[DISCUSSION] Improvements to the transfer system

[arsenal_2111]

FM11 has, in my opinion, improved the transfer and negotiation side of the game no end. Before it was robotic, unrealistic and fairly tedious. That, of course, doesn't mean that there aren't improvements that could be made, and below are several of ideas - some which I have seen mentioned before, others not - which I'd love to see introduced into a future game - FM13 is probably the most realistic, if they are not already planned for FM12.

Interaction

This is the weakest part of the system, in my eyes. As it stands, we offer a player (or agent, although as a lower league club I am yet to meet one of them) a contract, and they tell us what we need to improve to make the offer more reasonable and to tempt them to accept. The issue with this is that we seem to be talked at, rather than talked to. Whilst player interaction is now a conversation style (of which I'm not a huge fan but it is an improvement), the transfer negotiation remains a one-sided conversation. To improve this, I'd like to see the ability to explain your offer to a player. I'll use an example to make it easier to understand.

Peter Power is a 23 year old striker who you are signing for £8mil from a mid-table team, whilst you are a top team. He wants £50,000 a week and a 2 year contract, whereas you believe he should be on £30,000 a week and want him on a 5 year contract.

If you 'negotiate' to this, however, it's likely he'll only slightly bring down his demands (if at all) and will almost definitely not accept your new offer. What I'd like to see here is the ability to tell Peter Power why you think your offer of £30,000 is reasonable (perhaps a selection of options, like those given when responding to a transfer offer, would be appropriate) and why you'd prefer he signs a 5 year contract. Even if he doesn't accept your first offer, it may make it easier to tempt him to lower his demands a bit.

There are so many times that this would be appropriate - explaining to a young player why he should be on a lower wage and a longer contract, telling an older player why they are only offered a 'Rotation' squad status or even explaining that financial difficulties are the reason that you can't offer what they really want.

I'd say it's pretty unlikely that this doesn't happen in real life (at Arsenal, for example, I'd imagine Arsene Wenger tells players who are over 30 that they will only be offered a 1 year deal [although this seems to be relaxed now]), and think it would be a great addition to the game.

Promises/Clauses

Something else that I believe often happens in real life is that promises are given to players in order to tempt them to sign a new contract or join the club. Recently, Steve Morison has joined Norwich City from Millwall, after signing a new deal in January. He told the press that he was told, when he signed the contract, he was told he would be able to leave in the summer if he wanted. Similarly, Joe Lewis and Craig Mackail-Smith at Peterborough were promised they could leave after a year if they played for Peterborough for a year in League One. In FM, we don't have the option to do this - as far as a player knows, when he signs a contract he will have to stay until the end of the contract.

There are two ways I'd like to see this introduced - firstly, there could be several new 'release clauses' made available to us - things such as 'can leave to a bigger club after two years' or 'can leave to one of his favourite clubs' would allow more realism as, as unfortunate as it I find it being a Watford fan, there are clubs in real life which do effectively act as 'stepping stones' for players to move on to bigger clubs. Alternatively, there could be a 'promises' section in contract negotiation rather than a legal clause in a contract, which if it is not met could lead to a fall in morale or a fall-out with the manager.

Both of these would allow the transfer system, particularly in lower leagues, to work more realistically - I'd imagine there aren't many instances in real life where a lower league club would refuse to let a young player move up the leagues if they got a good offer for him (such as Carl Jenkinson who has just joined Arsenal from Charlton - the chairman said it would not be fair to refuse him a move as he has always supported Arsenal). Similarly, I'd imagine it's fairly common that a player joins a club with the agreement that he would be able to move on soon. It could also be introduced for current players - you could promise that they could leave a year after relegation, much like Peterborough did this year.

Another clause that I'd like would see included (although it would take a lot more work, I'd imagine) is the percentage of money earned by a player in sponsorship/advertising that the club gets - this is often done in real life and although it would be lengthy to put into the game (and actually, may not be allowed to be included due to existing sponsorships) it would be great if it could be added.

Short-Term Contracts

This is one which has come up again and again over the years but, as far as I know, is yet to be introduced. So many players now (especially older players) are joining clubs on a one, two or three month contract, either to stay fit themselves or to help a club when there are many injuries. Many free agents also do this in lower leagues - they are signed up to a contract on official terms but a short enough contract that both the club and player are not tied down, allowing flexibility. It effectively acts as a trial in which a player can play league and cup games rather than friendlies/reserve matches, and a fair few players have been signed up onto longer term deals after a short-term contract.

