The curious case of the young striker and the transfer system in FM

[hursty2]

It isn't the definition of 'fm' value though. I think it would make the game too easy if you could just instantly look at a player and know exactly what you could get for them at any given moment, it would make the decision to sell players far too simple. It is MUCH MUCH better as is, where the value is a rough estimate based on a range of factors, but what you can sell them for is a 'hidden' value of what teams are actually willing to pay. IRL clubs won't just know automatically what they can sell a player for. Every time they set a value themselves they will always risk either putting teams off or undercutting what other teams would actually pay.

Well I think value should be hidden, if a player is playing well clubs obviously value them highly but you shouldn't know this. With the current value figures I can double a players value and sure as hell get my man but with it hidden I'd have to place a value on him myself, hoping that it actually reaches the clubs selling point. If a player has longer on his contract his hidden value is naturally bigger than it would be with a year left, but then again look at the RVP sale, 24M for a player in the last year of his contract was he worth that? **** yeah.

This coupled with a hidden star rating system would make the game more focused on a players performances with regards to transfers and allow managers to be more judgemental on player values. Gone should be the days of players not playing 5 games during a season and still being bought for 20M because they have a good CA and a high rep. More risk would be involved with transfers rather than the simple, oh **** I've made a mistake by signing a injury prone/home sick nonce.

[Herbert Fandel]

Well I think value should be hidden, if a player is playing well clubs obviously value them highly but you shouldn't know this. With the current value figures I can double a players value and sure as hell get my man but with it hidden I'd have to place a value on him myself, hoping that it actually reaches the clubs selling point. If a player has longer on his contract his hidden value is naturally bigger than it would be with a year left, but then again look at the RVP sale, 24M for a player in the last year of his contract was he worth that? **** yeah.

This coupled with a hidden star rating system would make the game more focused on a players performances with regards to transfers and allow managers to be more judgemental on player values. Gone should be the days of players not playing 5 games during a season and still being bought for 20M because they have a good CA and a high rep. More risk would be involved with transfers rather than the simple, oh **** I've made a mistake by signing a injury prone/home sick nonce.

I agree with all of this. The only thing I would add is that because the current fm 'value' has no bearing on what teams will pay, it is already hidden.

I prefer this indicative number to simply a blank column, but problems arise when people like Shakes (and many many others) misunderstand.

[Shakes]

It isn't the definition of 'fm' value though. I think it would make the game too easy if you could just instantly look at a player and know exactly what you could get for them at any given moment, it would make the decision to sell players far too simple. It is MUCH MUCH better as is, where the value is a rough estimate based on a range of factors, but what you can sell them for is a 'hidden' value of what teams are actually willing to pay. IRL clubs won't just know automatically what they can sell a player for. Every time they set a value themselves they will always risk either putting teams off or undercutting what other teams would actually pay.

It's the definition of value in the English language, FM can't just go changing the lexicon because it suits it! If the "value" field in FM is supposed to represent some other concept unrelated to the economic one then it should be called something else. Or deleted from the game completely, since if you want to play the realism card teams have to send out feelers to other clubs to work out what a player would be worth (the equivalent of offering a player to clubs).

I agree with all of this. The only thing I would add is that because the current fm 'value' has no bearing on what teams will pay, it is already hidden.

I prefer this indicative number to simply a blank column, but problems arise when people like Shakes (and many many others) misunderstand.

The only people who misunderstand are SI who lack the basic understanding of what value actually means. It's fairly basic economics that the value of something is what someone will pay for it. The game is absolutely broken to display anything else and label it as value.

[Herbert Fandel]

It's the definition of value in the English language, FM can't just go changing the lexicon because it suits it! If the "value" field in FM is supposed to represent some other concept unrelated to the economic one then it should be called something else. Or deleted from the game completely, since if you want to play the realism card teams have to send out feelers to other clubs to work out what a player would be worth (the equivalent of offering a player to clubs).

I think they could change it to 'Estimated Value', but then that would look silly and they should just shorten it to value, with the meaning being totally bloody obvious from the context, which is arguable what they have done already.

