[SUGGESTION] Transfer Dealings Need Updating

[Weston]

Some of these I remember being discussed years ago, yet we still haven't seen a whole lot of progress, leaving one of the most crucial aspects of the game restricted and behind the times. Buying and selling players is one of the most fun parts of FM! Hopefully some of these have been updated in FM 19, or can be implemented in the near future:

1. FM requires you to have a deal worked out with the club before you can offer a contract to a player, yet we see clubs agree to "personal terms" with transfer targets before reaching a deal with the club all the time. This needs to be reflected for realism.
2. In FM you are able to agree to transfers outside of the transfer window, and they are simply implemented on the first day it opens again. However, for some reason you aren't able to preemptively arrange loan deals the same way. There doesn't seem to be any reasoning behind this, and it's incredibly restrictive of your transfer strategy, especially as a smaller club that relies heavily on loans. I often have to decide between signing outright a mediocre player or loaning a younger kid at a comparable level from a larger club, but that leaves me with the choice of either securing the older guy now or having to just sit around riskily waiting and hoping a loan could materialize later because it cannot be preplanned for. This is unrealistic and very frustrating.
3. Nuanced transfer variables are severely lacking. Some include:
   1. Player trades. I can't remember ever being offered one and can only recall having one I proposed being accepted once or twice, despite this happening in real life perhaps more than you'd expect, whether directly or indirectly. The recent Bonucci-Caldara+Higuain and Courtouis-Kovacic deals are good examples (note the latter even mixes a loan with a transfer).
   2. Buyback clauses. These happen all the time (they almost seem on pace to eventually replace loans) yet are rarely seen in the game and are nearly impossible to have accepted if you propose them yourself. Morata to Juve, Chalobah to Watford, Pjaca to Fiorentina, and Mandragora to Udinese are all recent examples.
   3. Loans with mandatory or optional purchase clauses. This is another thing we see all the time as teams look to simultaneously test players before committing and stay in FFP's good graces, and while I've had some success negotiating them on my own, they seem unrealistically rare in the AI and could use some improving all around. Costa to Juve, Mbappe to PSG, and Pjaca to Fiorentina (note this is combined with a buyback clause as well) are all good recent examples.
   4. Options on OTHER players not involved in the transfer/loan/trade. This is a special one that would really make things feel realistic. It has been reported that when Juve sent Pjaca to Fiorentina we secured a first option on Chiesa. When Juve sent Tevez to Boca we secured options on Vadala and Bentancur. This is one for really clever negotiators. I know it can be hard to replicate a "gentleman's agreement" like we often see (Juve with Berardi comes to mind), but surely there is some way to add these aspects.
4. This one is super simple and, though it can sort of be worked around with the editor, is a huge inconvenience that sort of punishes you for pursuing realism. I always start my games with the "no first transfer window" box checked, as forcing a second transfer window on the already newly-updated squads has always seemed silly to me. This way it's as if I took over the club as-is and the world begins from there. That being said, when this option is checked I usually get absolutely ZERO transfer budget, and while I may have a million sitting in the wage budget I am unable to move the slider that allocates where the money goes, meaning I don't even have enough spare change to hire a better Assistant Manger or pay the nominal signing on fee for a Serie C free agent. You're able to make changes to staff automatically when you are signed by a new club later one, and free transfers are allowed after the window closes anyway, so there is no need for this to be blocked. Trying to preserve starting reality shouldn't result in a complete financial freeze.
5. And lastly, it would be a nice touch if we could rework the way you ask the board to consider signing a player outside of the prearranged budget to make it more dynamic. Say scouts tell you to "sign someone whatever the price," it would be nice to have that scout attend the meeting with you to attest to the board the importance of working something out much in the way you introduce an older player to the discussion with a younger lad seeking tutelage. Say you can debate future terms, like asking for a deduction in the next window's budget to compensate, or promise a sale afterwards to compensate if the deal goes through, etc. Kind of like how Juve signed Ronaldo, perhaps you could point to increased shirt sales or sponsorship deals warranting a look at a possible exception in transfer policy as the potential benefits are so convincing.

Thanks for reading!

[月光下告白]

good idea

[Weston]

6. I appreciate how you can buy out clauses like sell-on clauses, etc., that were negotiated with other clubs, but it would also be great if you could buy out clauses like minimum fee release clauses in player contracts as well without having to renegotiate the entire contract. This happened fairly recently in the news but I can't remember with whom.