This would work well with the previous two ideas - the interaction would allow an explanation of why the player is being signed (such as provide short term cover) and a promise could be made (for example, if he plays 10+ games he will automatically trigger a contract extension, perhaps on better terms)

Whilst I'm not a programmer, I can't see that it could need too much work to introduce and would be a great addition in my eyes.

Player Exchanges

There are two extra options that would help to improve the player exchanges in FM. Firstly, I'd like to be offered the choice of a selection of players from a certain club which I could start negotiations with in return for the player I am selling. Barcelona have obviously been looking to sign Cesc Fabregas recently, and I've seen in the press that Arsenal would be offered the choice of a large selection of Barcelona's players plus cash in return for Fabregas. Whilst this is almost definitely press speculation (I can't see Barcelona letting the likes of Pedro, Busquets or Alves go), it would be a welcome addition into FM, purely adding a larger selection of options in the negotiation stage of the game.

Also, and can link in with the above ideas, allowing loans to become part of the negotiation for players would be fantastic. I'm aware that, in real life, loans are rarely arranged in a transfer agreement - whilst Leeds may sign a player on loan from Liverpool after selling a player to them, they may be separate deals. The best way of implementing this in the game, though, would be to be able to offer a player to a club on loan rather than for a permanent transfer. Whilst this may not completely reflect real life, sometimes simplicity should take preference and it would be a more convenient way of dealing with loan deals being part of the transfer.

If SI would prefer to implement it a different way, a transfer clause stating that 'Leeds Utd may choose a player from Liverpool to take on a loan deal' or similar may work. This would leave the game open to bugs, in my opinion, with Leeds asking for Steven Gerrard or Fernando Torres (oh wait...) on loan, where ideally they would ask for someone like Dani Pacheco or Jack Robinson. However, if they were keen to reflect real life rather than choose a easier (for both implementation and usage) then this, I believe, would be the best way available.

Lastly, when offering or asking for a player to be involved in a transfer, there should be some indication of whether or not the player would be interested in joining you or the other team. So many times I have almost bought a player, only for the deal to fall through thanks to my player refusing their contract offer. Scouts could be involved in this, or even an opportunity to choose a different player if one turned down the deal.

------------------------------------------------------

Right, I'm going to leave it there for now because I don't want a lengthy post to scare people off reading.

If you have any criticisms or agree with what I've written above, please post in the thread to say so - your comments could help to give SI some vital ideas for future games.

Also, if you've got a completely different idea that you'd like to see in the game with regards to transfers and contracts, post below - thanks!

[nileppezdel]

Ok, for the first part, nice idea. But i disagree with your example. It's not that hard to negotiate, even with agents. Ok some players make a fuss about it but usually it's pretty easy. For example, my player who is on a 1m per annum deal wants 3m per annum. I first offer him 1.5m he lowers to 2.3, I offer 1.7 he lowers to 2m I offer him 1.8 and he accepts. He still gets a huge raise but much lower than what he's asked for.

Second part, nice idea again. I found the promises part a bit useless, given if we promise them something on the long term, we can use them in short term and sell them before we have to fulfill our promise. But there should be much more clauses to be added, that's for sure.

Third part, I don't think would be useful. I mean, there are transfer periods. Yes it's much longer for free transfers in England but at least for Turkey, I know that free transfer deadline is the same as regular transfer deadline. So as long as you can't sign players for a month when you need them, in the middle of the season, this idea wouldn't be useful imho.

Last part, well while you are buying, you can exchange as many players as you'd like, I'm not sure if you can do that when some club wants to buy your player. If not, it would be nice. And loaning players out as part of a transfer deal is very common in Turkey. It should be implemented since it is used. Perhaps only for smaller leagues where this is used. Kind of like the co-own system, exclusive for Italy

[arsenal_2111]

Ok, for the first part, nice idea. But i disagree with your example. It's not that hard to negotiate, even with agents. Ok some players make a fuss about it but usually it's pretty easy. For example, my player who is on a 1m per annum deal wants 3m per annum. I first offer him 1.5m he lowers to 2.3, I offer 1.7 he lowers to 2m I offer him 1.8 and he accepts. He still gets a huge raise but much lower than what he's asked for.