I would also argue that that isn't what value means in the English language. Is the value of something you own what you would sell it for or what someone would pay for it? the definition of value doesn't give and answers and is open to interpretation.

'Value' is definitely the most appropriate term for this quite clearly estimated value field, and I personally don't think that a few people failing to realise that is sufficient cause for change. Getting rid of it isn't an improvement, as most managers will know more or have an idea of a 'value' for their player that they can set, but of course this will have no bearing on buying/selling price.

[Äktsjon Männ]

'Value' is definitely the most appropriate term for this quite clearly estimated value field, and I personally don't think that a few people failing to realise that is sufficient cause for change. Getting rid of it isn't an improvement, as most managers will know more or have an idea of a 'value' for their player that they can set, but of course this will have no bearing on buying/selling price.

Actually it's a meaningless concept so I can't see how it's needed in the game other than for behind the screens calculations. Real life players do not walk around with price tags attached to their foreheads. Since it virtually never represents what the player would go for anyway (i.e it's not what the selling team values their player) then what's it for? Some sort of loose representation of a players worldwide reputation is the only use one can find for it but that can surely be presented in some less precise and more abstract terms that you can put into real life context.

[Herbert Fandel]

Actually it's a meaningless concept so I can't see how it's needed in the game other than for behind the screens calculations. Real life players do not walk around with price tags attached to their foreheads. Since it virtually never represents what the player would go for anyway (i.e it's not what the selling team values their player) then what's it for? Some sort of loose representation of a players worldwide reputation is the only use one can find for it but that can surely be presented in some less precise and more abstract terms that you can put into real life context.

I completely disagree. The fact it is estimated from a variety of different factors allows you to keep a track of these factors. If it starts dropping rapidly you know their contract is running out, if it starts going up you can normally assume their reputation is rising in a decent way.

I think it is a useful tool in-game, despite having next to no bearing on how much a player changes hands for, and I personally want it to stay how it is.

Making it an exact possible sale figure = game ruining, makes the sale decision instant

Removing it = taking away a useful indicator that is only harmful in the eyes of those who don't understand it.

Leaving it as is = pretty good option

Relabelling to "Estimated Value" = makes sense in that it would clear it up for those who can't understand, but would just be shortened to "value" on most screens anyhow

[hursty2]

That's the thing though, value is personal depending on which perspective you take. People may value there players very highly thus not accepting many bids from the AI on what they consider to be a good value for them. It also works the other way, I may pay over the odds on a player worth 2M to the selling club but I come in with a bid of 10M because I feel that he would be invaluable to my side where as he's very dispensable to the AI. I've paid well over the odds but I've got my man and the AI is laughing all the way to the bank.

[Herbert Fandel]

That's the thing though, value is personal depending on which perspective you take. People may value there players very highly thus not accepting many bids from the AI on what they consider to be a good value for them. It also works the other way, I may pay over the odds on a player worth 2M to the selling club but I come in with a bid of 10M because I feel that he would be invaluable to my side where as he's very dispensable to the AI. I've paid well over the odds but I've got my man and the AI is laughing all the way to the bank.

Just like in real life football

changing to to a 'realistic sale value' like some above have suggested would kill this element of chance from the game.

[Äktsjon Männ]

I completely disagree. The fact it is estimated from a variety of different factors allows you to keep a track of these factors. If it starts dropping rapidly you know their contract is running out, if it starts going up you can normally assume their reputation is rising in a decent way.

I think it is a useful tool in-game, despite having next to no bearing on how much a player changes hands for, and I personally want it to stay how it is.

Making it an exact possible sale figure = game ruining, makes the sale decision instant

Removing it = taking away a useful indicator that is only harmful in the eyes of those who don't understand it.

Leaving it as is = pretty good option

Relabelling to "Estimated Value" = makes sense in that it would clear it up for those who can't understand, but would just be shortened to "value" on most screens anyhow

The label makes no difference. The fact that it's presented as a precise numerical figure is what's misleading people. A player can't have a universal value anyway. He's worth what the selling club is willing to sell him for or what the buying club is willing to pay. You don't need value to track a players contract status and their reputation could be represented in some more meaningful and less precise terms. If not, at least round the figures to make it look less like an exact calculation and more like a rough estimation. How can someone having a £12.25m value displayed in their profile be seen as anything other than the going price?

