Over the Top Contracts

[South-Side]

I'm seeing this more often while trying to sign better players for my squad.

My Millwall side got promoted to the EPL and I'm now in my third season (2020-2021) and I'm finding hard to sign players, home grown or otherwise as their wage demands are astronomical.

Even a player that is on the transfer list and unwanted at his club has most of the times over the top wage requests when you go for him. As a new club i always thought that things should progress little by little until you get to a big club level. But the wages year in year out are getting ridiculous. And someone who is unwanted at a club should be available for a lower wage than before as it's the case with his market value. But it's totally upside down, you get the knock-off selling price and pay the guy astronomically in wages. And there are no exceptions and in most cases no space to negotiate.

As an example i tried to go through a progressive approach. First season i would set a maximum barrier of 150k maximum per month (i always found it easier to manage finances that way) per player with 2-3 exceptions depending on the player. Second season i went close to the 200k seen as i have a total wage budget of 4 million per month. This summer i wanted to bring in some better players and improve a few of the areas to get that extra push for the title. Finished 4th and 3rd in my second season in EPL. But to do this i have to go in the 400k-500k p/m at least. It's detrimental to finances.

The only approach is to find sound regens and sign them. What do you do in this cases ?

Also it seems to be a disease that if you played well almost half a season you automatically feel entitled for a bigger wage. And you've just signed a 3 or 4 year contract. If you go for the common sense approach in 70-80% of the cases you wind up being in a conflict with the player. This in my opinion is unbalanced and should be toned down.

What do you do with contracts. Just stretch the budget to the max or do you follow a different approach?

[michaeltmurrayuk]

Unless someone is transfer listed by request or is unhappy at the club there isn't much of a reason for them to accept a lower contract elsewhere as they are still getting paid whilst at the club. However I've scouted loads of players who are willing to take paycuts to sign for me so they are out there, though I am currently the smallest side in the Championship.

One thing I have found is that reducing your wage budget tends to reduce the wage demands of the players, and if a player is on a 3 or 4 year contract then I tell them they have plenty of time on their existing contract and won't be getting a raise which shuts them up. Also seems you are setting your wage cap really low, £35K p/w for a Champions League side is really low in todays market.

Generally I consider how good the player is and if I can afford the wages, if not then the player gets sold or not bought, I also try and add in the extra/optional year options into contracts when I can, I've found nearly all players will accept the extra year after 5 games option if they are happy with the rest of the offer, you just need to add it back each time they remove it.

[South-Side]

In the Championship it's easier because the club reputation is close to that of the league, as my side only relegated last year. But when you get to the premiership reputation builds up hard over a period of time. So i'm thinking that players must take in consideration that when they ask for wages.

What i was reffering in my post are only players that are unhappy at their clubs. Listed by the club or by request. I wasn't talking about players that are currently happy and do not intend to swicth clubs and ask for high wages just to get rid of you.

I feel that strictly the desires of a player that is out the door and hasn't even played that much recently are too overpowered.

I go for options almost all the time for important players. 1 year minimum, 2 years if they allow during negotiations.

Last thing that i was confornted with during the weekend:

- I bought a towering young centre back regen from Velez for 10 mil and during negotiation i couldn't get him to get rid of the minimum release clause. Which was 16 mil. After a good first half of the season i tried to sign him to a better contract to get rid of the release clause, i wanted to take advantage of the thing that i pointed above: having played well until december he instantely considered himself a top shelf CB and wanted a raise. He was on 120k at 21 years old and he wanted 596k per month as an improvement. As my whole budget was 4 mil i wasn't going to spend that much on 1 player. In the mean time Valencia bid his release clause and got him. They are paying him 416k p/m.

[Pingdinho]

- I bought a towering young centre back regen from Velez for 10 mil and during negotiation i couldn't get him to get rid of the minimum release clause. Which was 16 mil. After a good first half of the season i tried to sign him to a better contract to get rid of the release clause, i wanted to take advantage of the thing that i pointed above: having played well until december he instantely considered himself a top shelf CB and wanted a raise. He was on 120k at 21 years old and he wanted 596k per month as an improvement. As my whole budget was 4 mil i wasn't going to spend that much on 1 player. In the mean time Valencia bid his release clause and got him. They are paying him 416k p/m.

Whilst this sucks, it seems realistic to me. The player wanted to get a foothold in a decent European league to showcase his skills in order to attract the attentions of a bigger club he can move to later to progress his career. Meanwhile, he (or more likely I guess his agent) wants to squeeze as much cash from you as possible as he/they feel his reputation demands it.

[swansongs]

With the amount of money in the Premier League now, over the next few years real life wages are going to skyrocket and every club will be paying "top 4" amounts (and the best clubs even more).

£100k a week for players in a title-challenging team is probably on the conservative side.

[evora69]

- I bought a towering young centre back regen from Velez for 10 mil and during negotiation i couldn't get him to get rid of the minimum release clause. Which was 16 mil. After a good first half of the season i tried to sign him to a better contract to get rid of the release clause, i wanted to take advantage of the thing that i pointed above: having played well until december he instantely considered himself a top shelf CB and wanted a raise. He was on 120k at 21 years old and he wanted 596k per month as an improvement. As my whole budget was 4 mil i wasn't going to spend that much on 1 player. In the mean time Valencia bid his release clause and got him. They are paying him 416k p/m.

Where did I see that? Hmmmm... All the time that I try to renegotiate a new contract with a young prospect and even backup players that are playing some games and performing well. The players in FM are really greedy and if there's some bigger clubs interested in them even more.

Some times they want 3-4 times more than what they earn, to sign a new contract, and if we dont concede and sell them, they accept a small improve in their contract with the other team. Oh, well...

For many players (depending on his loyalty and ambition) it should be the other way around, ie, if a player plays in Italy for 4 years it should have his life settled there and should only accept to move to Germany if they offer him 3-4 times more money. And should be willing to accept much less from his actual club.

Nevertheless I understand why in the game they are so greedy. If they wherent then the big teams would struggle to sign the better players because they would want unrealistic wages to move unless they were unsettle. In the past FMs that was a real issue. Real big deals would almost never happen and thats even more unrealistic. Deals like the ones of Ronaldo and Bale would never happen in past FMs. I hope it could happen now. I didnt see any but I still hope...