bugged me about the transfers is I tried to sign Fabregas he is worth 30 million so I bid that and increased by 5 million with each bid up to 40 million, Arsenal reject them all so I bid 30 miillion up front and 20 million in monthly payments, Arsenal say they want 72 million up front and 25 million in monthly payments. I pull out of the deal and straight away bid 57 million up front and it is accepted, I figured maybe they just want cash up front so once again I withdrew and straight away I bid 27 million up front and 30 million in monthly payments and they accepted and I signed him. How can Arsenals valuation of him differ so much in less than 2 days of game time. He went from have a value to them of 97 million to 57 million and he was not unsettled in anyway. Just seemed a bit strange.

Next was a young fullback from Spurs I bid his value of 6 million which was reject so I kept bidding up to 22 million and still no negotiation flat out rejected so I left it. Then within a week Juventus bid 10 million and it was accepted, I matched the bid and got him for 10 million this was around 4 days after bidding up to 22 million. Once again the player was not unhappy or unsettled in anyway. How could his valuation to them decrease so much over a few days?

I think there are lots of unrealistic bids being rejected the only solution would be to have clubs outright reject any offers for players they do not want to sell.

I think its got a lot to do with negotiating correctly, and the guy who had the massive price slapped on Gallas probably went about things in the wrong way. It's the same thing with your other two scnarios as well, as negotiations alter what will be accepted and what won't be but i have to say the Fabreags situation seems a bit absurd.

[stoned_assasin]

I have just been reading through most of the posts here (seems quite heated) and maybe have just realised something that might have been missed. Maybe the AI asking price is based on how much your club has to spend? Which then would make the unrealistic asking prices more realistic? Ie didn't Manchester City reportedly have a bid of £100 million turned down for kaka but then the same player went on to Madrid for nearly half that? it might have been that the player refused to join City but even so everyone know's that when City or Chelsea come calling for your players the asking price tends to shoot up (lescott, Barry etc)

But either way something is broken which brings down the realism of this management sim. if the above example which i have given is intended by SI then fair enough it is clever, but what is not clever is having a finance system in which teams managed by human players can very quickly be in a position to actually bid unrealistic amounts (without a suger daddy ofc)

[Brend]

I think its got a lot to do with negotiating correctly, and the guy who had the massive price slapped on Gallas probably went about things in the wrong way. It's the same thing with your other two scnarios as well, as negotiations alter what will be accepted and what won't be but i have to say the Fabreags situation seems a bit absurd.

I suggest you look back at the post where I attempted to obtain Gallas from Arsenal. There was no such thing as 'negotiation' until I bid £60m. Every bid up until then was rejected outright.

For your reference, the order in which the bids were made:

I bid £7.5m, and they rejected.

I bid £9.5m, and they rejected.

I bid £15m, and they rejected.

I bid £25m, and they rejected.

I bid £35m, and they rejected.

I bid £60m, and they rejected, but this time they negotiated: Arsenal want £102m for Gallas, and all of it up front.

[charlo116]

I suggest you look back at the post where I attempted to obtain Gallas from Arsenal. There was no such thing as 'negotiation' until I bid £60m. Every bid up until then was rejected outright.

For your reference, the order in which the bids were made:

I have already seen that and all i can say is that it hasn't happened like that for most people, its and irregular occurence that may have something to do with the way you're going about negotiations or it might not but either way thats not the norm.

[TSH]

I have already seen that and all i can say is that it hasn't happened like that for most people, its and irregular occurence that may have something to do with the way you're going about negotiations or it might not but either way thats not the norm.

Ehm, what? It is the norm.

There are exceptions, sure, but they are just that: exceptions.

[Eleanor_Rigby]

Anyone that doesn't think there's an issue with the transfer system are either deluded or playing the wrong game. In fact, it's not just the transfer segment that's a joke, it's almost every financial aspect within the game that's unrealistic. And has been since way back yonder.

Seriously, can anyone recall a CM/FM game that hasn't allowed each and every player controlled club to become mega rich?

The fact it's possible for almost any club to eventually have the finances to spend £80m on a single player, never mind £30m, says more about the game than having those bids rejected in the first place.

It's also unrealistic for a single team to have the best players for each and every position. Even Barca and Real cant lay claim to this, so why complain about the transfer fees when there's so much more wrong/unrealistic?

[Gills Rob]

not to go too off topic, but the main issue i have with the current transfer system is the lack of interest/activity in the top players. I fully understand that certain players are seemingly unattainable IRL (Gerrard, Rooney, Lampard, Messi etc) However it doesnt stop clubs watching them and sending the rumour mill into overdrive every transfer window.