There's just no real life context for player value the way it's represented in FM.

[hursty2]

Just like in real life football

changing to to a 'realistic sale value' like some above have suggested would kill this element of chance from the game.

Not if it was hidden, it could be the same as the current system with an actual realistic sale value added to the figure. Gone are the 10K youngsters that get bids rejected of 5M, the club will value this player at 5M and you will actually have to bid a reasonable amount instead of people moaning that they're 10K. Which, of course, is what most reasonable players will do but I just feel that we'll see more flops and great bargains if this system was implemented. Although, the whole transfer system needs changing and AI teams need to be smarter.

[Neil Brock]

We're aware of a lot of the stuff raised so far in this thread and it is being looked at for any future incarnation of FM. Unfortunately the way in which the AI and transfer system works, no way of redoing the code for this version.

[Herbert Fandel]

Not if it was hidden, it could be the same as the current system with an actual realistic sale value added to the figure. Gone are the 10K youngsters that get bids rejected of 5M, the club will value this player at 5M and you will actually have to bid a reasonable amount instead of people moaning that they're 10K. Which, of course, is what most reasonable players will do but I just feel that we'll see more flops and great bargains if this system was implemented. Although, the whole transfer system needs changing and AI teams need to be smarter.

As far as I know from my dabbles in illicit programs (this is going back to about fm2005 though, not used them since I grew up), there is already a hidden sale figure seperate to the 'value' in the game.

[NotMyCat]

We're aware of a lot of the stuff raised so far in this thread and it is being looked at for any future incarnation of FM. Unfortunately the way in which the AI and transfer system works, no way of redoing the code for this version.

Good to know, there has been a pretty good debate in this thread so it's nice to know it won't be wasted

[Äktsjon Männ]

As far as I know from my dabbles in illicit programs (this is going back to about fm2005 though, not used them since I grew up), there is already a hidden sale figure seperate to the 'value' in the game.

Well obviously it's still there, that's how the AI teams all know to bid the exact amount they know will be accepted. Making this visible would obviously be even worse game design. The less exact manner the player 'value' can be represented the better.

[Herbert Fandel]

Well obviously it's still there, that's how the AI teams all know to bid the exact amount they know will be accepted. Making this visible would obviously be even worse game design. The less exact manner the player 'value' can be represented the better.

I agree, and although I have been strongly defending the maintaining of the 'value' column, I don't have anything I can say against your point that an estimed value might not need to differentiate between 12 and 12.25 million, other than that given that there is a need to differentiate between 1k and 2k, where do you draw the line?

My comment which you are quoting was more to show I don't understand hursty's point, and still don't.

[Äktsjon Männ]

I agree, and although I have been strongly defending the maintaining of the 'value' column, I don't have anything I can say against your point that an estimed value might not need to differentiate between 12 and 12.25 million, other than that given that there is a need to differentiate between 1k and 2k, where do you draw the line?

My comment which you are quoting was more to show I don't understand hursty's point, and still don't.

Different rounding between 1-10k, 10k-100k, 100k-250k is a way and it is how it's done anyway, otherwise you could have players worth £10.251m. Anything above 10m should be in 5m increments, for example. Definitely no decimals.

Although what I'd prefer is not having any visible value figures at all. Make the player use their brain when trying to figure out what amount to start their bidding from. The AI will have it's hidden figures anyway.

[jayahr]

Does a site like transfermarkt.de exist in the Uk as well?

The market values given there are nowadays quoted very regularly in the German media, even though these values do not take age or contract duration into account (e.g. a 35-year-old keeper with an expiring contract can still have a value of 5m there). In the end we all know that this is just some kind of estimate and that such values do not represent factual transfer values which are driven by a lot of other things as well.

Having a value is fine with me. We must just be aware that they are not definite figures.

[Herbert Fandel]

Does a site like transfermarkt.de exist in the Uk as well?

The market values given there are nowadays quoted very regularly in the German media, even though these values do not take age or contract duration into account (e.g. a 35-year-old keeper with an expiring contract can still have a value of 5m there). In the end we all know that this is just some kind of estimate and that such values do not represent factual transfer values which are driven by a lot of other things as well.