[Tom8983]

22 hours ago, Weston said:

This one is super simple and, though it can sort of be worked around with the editor, is a huge inconvenience that sort of punishes you for pursuing realism. I always start my games with the "no first transfer window" box checked, as forcing a second transfer window on the already newly-updated squads has always seemed silly to me. This way it's as if I took over the club as-is and the world begins from there. That being said, when this option is checked I usually get absolutely ZERO transfer budget, and while I may have a million sitting in the wage budget I am unable to move the slider that allocates where the money goes, meaning I don't even have enough spare change to hire a better Assistant Manger or pay the nominal signing on fee for a Serie C free agent. You're able to make changes to staff automatically when you are signed by a new club later one, and free transfers are allowed after the window closes anyway, so there is no need for this to be blocked. Trying to preserve starting reality shouldn't result in a complete financial freeze

When I've been hiring staff recently, the fee has always been taken from elsewhere and not the transfer budget, so it wouldn't matter if I didn't have one. I'm not sure if this is just due to my financial security though or if this is always the case. Maybe you should double check that? I admit to skim reading a fair bit and it took me a long time to notice it said "the fee will not be taken from this years transfer budget" in the confirmation message.

Other than that you've mentioned some good ideas. The only one I'd disagree with is number 1, because it doesn't really make a difference to anything. You have to agree a fee and a contract to make a transfer happen, so it really doesn't matter what order you do it in. It just seems like needless extra work from the team.

[Weston]

3 minutes ago, Tom8983 said:

Other than that you've mentioned some good ideas. The only one I'd disagree with is number 1, because it doesn't really make a difference to anything. You have to agree a fee and a contract to make a transfer happen, so it really doesn't matter what order you do it in. It just seems like needless extra work from the team.

It's not extra work if it's adding realism to a game that prides itself in being realistic. Besides, having agreed personal terms with a player already puts pressure on the club to accept an offer for the transfer and vice versa. You already sort of get this effect through unsettling the player by declaring interest in the media, but this would be a big improvement.

[Tom8983]

4 minutes ago, Weston said:

having agreed personal terms with a player already puts pressure on the club to accept an offer for the transfer and vice versa

I'm not sure it does increase pressure, because the buying club still needs to have permission from the selling club to talk to the player in the first place. It just means that you're negotiating with the club and player at the same time. I'd personally rather the team spend the time it would take to code that in on something else that would give a bigger improvement in the game imo.

[Weston]

1 minute ago, Tom8983 said:

I'm not sure it does increase pressure, because the buying club still needs to have permission from the selling club to talk to the player in the first place. It just means that you're negotiating with the club and player at the same time. I'd personally rather the team spend the time it would take to code that in on something else that would give a bigger improvement in the game imo.

If a player at Chelsea has already agreed to personal terms to join Juve that absolutely puts more pressure on Chelsea to negotiate a deal with Juve, whereas if they player refused personal terms it would give Chelsea reason to reject any offers rom Juve.

And yeah, I mean, I would definitely prioritize #2 which is a huge hinderance to gameplay, #3 to an extent, and even #4 because it would be very simple to fix, but it's still worth looking into, especially over other issues like adding social media into the game, etc.

[Tom8983]

18 minutes ago, Weston said:

If a player at Chelsea has already agreed to personal terms to join Juve that absolutely puts more pressure on Chelsea to negotiate a deal with Juve

I really don't see that is does. If Juve aren't offering anywhere near enough money, then they aren't offering enough money. That's not Chelsea's fault. The player would know that even if he really wanted to leave that his agreeing terms is subject to Chelsea receiving a bid that they find acceptable. If it increased pressure on them, they wouldn't give permission for talks to start in the first place would they!? But well, I'm not in that environment so I don't know for sure, but for me I can't see it. I just see it as more of a courtesy and time-saver to be able to negotiate both things simultaneously.

 

[Weston]

1 minute ago, Tom8983 said:

I really don't see that is does. If Juve aren't offering anywhere near enough money, then they aren't offering enough money. That's not Chelsea's fault. The player would know that even if he really wanted to leave that his agreeing terms is subject to Chelsea receiving a bid that they find acceptable. If it increased pressure on them, they wouldn't give permission for talks to start in the first place would they!? But well, I'm not in that environment so I don't know for sure, but for me I can't see it. I just see it as more of a courtesy and time-saver to be able to negotiate both things simultaneously.

 

I think you're missing the point a bit.

If you receive an offer for 10m for a player that has shown no interest in leaving you can reject it safely. If you receive an offer of 10m for a player that has already gone through the motions of negotiating and agreeing personal terms with that team you know if you reject it he will get upset, making you more likely to accept.

Same thing goes for increased or decreased fees, and players you're trying to sign as well. Club reject your offer? Get the player on board, and then try again. You may be able to push it through for the same fee or even less.

Say first round of negotiations fail with a player because they want higher wages and you can't agree, the club can raise the asking price because they see you're not willing or able to reach the proposed valuations and they know the player won't be upset because they have deal in place. So on and so forth. But again, despite the fact I put it first this is definitely not the most crucial of my list, they weren't in any real particular order.

[Tom8983]

 

14 minutes ago, Weston said:

If you receive an offer of 10m for a player that has already gone through the motions of negotiating and agreeing personal terms with that team you know if you reject it he will get upset

You seem to be under the impression that buying clubs are negotiating contracts with players they want to buy without first asking the players current club for permission. That's an illegal approach/tapping up.