The mid range of players is very busy but for example in my current save, Miguel Veloso (2nd season) still a Sporting Lisbon player is avg 7.4 and my scouts tell he's amazing but not a single club is interested, which i find hard to believe. Yet fringe players throughout Portugal are being scouted by lower Premiership teams. Of course he'd command a higher but my reliably accurate scouts tell me it would take only £8million to acquire him.

Anyway, my point is that market isnt busier enough, in particular the at the top end, hope that makes sense

[HotshotUK]

I put bid of £50M for 27 yrs old World class defence and they rejected it and they want £150m........it is very unlikely happen in Real Life!

I hope FM 2011 will fixed that

[AcidBurn]

That's just bad negotiating, you bid £50 million straight away, I bid his value then upped it £5 million at a time once I got to £30 million I bid £40 million they came back and said they wanted £70 million, I bid £50 million and they accepted. I am not saying £50 million is realistic but to Man United Vidic is a key CB and easily one of the best on the game, he is also at 27 at the peak of his career. I would want around that or possibly more for him if I was managing Man United.

[charlo116]

I put bid of £50M for 27 yrs old World class defence and they rejected it and they want £150m........it is very unlikely happen in Real Life!

I hope FM 2011 will fixed that

You're man city, one of their biggest rivals of course they're not going to let a world class defender go to you. I'm not sure if Ferguson is still managing United in your save but irl he has always tried to avoid selling players to liverpool and man city.

[Toadi]

Wow. It's taken me about a day on and off to read all this. Both parties definitely have something to say from what I've read, and both are to a degree, correct.

I must say that the transfer system IS flawed. But not in the way Badass, Rista et al are suggesting. Unfortunately, as often does with these kinds of discussions, rationale and fair debate go out the window, as people ignore reason and blindly push their argument forward without considering the other side.

I would like to point out that this thread was started as a question (albeit a one sided question but...) "Is the Transfer System a bit of a Joke in FM 2010?". IMO no. The transfer system works totally fine in LLM, if anything it's a little unrealistic some of the loan players I can get on my team edited to have 1 reputation (lowest in BSN/S is 1000). But that's totally the opposite way to which your argument is suggesting, so I'll leave that out. (especially as youngsters being loaned out... a number of them will be loaned out to someone NEARBY rather than a relevant league).

As you go up the ladder, you gain money, you gain reputation, and so the players you go for will be better. Personally, and I believe a few people in here are of the same mindset (especially dafuge ) I don't buy expensive players, I feel "that's the challenge gone", I feel that "what's the point in buying the best player for that position?" because, if you have the best Striker in the world, You Will Score Goals. If you have the best Midfielder in the game, You Will Have Successful Passing. If you have the best Winger in the game, "You Will have Superb Crosses" Etc Etc Etc. Basically, tactics become less necessary.

And yes, IRL every manager would LOVE to have a team that consisted of Casillas, Alves, Cole, Puyol, Vidic, C.Ronaldo, Kaka, Gerrard, Torres, Teves, Rooney. But it wouldn't happen. It's unrealistic. Manager's wouldn't even waste their time attempting to get half of these players. BECAUSE THE CLUB WOULDN'T SELL THEM.

Now, in FM2010, there is no option for the club to say "The Player is not for sale". So, to remedy this, they have put in a ridiculously high sale value. This is because these players MEAN SOMETHING to these clubs. IGNORE the "sale value". William Gallas won't be sold by Arsenal, because he is destined (in FM10 at least) to finish his career there. IF you want him that badly wait until his career is ending, and have him for a season. But you wouldn't want to! He starts as a good prem player, so you'd think, Wigan or Fulham or the like would have him, but they wouldn't because they can go for someone younger. In a few years down the line, he'd be potentially interesting to a championship club, but wages would immeditaely become an issue, and it would depend on how much he wanted his career to continue (like Sol Campbell did, but many others didn't). Overall though, Gallas would be asked to stay on as a coach or something by Wenger, and although he is getting to a point in his career where he will become less and less useful to the playing side, then it's obviously a mixture of sentimentality and roles after football that are keeping him at Arsenal. (if it were me, I would never have joined arsenal in the first place, but that's besides the point )

As for the lower clubs not accepting a large amount for an average player. Again, it's just the game saying this team wouldn't sell. Of course, IRL if someone offered £30m to Leicester for Matty Fryatt (not our best player, but often quoted as being), we would snap their arms off. But nobody would, and that's the point. If you want to spend ridiculous amounts of money, you wouldn't go for the old, or the average. You'd go for the young, at a push you'd go for the players already at their peak.