Having a value is fine with me. We must just be aware that they are not definite figures.

I agree completely, and would also note that the current FM model apparently does an even better job than your website!

[jambo14]

Does a site like transfermarkt.de exist in the Uk as well?

The market values given there are nowadays quoted very regularly in the German media, even though these values do not take age or contract duration into account (e.g. a 35-year-old keeper with an expiring contract can still have a value of 5m there). In the end we all know that this is just some kind of estimate and that such values do not represent factual transfer values which are driven by a lot of other things as well.

Having a value is fine with me. We must just be aware that they are not definite figures.

Why not just get rid of the player values then

[Svenc]

Why not just get rid of the player values then

Because you want a rough estimate as to what you can demand should you want to get rid of a player. That is how I view the "value" anyway. It's also a very dynamic thing.

The values on Transfermarkt.de are significantly higher on average and best case scenarios for the club who has a player under contract and for whom there is demand. An example for this I usually take is that of Luca Toni, when he was still at Bayern and then manager van Gaal wanted to get rid of him. At that time, Transfermarket.de had Toni listed with an estimated transfer value of about 10 millions of Euro. But because there wasn't actually that much demand, in parts because his contract at Bayern was massive and Toni thus quite an expensive player to pay for, they had to let him go for: zero Euros, nada, nichts.

[eple]

To update you on the original post the striker had a out-of-his-depth-season in the PL, scoring 2 goals in 23 games. His value dropped to £2.5m and I was able to sell him for that to a lower half EPL-team.

[Guest]

That's actually worse, rather than take a gamble on a young English striker with potential the buying club have paid for a young English striker who failed to make the grade at the first time of asking.

This assumes that his performances were in line with his goal tally rather than being a very good player let down by the rest of the team.

[eple]

That, or that he continued to improve his ability through training and game time. As my test showed offers came in only when he had a higher CA, though I concur that I might not have given the reputation test enough time.

He was backup to an Argentine newgen striker who scored around 20 goals in 33 games, so it wasn't a case of his team playing badly. He only rarely stepped up when given a chance.

At the other end I sold both my right and left back. Looking at their ability it was clear they were only average Championship quality. They had done alright though and started 25 and 17 PL-games and a few sub appearance, with AVR of 7.09 and 7.21. One had value of £2m and the other £3.3m. Selling them I only got £850k and £550k respectively (to a Championship and a League one club).

I'm guessing it has something to do with me massively over-performing. An AI-club would never be able to get promoted to PL and do well with such low CA-players. That scenario should perhaps not occur to begin with.

[m_fenton]

Just an idea here - if value was removed could you instead go to your staff for ideas of an asking price? (Similarly to how you would go to them about training etc). It would be dependent on their judging player ability/potential values, business sense etc. It would also give more reason to leave transfers to your DoF as you would be relying on their judgment rather than risking it yourself.

[Herbert Fandel]

Just an idea here - if value was removed could you instead go to your staff for ideas of an asking price? (Similarly to how you would go to them about training etc). It would be dependent on their judging player ability/potential values, business sense etc. It would also give more reason to leave transfers to your DoF as you would be relying on their judgment rather than risking it yourself.

My response, for the purposes of discussion and not for criticism, would be as follows:

-Wouldn't they just give you the current 'value' ? Then it isn't removed but instead just changed so you have to click an extra button to get it.

-Or they could give you an exact value, which would remove the fun.

-Or they could give you an exact value with an element of risk, with what you said 'relying on their judgment', but then this would begin to sound a bit like the current 'value' in my eyes, or at least a line between an exact value on one end and the current value on the other, based on their judgment.

What about non-league staff with the lowest possible attributes, would they get their estimates wildly wrong?

[Äktsjon Männ]

-Or they could give you an exact value with an element of risk, with what you said 'relying on their judgment', but then this would begin to sound a bit like the current 'value' in my eyes, or at least a line between an exact value on one end and the current value on the other, based on their judgment.

What about non-league staff with the lowest possible attributes, would they get their estimates wildly wrong?

