Player Values Theory - doing away with them

[glamdring]

Players have insurance so someone has to value them, however much of a wild stab in the dark it is.

[Indi75]

Players have insurance so someone has to value them, however much of a wild stab in the dark it is.

True but Owen was rumoured to be insured for £60m by Liverpool, but they'd never have sold him for more than £40 even in a bidding war. Insurance values are as bad as FM's tbh.

*I wish this thing would stop remember quotes from other pages :-(

[glamdring]

I'm not saying they are good, I'm just saying there is "a value" for each player that someonoe has calculated.

[jayahr]

No, he's saying that values are not displayed in real life. So aside from the fact that the current values are not true player values, we should still have to ascertain the players value via other means than simply looking him up in the game.

Two issues here, same same but different. Firstly, values are currently nothing to do with his actual value to the club which only seems to create discontent every FM release, and secondly any 'true' value should only be discovered by scouting, media punditry, and enquiring as part of the game.

You don't convince me there.

According to what you say you want those valuations to be in the game but harder to find. So all you actually want is to make it some more of a hassle and a bit less exact.

This might indeed add some realism, but mainly it would annoy too many users. Hardly any use but huge potential to deter from the game

[Dave C]

Wow, what an incredibly skewed poll question! You should work for a think tank!

Firstly, players do have values internally, not least for the purpose of insurance as assets.

In terms of the value we see, I tend to think of it as a guideline. I think it needs to be there for the majority of players just so they have some sense of starting point, and also to give them a guide to when they are paying over the odds.

As an optional extra, where we had our internal board-set valuations but otherwise had to rely on our scouts/coaches/chairman/media to suggest a figure, I'd be happy with it.

The valuation system needs to improve so it's more performance driven, but I see no need to scrap it altogether.

[Indi75]

Wow, what an incredibly skewed poll question! You should work for a think tank!

It was late, I was tired.

[pelicanstuff]

Another benefit of getting rid of it is it would dissuade people from blindly buying players without bothering to scout them at all first. This would enhance realism, in my book.

[Bongo-Bongo]

Sometimes, realism has to be sacrificed in terms of gameplay, and I think this is the case with player valuation. The value gives a guideline to the player of the minimum of how much the player might have to pay. Removing the players value will make the game much harder, and increasingly more frustrating, particullarly for newer players as they have no way to gauge what they should be playing. As an option, this would be fine, but as part of the main game? No way.

Personally, I think this would be more of a cover up for the failings of the current transfer system. When a club are asking for £30m for a player valued at £10m, then it shows there is something wrong with the transfer system and not the fact that the player has a valuation. As the transfer module is being reworked for FM09, we will just have to see how this will work in the future.

[philly_flyer10]

At the very least, if you or the ai bid £10m for a £5m player, the players worth should go to £10m instead of £5m.

At least that will close the gap between the viewed price and the real selling price and over time should lead to a more realistic valuation of players.

[pelicanstuff]

I would like the option to remove it at least, as it really gets on my nerves. I want to find out how much to bid by exploring through media and scouts and enquiries.

[Indi75]

Personally, I think this would be more of a cover up for the failings of the current transfer system. When a club are asking for £30m for a player valued at £10m, then it shows there is something wrong with the transfer system and not the fact that the player has a valuation. As the transfer module is being reworked for FM09, we will just have to see how this will work in the future.

It's not the £30m figure you mention I have an issue with, as transfers are already up there for players in demand, it's the £10m figure that needs correcting.

If a player is worth £30m to his club, he's worth £30m in the same way that Ronaldo at Utd would only be allowed to leave for nigh on £100m.

If FM were applied in real life come January, Torres, Cesc, and Gerrard would all require bids of £50m to be even remotely succesful but would all have a sign round their necks that says £15m.

The valuations are wrong, not the asking price. Being priced out of a player is part of life, and therefore part of the game.

[Evon]

Great idea. This will also make it harder to find players through player search which does rather make it a bit too easy. But maybe it should be N/A instead? And then after scouting the value should appear.

[Ackter]

It would be a hell of a lot simpler if Enquiries worked.

[Nomis07]

If a player is worth £30m to his club, he's worth £30m in the same way that Ronaldo at Utd would only be allowed to leave for nigh on £100m.

I see what yu're saying, but it just doesn't work that way. If two guys own identical cars and both are valued at 1k, but one puts his up for sale at 1'100 and the other 900, which has a higher value? The answer is neither, they are of equal value, just one costs more than the other. What makes a footballer different?

[pelicanstuff]

who values them, though? value is always subjective. practically, a footballer is worth the price that the market dictates he is worth, as with most other commodities.

how are you estimating worth?

[UELLfan]

Players are looked at as 'assets', 'propierties' or 'inversions' by the clubs nowadays. In such context, it is not strange that there is a 'player value' and a fluctuating 'player sale value'.

If you think about other markets in which 'assets', 'propierties' and 'inversions' are involved, let's say real estate for the example's sake, you'll see there's always a 'value' (how the experts evaluate the value of said asset) and a 'sale value' (how much money the owner wants to complete a transaction for said asset).

Going back into the Real Estate analogy, that'd be the price difference between 'Real Estate taxation estimators' (a figure which exists in the Spanish RE market) and what the owners of said propierty want to sell the house.

The owner's valuation can be close to the estimator's value (if the owner needs to sell) or it can be wildly off (the place you're trying to buy has been the owner's family house for all his life and he doesn't want to sell it for sentimental reasons unless an extravagant offer comes in). Of course analogies never work, etc... but that's the way I integrate the difference in values in my mind.

That being said, I agree it can sometimes be frustrating to compete in FM's tranfer market as you never seem to be able to notice the right moment to make a bid for a player.

[McDoul]

I think many people here are missing the OP's point - his thread title looks like might have tried to change to "Player Values - a realistic approach?" if you look at the opening post title. It's his first post, and frankly a bllody good for a first post even if he not nailed his argument.

I'm not sure he's saying get rid of them. If you cast minds back to the endless barrage of threads last year about not being able to buy players for anything like their listed value you'll recall a few people popping veins in their forehead.

What he's saying is that a players value should be scouted and acquired rather than simply labeled, and even then we should not be given an exact sale price, merely an estimate as you moght get from scouts, enquiries, media and pundits in real life.

Further, the approach above eliminates the current values system which has caused a fuss here in GQ for every release I can remember.

Too many people are focusing on the seemingly unchangeable thread title and not seeing the discussion taking place - perhaps a mod could assist?

I, for one, have voted in favour because I'd like to see realistic values in thre game that have been scouted rather than these current values with have little bearing on any aspect of the game other than filtering by price.

[Indi75]

Heh, should've let you write the opening post McDoul, you've summed up rather well.

Oddly enough I've spent the last hour ignoring bids from clubs for Ab Raz Traore because clubs ignore my sensible £3m asking price and only see his bloody £1m value. Enquiry, after enquiry, after enquiry.

If it was other way round it'd be just as bad, I'd be annoyed that I can't have the player 'valued' at £1m for £1m. Can't have him for my scout's estimate of £1.8m, and refuse to pay the £3m the club wants. Neither I or the AI is wrong... the value is just a flawed reference point.