As for young players, again the high sale value is an INDICATION. SI had to put something in the game to show that clubs want to hold onto their best players. This was the option they decided on. They assumed that all the people playing the game would be mature enough to play it as it was made (a simulation), or if they wanted to buy everybody, then to at least not complain about it, as it was not the way the game was implemented. Young players that are hot prospects, clubs will hold on to these for dear life IRL, Could anybody imagine Gosling being sold? or Wilshere? No. At least not until their early-mid twenties when their potential is becoming realised and if they haven't shone quite as brightly as expected.

Players in their prime: These again, aren't going to be sold. Liverpool constantly rejects clubs who come in for Gerrard. Utd wouldn't release Rooney. Etc.

People need to learn this fact below, and I'm going to underline it as so far the 'discussion' has just been going round and round in circles.

Sale Value is JUST an indicator. If it is ridiculously high. It means "NOT FOR SALE" or "DONT WASTE YOUR TIME"

Obviously this needs a tinkering for future versions, but as long as you have common sense, then you can figure it out. Jeez.

I feel really sorry for Dafuge here. As all he has done is try to explain what he feels is happening, and all a lot of you have done is ignore his ideas so that you can have everyone agreeing with yours. Just because you don't understand something, it doesn't mean it's wrong! You know it's bad when people have to say things like "well i'm done with this thread now" or something to the like, because it just means that there is no discussion, it's more like a Rally.

Forums are for discussion, not for preaching an idea and expecting everybody to agree with it. Please, be more openminded!

Finally, before you just flame this comment. I urge you, No, I BEG of you, please, read what I and many others have put (hell, read the thread through again) with an open mind, read them thoroughly. I don't want you to share my opinion. Just respect it as I respect yours. I'm not saying anybody's wrong, I'm just saying there are different ways of looking at it, and different ways of playing.

Good luck to Y'all. I'll be back here in a bit to answer if requested, or to be burnt at the stake if required.

[private pyle]

Well I would rather the club say that player x is not for sale at any price - you could then add them to your shortlist and then the game should inform you in the future if this changes and the club are now willing to listen to offers.

[Toadi]

Well I would rather the club say that player x is not for sale at any price - you could then add them to your shortlist and then the game should inform you in the future if this changes and the club are now willing to listen to offers.

I think that's the only way the current system could be tweaked. And is the most viable option IMO

[KingKenny]

If we were to go for actual realism, then the game would not display any values for any player whatsoever.

In real life a manager doesn't have access to a list of players and their associated values. He just has to base his bid on what he thinks the player is worth to him and his club. And in fact, there is no such thing as an objective value for a player..... a player is valued at what someone is prepared to pay for him.

[pelicanstuff]

If we were to go for actual realism, then the game would not display any values for any player whatsoever.

In real life a manager doesn't have access to a list of players and their associated values. He just has to base his bid on what he thinks the player is worth to him and his club. And in fact, there is no such thing as an objective value for a player..... a player is valued at what someone is prepared to pay for him.

Absolutely, there's a discussion along these lines a page or so back. The question is how do we go about ordering the players on the player search screen once the value is removed - I guess expanding the range of values for Reputation further is the easiest way?

[Toadi]

Absolutely, there's a discussion along these lines a page or so back. The question is how do we go about ordering the players on the player search screen once the value is removed - I guess expanding the range of values for Reputation further is the easiest way?

I like this idea, although I doubt the values system will be totally removed from the game as it is still very effective on cheaper players as a rough indication. Maybe player value and an extended Reputation system together could work well

[AcidBurn]

People are saying that the game needs a this player is not for sale option, the trouble people are having is that when someone is not for sale then why can't the AI just reject the bid? Personally when I play if I do not want to sell someone I always ask the bidding club for £200 million for the player.

[dafuge]

Bit of a bump here, but how do the people who were complaining about the transfer system in FM2010 feel about the changes for FM2011?

[grade]

People are saying that the game needs a this player is not for sale option, the trouble people are having is that when someone is not for sale then why can't the AI just reject the bid? Personally when I play if I do not want to sell someone I always ask the bidding club for £200 million for the player.

I would agree with the reject the bid, if the transfer are working as supposed to be, or a lot of people will complain about it. Also another point is this game needs to let for the user to buy the players he always dream to play for his club and has been among the major seller points of the game. Loosing this, maybe means loosing costumers.