Well that already happens anyway. Scouts estimate the price a player would be sold for. This is more or less them showing you the hidden value, except they obfuscate it by giving you a range.

[Herbert Fandel]

Well that already happens anyway. Scouts estimate the price a player would be sold for. This is more or less them showing you the hidden value, except they obfuscate it by giving you a range.

Fair enough, but I would still prefer to retain the 'value' colum. I agree that adding, perhaps in the player report page, a 'estimated sale value' wouldn't be a bad idea for some players, and would perhaps even enhance realism, even thoguh I personally wouldn't like it.

[NobleZarkon]

Your young striker is still by far the most valuable player in the squad, but he has just a year left on his contract. His demands are still the same and his coaches now believe that he will become a good PL-player in the future, but you as the manager knows that he will likely struggle for a few years in the PL before producing the goods and in that time you will look to bring in a lot of players that will ask for big wagers. However, his demands are still the same, expecting key status and clauses that seems unreasonable. Now you can afford to pay him, but is he worth it? In your mind he is a great prospect, not a key player.

Perhaps the other clubs did the same analysis and came to the same conclusion you did?

[Sir_Liam]

I agree with a lot of points in this thread, because the AI's failure to recognise talented young players is probably my main annoyance with the FM series over the last few years.

I think on FM2007 it was too far the other way. The AI seemed to be able to spot my young players' potential far too easily, and my chairman was forever selling off young prospects. At some point something changed, and now the AI can never find talented lower league players, presumably because the reputation system is either not calculated well enough, or it holds too much sway in AI transfer decision making.

Another issue is players refusing to transfer to clubs who are on their level, or sometimes even above their level. I'm managing a team from Liechtenstein right now, as well as Liechtenstein's national team. There are players in my national squad who are released by their clubs, and then never get signed by another team. My team is one of the best teams in the Swiss 3rd tier now, and the players refuse to even negotiate. AI teams seem to steer clear quite often as well, which is either because they're not spotting the player, or because they know the player won't sign.

I also have quite a few talented young players on amateur contracts from my club's amateur days. It took 5 years for the AI to even attempt to poach one of them. I have one player on an amateur contract who has scored a lot of goals at our level, according to my coaches can be a good Super League player, and also has a good CA for our level, and some international goals. I am not worried in the slightest about him being poached though. Why pay money to him when he's happy and the AI has no plans to sign him?

Reputation must be what is causing these problems. It's stopping the AI spotting lower league talent, and is making players refuse to even negotiate a contract with the sort of club they should be very happy to play for. This is the number one thing I'd like SI to focus on for FM2014.

[BiggusD]

The reputation system is definitely not sophisticated enough to be used as extensively as it is in so many parts of FM.

In order to prevent unrealistic transfers, AI clubs only sign players with same-ish reputation as themselves. This is understandable, but it does prevent scenarios like in the OP from playing out realistically. At the same time, performance can't be an important factor for transfers because av.r and goals in non-full detail leagues cannot be trusted. I would say that given the tendency to award all eleven players higher av.r for team performance when the team wins with three goals or more, AI av.r cannot be trusted at all and it is clear that the transfer system cannot differentiate between players and AI. For instance, my team's av.r ranges from 7.20 to roughly 8.0 in one season, where full backs and keepers have the lowest ratings and my star defensive midfielder has the highest rating. The competition may have a top goalscorer near the 7.70 mark but the rest of the team often drops below 7.0. If the AI signed players based primarily on ratings and goals it would be too easy for the human user since I could sign a 38 games, 0 goals, 4.50 av.r striker virtually for free and turn him into a 38-38-7.70 striker if his attribute distribution is the right one for my tactic... and then sell him on for a huge profit.

I honestly can't think of a simple way to improve the current valuation system.

No simple way because it would have to include another factor or ten into the system, which would mean instructing thousands of researchers to evaluate new stuff. Right now we have CA, PA and reputation. It is clearly not enough. Reputation is divided into Current, Home and World in the database IIRC. What do we need to make sure that an 18 year old striker who impresses in The Championship for a newly promoted, low reputation team and has a PA that could see him in the Premier League in the future, gets spotted by Premier League clubs? Media Buzz Factor? A fourth reputation factor driven by ratings, PotM and goal stats that can rise very quickly and at the very least draw the attention of bigger clubs?