<snip>

Third part, I don't think would be useful. I mean, there are transfer periods. Yes it's much longer for free transfers in England but at least for Turkey, I know that free transfer deadline is the same as regular transfer deadline. So as long as you can't sign players for a month when you need them, in the middle of the season, this idea wouldn't be useful imho.

<snip>

Do you not find that, perhaps with older players, they are reluctant to take a drop in wages, despite no longer being a key member of the first team? Personally, this is an issue I've had in the past and I reckon being able to talk to them about why their wages should drop would help with negotiations - if they disagree, it could lead to a transfer request. It may just be me who has experienced this, thought!

About the second part of the above, I'm not entirely sure you've got what I meant - you mention when you can sign players, and the time that the transfer window (especially the free transfer window) is open. The point I was attempting to make was that, even though the free transfer window is open, we can't offer players a contract less than a year unless they are on loan. I'd like to be able to offer a contract, for example, for six months, with a view to being extended. If I'm wrong and you did understand but still disagree, apologies!

Thanks for your reply!

[nileppezdel]

No you're right I didn't understand that part, that would be a nice addition I guess.

About the first part however, yes it's frustrating when that happens and I just suggested the same thing in a new topic today. I totally agree with you, but usually I find it rather easy to be a hard bargain manager

[BurakUeda]

Nicely explained and backed ideas, and I completely agree with them.

One thing:

Lastly, when offering or asking for a player to be involved in a transfer, there should be some indication of whether or not the player would be interested in joining you or the other team. So many times I have almost bought a player, only for the deal to fall through thanks to my player refusing their contract offer. Scouts could be involved in this, or even an opportunity to choose a different player if one turned down the deal.

In negotiations window, you can see the players reaction when you change offer details. If you offer him rotation position, he will go "slightly interested", and will change to "interested", "very interested" when you change the offer to first team and key player respectively. Same thing with the salary and sign on a fee. More money makes them more interested.

I have some humble ideas:

For the transfers, it would be nice if we can hire agents as staff and give them a list of players we want to sell, minimum price etc.

Player awareness:

Players must know the circumstances. I am the EPL champion and playing with a CH team in a cup match. 2 of their players sent off and match ends 1:1. In the team talk I select angry and fine some of the players. They all go unhappy, morale is poor, they criticize my team talk etc. There must be some variable in their minds, for example, likeliness_of_winning_this_match. Under different circumstances, this variable will change. So playing with a CH team at home and left 9 players after 35th minute, my players must realize that we HAVE TO win this match 100%. And if we cannot they must expect some harsh penalties.

[arsenal_2111]

About the first part however, yes it's frustrating when that happens and I just suggested the same thing in a new topic today. I totally agree with you, but usually I find it rather easy to be a hard bargain manager

Yeah, just noticed it was you who made the other thread about transfers and contracts. Can I assume there are various things you'd like to be changed with regards to this area, then?

[nileppezdel]

Well I'd like to see what you suggested about that part of the game, getting implemented. It would really add depth to the game, and some reason too

[nileppezdel]

Oh an idea about agents offering players to you: I think we should be able to assign a scout to take a look at all the agent offers and automatically decline those which are under three star ratings or sth. This way, my inbox wouldn't fill with poor agent offers and when I see an offer, I would be excited about it

[arsenal_2111]

In negotiations window, you can see the players reaction when you change offer details. If you offer him rotation position, he will go "slightly interested", and will change to "interested", "very interested" when you change the offer to first team and key player respectively. Same thing with the salary and sign on a fee. More money makes them more interested.

I have some humble ideas:

For the transfers, it would be nice if we can hire agents as staff and give them a list of players we want to sell, minimum price etc.

Player awareness:

Players must know the circumstances. I am the EPL champion and playing with a CH team in a cup match. 2 of their players sent off and match ends 1:1. In the team talk I select angry and fine some of the players. They all go unhappy, morale is poor, they criticize my team talk etc. There must be some variable in their minds, for example, likeliness_of_winning_this_match. Under different circumstances, this variable will change. So playing with a CH team at home and left 9 players after 35th minute, my players must realize that we HAVE TO win this match 100%. And if we cannot they must expect some harsh penalties.

