• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Matshit

  • Rank
  1. The normal percentage is around 10-15% of the profit (not on the sales price, but the profit). Which is a pretty tiny sum per shirt. There has also been speculation that Man Utd takes an even smaller cut, down to basically zero, which is the reason Adidas paid so much to begin with. And the 75 million they get now per year, is the maximum they can get for the next 10 years, with potential for dropping down with bad results. So, there is no way United can increase their profit from shirt sales, either directly or indirectly in the next 10 years.
  2. I think the "problem" is that the game often struggle with giving you a full insight into a situation. No one follow every situation in game, and you just look at the result and deem it unrealistic. A player is scoring 20 league goals one season, and can barely get a match the next even without injuries? Maybe he was benched after making trouble or refusing to sign a new contract, maybe another even better striker took his place. Maybe the team changed tactics so there were no longer any room for his type of player. I think this is an area that someplace down the future will be expanded on in the game. It is probably a bit to demanding at the moment, but news stories, player/manager/club biographies and important storylines has a huge potential to help people understand more of what is going on in the game world.
  3. So Man United 2.8 million shirts. Cool. It means, at a price of $65 per shirt, that the gross income is around 180 million. You know how much of that money Manchester United see? Basically zero. You know how much of that money Adidas see? Around 180 million (before we remove production and other costs). And how many people buy a United shirt because they bought Pogba? A lot of people probably bought a shirt with Pogbas name, but how many of those wouldn't have bought another shirt anyway?
  4. Don't believe the "shirt sales" lie. The extra shirt income United make from the Pogba transfer, would be enough to pay his wages for about a day.
  5. I did win a match 4-3 after scoring 3 goals in injury time in the second half on FM13. Still the most insane match I have ever played.
  6. With the amount of matches that are played on Football Manager, someone is bound to experience results that are in the 0,001% chance of happening. Playing a match and conceding in the first minute is unlikely. Doing it three times in a row is extremely unlikely. But people overestimate the importance of unlikely events in a big series of events. It is the same way you are most likely going to get a series of 7 heads or tails in a row if you flip a coin 50 times.
  7. A mixture. Researchers fill in wage (often done through a mixture of knowledge and guessing), and for the ones that is lacking there is some internal logic to calculate it.
  8. It is also pre-generated animations that is about as comparable as comparing FM and Toy Story.
  9. It is a bit easier to put hamstring injuries down to the way they train however. This case is most likely just a big element of bad luck.
  10. Just met a random 4. level team in the cup. They had one player, so the rest was grey. One of those grey players was named Øystein Lars-Erik. Although this pretty much made my day, I think we can all agree that Lars-Erik is not a proper Norwegian last name.
  11. Well, that doesn't make a big difference. If a player of Lewandowskis quality can end up on level three in Poland, then surely a player of Messis quality can as well. And besides, Who is to say Messi had a much bigger potential than the other mentioned? There are tons of reasons Messi is as good as he is. A big part is a natural talent, but there are probably a lot of other players who COULD have been as good as him, it is just a lot of hard work and luck.
  12. Not Messi quality, but there are lots of examples. Jordi Alba would have started in Barcelona, but with such a low PA that the club would decide to let him go at the age of 16, and he would be signed by a level three club in Spain. Domenico Berardi would have started his Football Manager career at Cosenza at the lower part of level three. Giaccherini at a club so weak I cannot even find out what level they are on. Diego Costa at some sort of hobby team in Brazil. Lewandowski at a level three team in Poland. But that makes no sense. The fact that you are not playing football seriously and lack the discipline does not mean your potential is any lower. Again, the big clubs would easily swoop up the big CA youngsters, but if the player isn’t showing any quality to prove his potential, how would anyone know? I have. Way above 20 as well. It doesn’t. That is true. But again, I said “on average”. In the same way as having three dice would on average give you a higher number than two, even though potentially the one with two dice could end up with a number four times as high as the one with two.
  13. Sure, but a player CA is a quick way to see how good he is, on average you will expect the quality of players to increase as the CA increase. My biggest problem isn’t the PA in itself anyway, more the PA your scout and assistant gives you. It is WAY to accurate. The last time I checked, two identical players with different PA got different ratings from the scouts as well. That should never happen. When I get a new list of youths I want my assistant to sometimes say “This player will most likely never be good enough for the club” only for him to turn into a world beater. And I want a chance for a player with the potential to be as good as Messi to start up at a weak Conference South club with a CA on the same level as his team mates. 99/100 times he never ends up anywhere, but with a bit of luck he might slowly progress to turn into a quality player. And I want a 18 year old to look like a superstar, only for his career to fizzle away. In my view, big clubs should produce players with a higher starting CA, but PA should not be in any way affected by training facilities. That makes no sense.
  14. Well, yes. In terms of the player being able to lower some stats and improving others. In terms of proper improvement not so much. Well, I still think it is true. Not because I think the people doing the research aren’t as qualified as they can be, but because PA has to be a big amount of guesswork. You can only see how good the player is now and if he seems to have the correct attitude (both of wich are already in the game).
  15. Remember when your tactic option was just three bars? Remember when any input you got was a possession bar, and a few messages telling you if you had a scoring chance? Remember when they changed it to a 2D simulation and lots of people promised they would never use it as they liked the simple text commentary? That was nice and simple, wasn’t it? The CA\PA functionality they have now might be easy, but it is also extremely arcadeish and two dimensional. The PA is just an arbitrary number that some guy has pulled out of their backside, and it makes absolutely no sense when trying to explain it in real terms. Do anyone really think a 25 year old suddenly stops improving because he has now reached his true potential and nothing he ever does will improve it more?