[whilewolf]

Here's a very simple idea that would go some way to improving things. Allow the Reputation of player under 21 years old to increase at a far faster rate, also allow the Reputation of those over 31 to decrease at a far faster rate

[Jops14]

I thought value was calculated based on the current salary combined with years on contract and club/player rep.

I think the reason OP couldn't sell his player, is possibly because his clubs rep wasn't high enough, sometimes I find at lower rep clubs bigger teams don't really get all that interested in your players. At NEC I had trouble selling players who would do well in the division until I played then a lot more to get their own rep up.

Selling does become easier with more league on, I put all european leagues to view only, and you then get far more offers coming in from elsewhere.

[pigfacemonkeyman]

Here's a very simple idea that would go some way to improving things. Allow the Reputation of player under 21 years old to increase at a far faster rate, also allow the Reputation of those over 31 to decrease at a far faster rate

That would shrink the window for tutoring. Reputation is too much of a jack of all trades.

[Cadijk van Kaarhandel]

I’ve completed a season and a half with Aberdeen, winning the league in Season 1 and finishing 3rd in a Champions League Group with Barce, Juve and Shakhtar Donetsk. I’m still in all 4 cups in February season 2, the transfer window has just closed, and I’ve had zip/nada interest in my players.

My overall budget is low - £50k/week wages with my top earner getting £6k/week. My player values have remained low, I think £600k is the value of my highest priced player.

It would seem reasonable that in light of these facts and after 18 months success I would have been hit with an influx of bids by clubs looking for a bargain, particularly from South of the Border.

I’m not complaining too much – I want to keep hold of my players – but it seems extremely unrealistic that nobody has even so much as publically expressed an interest in my overperforming stars. In real life we’d’ve been swamped by bids from the financial behemoths of English League 1 and the likes.

[fuhrerul]

if value is removed from the game then:

- if u want to buy a player u scout him and the scout will give u an estimated cost or enquire his club about him( things that are already in the game)

- if u want to sell a player u offer him to clubs with no set price and interested clubs make offers with how much they are willing to pay and u can negociate like u do when u buy a player or refuse if they are far from your request; or u can ask the dof(or other staff) to sell him or offer him to clubs and see who's interested and how much they would pay

as it is now in the game player value is mostly useless and misleading

[eple]

I’ve completed a season and a half with Aberdeen, winning the league in Season 1 and finishing 3rd in a Champions League Group with Barce, Juve and Shakhtar Donetsk. I’m still in all 4 cups in February season 2, the transfer window has just closed, and I’ve had zip/nada interest in my players.

My overall budget is low - £50k/week wages with my top earner getting £6k/week. My player values have remained low, I think £600k is the value of my highest priced player.

It would seem reasonable that in light of these facts and after 18 months success I would have been hit with an influx of bids by clubs looking for a bargain, particularly from South of the Border.

I’m not complaining too much – I want to keep hold of my players – but it seems extremely unrealistic that nobody has even so much as publically expressed an interest in my overperforming stars. In real life we’d’ve been swamped by bids from the financial behemoths of English League 1 and the likes.

I have a similar situation now. Two season completed in the Premier league with Crewe and managed a 4th and 3rd place and got to the quarter finals of the CL. Most of my team is young newgens and 5 that I can recall have been classed as 'wonderkids', two nineteen year olds from my academy was called up to the England national squad and one of them now has 8 caps. One of my players won the European golden boy awards and also young player of the year, etc,etc. So far, not a single offer for any of my players. One player attracted some interest from Chelsea that never resulted in something concrete. I would expect it to be much harder. Now I can sign a bunch of 5* potential youngsters and just keep them around until they become worldclass and my team walks over the big sides.

[TGP]

I am having big issues with value of players. My scouts have come back with some very highly rated players with really low value. Probably future superstars. When I go to buy them I can't. Even if the club is lower division and I offer more money than they make in 2 years they refuse. Every good young player costs 10 or so million for me. a 26k 18 year old right back in second division scotland at motherwell shouldnt cost 15 million to buy. Teams, especially poor teams who know they have to sell, just dont operate like that.