Is that not only for the main player, though? I was suggesting that we were told about the likelihood that players involved in a part exchange (so if the price of PLAYERA was £5mil + PLAYERB then we would be able to see what PLAYERB thought before negotiations started)

The first of your ideas sounds similar to a director of football role which is something that, although I wouldn't be keen as I enjoy dealing with transfers, I can definitely see being in a future release of the game.

Also, the second idea will probably be different for all managers. From what you've said, you seem to be a manager who prefers to keep the team well disciplined, and you can fully expect some players to be upset by that. Similarly, managers who are relaxed may also have negative consequences - in my eyes, that is more about balancing the management of the team, something a good few managers in real life seem to struggle with!

[arsenal_2111]

Oh an idea about agents offering players to you: I think we should be able to assign a scout to take a look at all the agent offers and automatically decline those which are under three star ratings or sth. This way, my inbox wouldn't fill with poor agent offers and when I see an offer, I would be excited about it

Isn't this kind of already in the game?

In 'Team Settings' under the 'Scouting' tab, you can decide which agent offers you want to see - so, for example, you could choose to only show future prospects.

[nileppezdel]

They offer future prospects and when I send my scout to see if I'm wrong about that player, he tells me he has a potential of 1 star. And my scout is Oliver Bierhoff who is awesome. I want them to be shown, according to the scout report

[RiverReveal666]

Why did young players from neighbouring clubs become so hard to sign in the 11.3 patch? I always used to buy Phil Jones or Jack Rodwell in my my Man Utd saves within the first couple of seasons but since 11.3 they have no interest whatsoever. In real life I am sure either player would join Man Utd if the either club accepted a bid for them. For a real life example of this Phil Jones is about to sign for Man Utd today!

[SCIAG]

Great post Jammy, I agree with pretty much everything you've said.

There are a few things I'd like to comment on:

Promises/Clauses

Something else that I believe often happens in real life is that promises are given to players in order to tempt them to sign a new contract or join the club. Recently, Steve Morison has joined Norwich City from Millwall, after signing a new deal in January. He told the press that he was told, when he signed the contract, he was told he would be able to leave in the summer if he wanted. Similarly, Joe Lewis and Craig Mackail-Smith at Peterborough were promised they could leave after a year if they played for Peterborough for a year in League One. In FM, we don't have the option to do this - as far as a player knows, when he signs a contract he will have to stay until the end of the contract.

There are two ways I'd like to see this introduced - firstly, there could be several new 'release clauses' made available to us - things such as 'can leave to a bigger club after two years' or 'can leave to one of his favourite clubs' would allow more realism as, as unfortunate as it I find it being a Watford fan, there are clubs in real life which do effectively act as 'stepping stones' for players to move on to bigger clubs. Alternatively, there could be a 'promises' section in contract negotiation rather than a legal clause in a contract, which if it is not met could lead to a fall in morale or a fall-out with the manager.

I agree with this, as long as players have some idea of how much they are worth. Having said that, aren't there already non-promotion release clauses in the game? It would be nice if players factored them in though.

A wider range of promises would be good, and the ability to invoke them earlier. Since Reading got relegated, we've had to sell a player for £5m+ every summer, and usually a few others. When we were first relegated, we had offers for both our starting strikers, Dave Kitson and Kevin Doyle. Kitson wanted to leave as he was older, on the verge of an England call up, had fallen out with certain players who he thought didn't care if we were relegated, and our top scorer, so we agreed to sell him to Stoke for £5.5m.

Doyle felt he owed the club a good season, so stayed. He was the Championship top scorer in December iirc, and then signed a new contract with a non-promotion release clause so we could attract higher offers. We missed out on promotion on the last day and then failed in the playoffs, received a bid of £6.5m (roughly his clause) from Wolves, so put the offer to him and he accepted. Stephen Hunt and Andre Bikey had signed similar deals shortly after Doyle, and also left for Premiership sides.

We've since repeated the trick with Gylfi Sigurdsson (who left for 7m EURO, or £6.6m), and now Shane Long (who will probably leave for £4-5m).

We should be able to say to players "look, if you sign a deal with a non-promotion or higher division release clause, we won't be able to stop you leaving if we don't get promoted, we'll be able to get more money as you'll have longer on your contract, you'll earn a few hundred pounds more per week for six months, and if we get promoted as a result of your performances, you'll won't need a transfer".