In the instance of players agreeing a contract with a buying team before a transfer fee is agreed, the selling club has given permission for that conversation to take place, in good faith that a fee can be negotiated. They can just as easily reject permission for the buying club to begin contract negotiations, or withdraw that permission at any time. The player may be upset if he thinks that the money offered was enough and you rejected it, but that happens on the game anyway.

I understand that you may want a slightly more diverse way to upset players, force through transfers, and increase the realism a touch. It's just that personally, I don't think it loses much by not having this feature, and the time spent implementing it could be used on things that I think could bring bigger improvements. Like the ME, or general player interactions, or media interactions. I'm not saying you're wrong for wanting it, I'm just mentioning that I have different priorities than you. 

[Weston]

5 minutes ago, Tom8983 said:

 

You seem to be under the impression that buying clubs are negotiating contracts with players they want to buy without first asking the players current club for permission. That's an illegal approach/tapping up.

In the instance of players agreeing a contract with a buying team before a transfer fee is agreed, the selling club has given permission for that conversation to take place, in good faith that a fee can be negotiated. They can just as easily reject permission for the buying club to begin contract negotiations, or withdraw that permission at any time. The player may be upset if he thinks that the money offered was enough and you rejected it, but that happens on the game anyway.

I understand that you may want a slightly more diverse way to upset players, force through transfers, and increase the realism a touch. It's just that personally, I don't think it loses much by not having this feature, and the time spent implementing it could be used on things that I think could bring bigger improvements. Like the ME, or general player interactions, or media interactions. I'm not saying you're wrong for wanting it, I'm just mentioning that I have different priorities than you. 

Perhaps I am misunderstanding the nuance of what happens in real life, then. Of course I am not in the room when these things happen, I can only garner what I know from the reports after! It seems to be in the news often though that players agree to personal terms and try to force a move. Perhaps this is illegal or there is some loophole.

[ClemB]

If it's a moral agreement, then it's not illegal i believe.

[steakfaced]

13 hours ago, Tom8983 said:

 

You seem to be under the impression that buying clubs are negotiating contracts with players they want to buy without first asking the players current club for permission. That's an illegal approach/tapping up.

In the instance of players agreeing a contract with a buying team before a transfer fee is agreed, the selling club has given permission for that conversation to take place, in good faith that a fee can be negotiated. They can just as easily reject permission for the buying club to begin contract negotiations, or withdraw that permission at any time. The player may be upset if he thinks that the money offered was enough and you rejected it, but that happens on the game anyway.

I understand that you may want a slightly more diverse way to upset players, force through transfers, and increase the realism a touch. It's just that personally, I don't think it loses much by not having this feature, and the time spent implementing it could be used on things that I think could bring bigger improvements. Like the ME, or general player interactions, or media interactions. I'm not saying you're wrong for wanting it, I'm just mentioning that I have different priorities than you. 

Except, that's exactly what happens 99% of the time. Tapping up IS illegal, but it's the way almost every transfer goes. They reach out to the player, and make an unofficial offer to kind of feel out the type of package it would take to bring them. And then talk to the would be selligng club. Is it right? No. Is it how it goes? Almost all the time.

[Weston]

To add to 3.2. here is another example of a team buying a player and then immediately selling him with a buyback clause, effectively farming a player for a low-risk long-term loan. I appreciate how FM has recently made it so you can promise a player he will be loaned out when you sign him, but it does not allow for nuances like this. It is impossible to get players to leave so soon after signing them, which limits your options when you intentionally plan on doing something like that from the start.

[Weston]

Just watched the new video on scouting and transfer features coming in FM19 and it looks like they addressed... none of these issues.

[autohoratio]

3 hours ago, Weston said:

Just watched the new video on scouting and transfer features coming in FM19 and it looks like they addressed... none of these issues.

Such a shame. Not being able to negotiate a loan before the transfer window opens is a huge gripe of mine, really hope it's added sooner rather than later.

[Weston]

37 minutes ago, autohoratio said:

Such a shame. Not being able to negotiate a loan before the transfer window opens is a huge gripe of mine, really hope it's added sooner rather than later.

Agreed! It's so simple, and it's an actual feature that mirrors actual football, not just a cosmetic rearrangement or reshuffling of already existing features...

[rich10]

Regarding the tapping up point, don't the scouts already include the likelihood of the player being interested in discussing terms in their reports?

[Weston]

On 11/10/2018 at 16:44, autohoratio said:

Such a shame. Not being able to negotiate a loan before the transfer window opens is a huge gripe of mine, really hope it's added sooner rather than later.

As far as I can tell, the top leagues had the below number of loan deals arranged on or before the day the window opened. Note this does not include smaller leagues where loaning is far more common and crucial.

England, 39: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_football_transfers_summer_2018

Italy, 16: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Italian_football_transfers_summer_2018

Spain, 9: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Spanish_football_transfers_summer_2018

[Neil Brock]

Reviewed so locked.