[Guest]

I agree that too many clubs who would normally look at players sales as key to their financial survival are unrealistic in their demands. I have been trying to sign a player from Murcia on my save & they are steadfastly sticking to their £23m asking price, to a top team in a healthy financial position he is probably worth that sort of money but for a 2nd tier club who could do with the £10m plus clauses that I'm willing to pay it's almost suicidal behaviour.

Thankfully for me the lad is in the final year of his contract & I'll be able to approach him with a pre-contract offer in 4 months.

[BiggusD]

I am having big issues with value of players. My scouts have come back with some very highly rated players with really low value. Probably future superstars. When I go to buy them I can't. Even if the club is lower division and I offer more money than they make in 2 years they refuse. Every good young player costs 10 or so million for me. a 26k 18 year old right back in second division scotland at motherwell shouldnt cost 15 million to buy. Teams, especially poor teams who know they have to sell, just dont operate like that.

For youngsters who haven't accomplished anything yet, Value has very little to do with the Asking Price. It is easy to find out who you have to pay silly money for and who you can get cheaply. In the report, if it says "unlikely to want to sell", the club is unlikely to want to sell, and this means they will only accept TOO MUCH money for their player. Are you dumb enough to pay superstar money for a completely unknown fifteen-year-old, then you get to buy them.

That's how it works in FM13. It is this way because in FM12 it was too easy to just go to player search, click on Value, filter by age max 17 and pick up the 11 best talents in the world for a total of 20-30 million. Congratulations you won the game (in 3-4 years).

Now, to how it -should- work, I sort of agree with you. I have several times discovered that I am offering many times as much money as the entire selling club is worth! Now this is unrealistic, and in your example, Motherwell is unlikely to be worth $15m (or at least; ever to refuse an offer of £10m for anyone). In order to balance this aspect of the game, SI needs to take away the ability to search for PA. After all, in real life, there is no search for potential ability, only for high current ability at a young age.

[Herbert Fandel]

SI needs to take away the ability to search for PA. After all, in real life, there is no search for potential ability, only for high current ability at a young age.

Absolutely agree, this type of change is more or less key to my future enjoyment of FM series

[whilewolf]

That would shrink the window for tutoring. Reputation is too much of a jack of all trades.

Your right. Reputation does at least two jobs and splitting it into two attributes might help. Reputation measures how well known a player is and it measures how skilful player is considered. For most players those two are nearly synonymous but for veteran players or great players who have serious injuries they diverge. David Beckham might be a shadow of his former self as a player but his still a world wide celebrity.

With Reputation doing both jobs its going to be very hard to make a system where Beckham will both move to a small league and be able to tutor a great young talent.

[Svenc]

This screenshot is from FM 2012, actually, but an average second division side (Bochum) doesn't even give a contract to Goretzka, by FM 2013 one of the best young prospects on his position in the database, with interest shown from the biggest clubs all over Europe. He might not be as strongly edited into the FM 2012 database, but he certainly isn't the kind of player such a club would just let go just like that, ever.

[RBKalle]

This screenshot is from FM 2012, actually, but an average second division side (Bochum) doesn't even give a contract to Goretzka, by FM 2013 one of the best young prospects on his position in the database, with interest shown from the biggest clubs all over Europe. He might not be as strongly edited into the FM 2012 database, but he certainly isn't the kind of player such a club would just let go just like that, ever.

He's probably in that "grey area" where his attributes and his reputation are too high for him to sign another contract with his current side but still too low to attract the actual interest of bigger clubs from bigger leagues.

That's the biggest flaw FM has, and it's been so for many iterations already... Reputation and PA are a deadly mix because they often don't mix well, so you get talented players rotting as free agents for months before they accept a contract at a same-ish level as their previous one, while better clubs simply don't "see" them.

That, or you get inept youngsters with high PA getting signed for big money despite their apparent lack of quality/performances. And the youngster in the OP's scenario will likely score 30 goals per season at the same club as long as you can get him to renew his contract, safe from better clubs ever making a serious offer