Release clauses for favourred clubs is a good idea, I know of players (though I couldn't name them) who have specific clubs written into their contracts that bids must be accepted for. Linked to that, it would be good if players more actively requested to be allowed to leave for a certain club- currently we get a small message from the agent at the bottom of the screen for the offer, personally I'd prefer players to ask for a conversation discussing the matter. If they're quite loyal and not especially ambitious, the message could come up saying "I wouldn't be asking if it wasn't a club that is so close to my heart", if they're incredibly loyal they could mention it and say "happy to stay, but I would be grateful if you allowed me to leave" or some such.

Player Exchanges

If SI would prefer to implement it a different way, a transfer clause stating that 'Leeds Utd may choose a player from Liverpool to take on a loan deal' or similar may work. This would leave the game open to bugs, in my opinion, with Leeds asking for Steven Gerrard or Fernando Torres (oh wait...) on loan, where ideally they would ask for someone like Dani Pacheco or Jack Robinson. However, if they were keen to reflect real life rather than choose a easier (for both implementation and usage) then this, I believe, would be the best way available.

SI could make it "Leeds may request to take a player from Liverpool's reserves or u18 squad", with the game rejecting a player who has the squad status of "key player" or "first team" who is just recovering fitness, for example.

[CaptainPlanet]

Great post. I agree wholely.

[looknohands]

One thing about the promises/clauses: SI would need to make sure that a player understands there's a difference between "letting him go" in the next window, and "promising to let him go." I've had a few players demand a move to a bigger club, then get upset when a move never materializes because no bid is ever made. There's no option for the coach to say "Hey, if I get any sort of offer you can go." It's either "You're gone in the next window," or "You'll leave over my dead body."

[arsenal_2111]

I agree with this, as long as players have some idea of how much they are worth. Having said that, aren't there already non-promotion release clauses in the game? It would be nice if players factored them in though.

The way Peterborough did it wasn't official, though (sorry to use the same example) - their chairman promised the players they could leave after a season, but legally he did not have to let them go after a year. Even though they went up (which would make a non-promotion release clause redundant) he is still allowing them to leave - this sort of thing would be a good addition, purely for more variety!

I think a lot of 'release clauses' are done as a gentleman's agreement rather than an official clause, so a 'promises' section when negotiating contracts would be very useful - it would also open other doors to areas such as squad harmony and morale.

[glennuk]

I would love the following

Loan Back Clause

So many times i want to buy a young player from a lower league/inferior foreign league, but know i will not be playing him for a few years (Where as his current club use him as first team/squad rotation) now i would love the option of loaning him back to the club afterwards.

I know this is kind of like the transfer at end of the season malarky, but i think it could be alot more detailed.

So for example i buy Joe Bloggs a 17 year old from Watford. I want to buy him now and then loan him back to watford as he is playing well. However if i choose buy player at end of the season, he may get played less, may lose morale playing for a team he knows he is leaving etc, or if i desperately need cover i can't suddenly change the transfer date, where as if he was on loan i could call him back.

I hope that makes sense....im tired

Next

Multiple Player Exchange

I would love to offer 3 of my players for 2 of another teams.

It may be that i know Charlton are looking for some old experienced heads, and i am looking for some future stars. I want 2 of their players they are interested in 3 of mine. Swap deal...simples

PS: Also love your ideas especially in regards to a team giving you a realistic selection of players that you could ask for in exchange. I have plenty of times negotiated a great deal only to find one of the players from either side was not interested.

[Lenzar]

I would like the option of being able to loan a future purchase, allowing him to blend in and be properly ready for the next season.

[Lem]

I honestly don't see how SI could successfully implement promises as there are so many variables. What's going to determine the bigger club - rating? league position? (current position or last season?) What if the big clubs don't come in? What's going to stop the AI and humans taking advantage and offering peanuts to test that "promise"? What if the interested club is likely to be relegated and the other promoted(or even not and ending in the same league), which club is bigger? What about clubs in other leagues? Will the player want to go to any big club or just a selection?

Isn't this effectively the same as players kicking up a fuss anyway because they want "a new challenge" or to "progress their career"? Maybe it'd be better just to improve the current system, particularly transfers and agents, before adding yet another half-baked new feature. Maybe consider it for FM2016.

[Coentrao]

I feel that is somewhat too easy to keep hold of your top players, the players always seem keen to renew their contracts when there is only one or two years left while on real life you have examples of players like Ozil that wanted a move and Bremen sold him since he only had one year left on his contract, we hear rumours about Ashley Young not wanting to renew at Villa Park so he will probably move for Liverpool or United this summer,etc.

In real life if you are a relegation battler or a mid table team it's really hard to try to build up teams on the long term since normally the top teams will just take your best players every other summer which is somewhat easy to prevent on FM and makes it easier, i understand it's just a game and many people would disagree with this(and it's maybe an area where the difficulty levels could be implemented) but i would really like to see a more ruthless AI on the transfer market.

[milnerpoint]

The first idea is fantastic and something i have longed for in FM for a while now, good stuff!!

[bigdunk]

Short-Term Contracts

This is one which has come up again and again over the years but, as far as I know, is yet to be introduced. So many players now (especially older players) are joining clubs on a one, two or three month contract, either to stay fit themselves or to help a club when there are many injuries. Many free agents also do this in lower leagues - they are signed up to a contract on official terms but a short enough contract that both the club and player are not tied down, allowing flexibility. It effectively acts as a trial in which a player can play league and cup games rather than friendlies/reserve matches, and a fair few players have been signed up onto longer term deals after a short-term contract.

This would work well with the previous two ideas - the interaction would allow an explanation of why the player is being signed (such as provide short term cover) and a promise could be made (for example, if he plays 10+ games he will automatically trigger a contract extension, perhaps on better terms)

Whilst I'm not a programmer, I can't see that it could need too much work to introduce and would be a great addition in my eyes.

Not including this is a performance decision apparently. If you had month to month contracts, the code the evaluates contract renewals would have to run 12 times more often than it does at the moment (i.e. X times a month instead of X times a year), and that's assuming that contracts always run to the end of a whole month. If you want to be able to sign a player for a month from any given date, then that code needs to run on an almost daily basis.

[nileppezdel]

Umm.. Why should it auto renew? If it doesn't auto renew, it would be like a regular contract code so it wouldn't be a problem. Or would it? I'm not so good at these things but since there are many different transfer seasons, almost every day can be the beginning or the end of a contract in FM. If you don't do auto renewals for month to month contracts, and rather it just tells you that the contract is about to expire in let's say 5 days, it shouldn't be any different than other contracts and their respective codes

[bigdunk]

There's only really a few times in the year when contracts expire - i.e. in summer leagues they pretty much all expire at the end of June. It's the AI code for clubs offering players new contacts, and players accepting/rejecting those contracts that would have to run a lot more often than it does at the moment.

[nileppezdel]

Well I still don't think it would make a huge effect on the system performance :/

[milnerpoint]

Well I still don't think it would make a huge effect on the system performance :/

But the guys at SI who work with the code and performance of the game do, who would you rather listen too?

[nileppezdel]

Is there any official explanation about month to month contracts or is this just speculation?

[bigdunk]

That is the explanation that SI have given every time that month-to-month contracts have been bought up.

[nileppezdel]

Alright then

[arsenal_2111]

I honestly don't see how SI could successfully implement promises as there are so many variables. What's going to determine the bigger club - rating? league position? (current position or last season?) What if the big clubs don't come in? What's going to stop the AI and humans taking advantage and offering peanuts to test that "promise"? What if the interested club is likely to be relegated and the other promoted(or even not and ending in the same league), which club is bigger? What about clubs in other leagues? Will the player want to go to any big club or just a selection?

Isn't this effectively the same as players kicking up a fuss anyway because they want "a new challenge" or to "progress their career"? Maybe it'd be better just to improve the current system, particularly transfers and agents, before adding yet another half-baked new feature. Maybe consider it for FM2016.

Well, that's something that would have to be carefully considered (as I'm sure all potential features are before being implemented) but club reputation would probably have a strong influence in how 'big' a club is regarded.

It's very easy to say they need to improve the existing features before adding more but let's be honest, that's not a sustainable business model and 80% of gamers would not buy a slightly improved version of an existing game, especially not for the RRP.

Not including this is a performance decision apparently. If you had month to month contracts, the code the evaluates contract renewals would have to run 12 times more often than it does at the moment (i.e. X times a month instead of X times a year), and that's assuming that contracts always run to the end of a whole month. If you want to be able to sign a player for a month from any given date, then that code needs to run on an almost daily basis.

I don't suppose you could find where that was said, could you? I'd be interested to see more about it as I'm not exactly sure why that would have to be the case - different leagues have contracts end on different dates (due to when seasons begin and end) and if you have enough leagues loaded then you will already see that contracts expire at the end of various months. On my current game (with very few leagues), I have contracts finishing at the end of May, June, August and even October, which would make it seem to me as though the code already has to run more than once a season.

Perhaps, rather than giving exactly one month contracts, we could get the ability to offer contracts until the end of a certain month - if we wanted a 3 month contract, for example, it could start on whatever date it was offered and finish on the last day of the 3rd month after it began (which, of course, would be shown in the contract negotiation screen)

There's only really a few times in the year when contracts expire - i.e. in summer leagues they pretty much all expire at the end of June. It's the AI code for clubs offering players new contacts, and players accepting/rejecting those contracts that would have to run a lot more often than it does at the moment.

That's a very narrow-minded thing to say - you have to remember that there are hundreds of leagues on the game, some start when Europe's does but many don't, and many use different systems for contracts. Summer league contracts may mostly expire at the end of June, but if you're signing a player from abroad (for example, the USA), their contract might finish in January (I'm not completely sure). There are so many working systems in football that it can't be said that there are only a few times in the year when contracts expire - especially with more short-term contracts being offered in recent seasons (Edgar Davids being an example)

[bigdunk]

I don't suppose you could find where that was said, could you? I'd be interested to see more about it as I'm not exactly sure why that would have to be the case - different leagues have contracts end on different dates (due to when seasons begin and end) and if you have enough leagues loaded then you will already see that contracts expire at the end of various months. On my current game (with very few leagues), I have contracts finishing at the end of May, June, August and even October, which would make it seem to me as though the code already has to run more than once a season.

Perhaps, rather than giving exactly one month contracts, we could get the ability to offer contracts until the end of a certain month - if we wanted a 3 month contract, for example, it could start on whatever date it was offered and finish on the last day of the 3rd month after it began (which, of course, would be shown in the contract negotiation screen)

In here, for example:

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/107257-Short-term-player-contracts?highlight=short+term+contract

[SJ234]

I would like to see clubs more likely to accept deals with clauses rather than take it as an excuse to double the amount of money they want for the player. Slighted related I would like to see stronger attribute masking so you would need more reports to find out more about the player

[Sjmclean]

Very well thought out post. I agree especially with the pay per play deal: I have a 35 year old Lee McCulloch who does a useful job patching up defence of DM slot when needed (basically a squad player) and is on £10,000/week in his last year. I offer him £4,000/week and a huge game bonus, he counters with wanting £14'000/week and the same huge bonus. He wont budge and now wont discuss a contract with me.

[Lem]

Well, that's something that would have to be carefully considered (as I'm sure all potential features are before being implemented) but club reputation would probably have a strong influence in how 'big' a club is regarded.

It's very easy to say they need to improve the existing features before adding more but let's be honest, that's not a sustainable business model and 80% of gamers would not buy a slightly improved version of an existing game, especially not for the RRP.

That's what worries me. They had this problem on 2007(?) where players always wanted to move to bigger teams, but often chose teams in the same league that were having less success. Reputation would have to be more dynamic if this was to be implemented as clubs change in size and importance on a yearly basis, there would also have to be a significant reputation difference to tempt players away IMO.

I think it's more important they take the time to get things right, even if it means taking a year out or reducing the price. There's a lot of gamers that would not come back to a game series if it was poor upon release, especially on such a regular basis, just for the sake of a few new features(that themselves don't always work properly).

I can see it being persuasive to kids and new buyers though eventually the number of new buyers will be overshadowed by lost loyal fans. Of course there's only way many games companies will realise that, and it's when people get fed up and look elsewhere.

[Jhemre]

Very good idea, i hope SI reads it...

[heathxxx]

I don't mind things as they are. I can always guarantee that I can double my money on any expensive flop I've signed, by selling them to Manchester City!