Can we discuss the transfer system for future versions?

[WayneRomney]

Looking forward to another installment of FM and casually thinking of the transfer system we have in today's version.

Sorry for the TL;DR

I am always looking for realism when playing. As such, one of the biggest issues I am running into after a while, on all my saves, is the transfer system as we know it now. Just like all of you I find the behind the scenes glimpses of the top clubs very fascinating and I always devour all things related to transfers and finances when I come across it. It gives us a more realistic view on how transfers take place, from identifying a target to getting the signature.

In order to sell you on the idea it self I will use major clubs involvements, but it relates to all clubs really. I do realize that many of you like the idea of having complete control over transfers, in and out, and negotiate with targets directly. It's just not very realistic.

Being a Man Utd fan I have followed all press conferences this summer. In pre-season games the questions for journos have been 10% about team fitness, tactics bla bla, the rest about transfers going in and out. Every time LvG says something in the lines of "I have told Mr Woodward about my preferences", or "The CEO shares my views, we must get one or two more players before September", "Mr Woodward is working 24 hours on new signings" etc. Also, when LvG was hired, we remember him having a list of names he handed over to Steady Eddie, of potential players he saw could strengthen the team. I can't remember how many players, but it was a list.

When Memphis was signed, it was, according to LvG, a stroke of good fortune that he actually signed for Man Utd. In that press conference LvG said that it was by chance he heard that PSG made an offer (that was accepted) and they essentially hijacked the deal. The reason he heard about it was through his Dutch connections (?).

It wasn't like he was looking at a list a players and suddenly noticed a "bid" icon next to Depays name. Nor did he himself just email them an offer and then just hands him a 5 year contract worth x amount. You know what I'm talking about. However, MD was on Utds shortlist of targets and as such they would have been told regardless, I assume. In that perspective it is very similar to the current system in FM.

All in all we know that there is a lot of discussions between managers and their boards regarding new players. Also for players out. We know that Brendan Rodgers is essentially prevented from making these decisions on his own, he must report his targets to a committee that will in turn do the rest, once they agree with him that this is realistically a player we need/can get.

We also know that some players are bought outright by chairmen. Shevchenko to Chelsea for instance. I also assume Fernando Torres was not signed because Ancelotti wanted him real bad. At least not a 100% Ancelotti signing. The Shevchenko signing is an extreme example, as we don't see stuff like that very often. The point is still that managers have a very limited role in the direct signing and negotiating of players. We also know now that Franco Baldini was very instrumental in the Spurs shopping spree not long ago.

My idea would be to have more interaction with a DoF or the board. The scouting would not include things like market value, as this basically only exists on transfermarkt. There could be a given transfer budget each window and you could be approached by the DoF or board to confirm that yes, we should buy Mats Hummels for 35m, on a 4 year contract worth this much. And you'd of course pay the price if that investment fails miserably, just like Villas-Boas did and not Baldini. Just as you would be dependent on a good board/DoF when selling Ronaldo to Real.

I think the current system is good and fun, but not entirely realistic. For me, it would make the game more difficult and interesting. Your success on the pitch would be more dependent on other factors, just as they are IRL.

Thoughts?

Thanks for reading btw

[isignedupfornorealreason]

The Depay situation would be having him on the shortlist, the moment a bid went through your 'connections' would have emailed you the information about the bid - I believe this happens even via a media story and whatnot even when the supposed bid is private.

The Chairman can and do buy/sell on their own whims at times already.

The DoF also does the same.

Personally, I think it would be great if we had a transfer targets meeting scheduled as and when we, the player, decide. In that meeting we can chat with the assistant and coaches and perhaps the executives about deals and such, but I would wager that most players would not be too impressed if we have to have our deals pre-approved by the money men.

Edit: Where I think these 'meetings' would be good for is that the coach/assistant can often suggest players out of left-field that might be overlooked by the manager. I've picked up a few on their suggestions at times, but you have to actually go through their individual meeting panels for that.

[WayneRomney]

The Chairman can and do buy/sell on their own whims at times already.

In FM15? I have never ever encountered this on FM15. I have seen them accept bids 4x the market value, but never have I experienced a chairman buying a player.

The DoF also does the same.

Yes, I am aware that you can select this function via the personal assistant or something like that. It is not the same tho.

I often use the "Add as transfer target" feature, but mainly to avoid having to pay excessive wages.

In a RL setting I assume managers have their own opinion on a potential value for their own players, and to some extent a value on a transfer target. I also believe that given the real life scenario of Chelseas pursuit of John Stones José Mourinho had many talks with Roman regarding the sizing of bids. I do not believe however that JM had a carte blanche on bidding.

Personally, I think it would be great if we had a transfer targets meeting scheduled as and when we, the player, decide. In that meeting we can chat with the assistant and coaches and perhaps the executives about deals and such, but I would wager that most players would not be too impressed if we have to have our deals pre-approved by the money men.

This is something that could be very cool to see in the future. However, I'm not sure I understand the last statement. Do you believe that a manager today can buy players without the approval of the top brass? Or do mean something else?

[Maaka]

This sounds like a good idea for the future incarnations of FM, even though it would probably need some polishing.

A "manager" today isn't always what it has been before, and there's major differences between what guys like Ferguson/Wenger are (were) responsible for as opposed to head coaches in Norway (i.e.). Likewise, I'm pretty sure that if you look into an english club in L1/L2 (or lower), the manager is just that, the manager, responsible for negotiating transfers and contracts while also managing the squad in training and matches, while head coaches in the top division on Germany (i.e.) may just be in charge of the team on the training ground an during matches, with a director of some sort being responsible for transfer and contract negotiations. Of course the head coach most likely has the opportunity to suggest players to sign (or who to re-sign/let go), but the responsibilities here would probably be set by the board (or chairman/owner alone in some cases), and then we as the managers/head coaches would have to accept that.

I'd think that the most realistic way would be that we (as players) would gain the trust of our board as we "grow" in-game, and would be handed more responsibility with time passing by (if we improve), but occationally we'd have all the power from scratch (depending on level/club).

Basically, the way transfers are depicted today in FM, doesn't quite reflect RL, but it comes closer and closer year after year. Some day it might even be perfect.

But this would be a start.

[WayneRomney]

This sounds like a good idea for the future incarnations of FM, even though it would probably need some polishing.

A "manager" today isn't always what it has been before, and there's major differences between what guys like Ferguson/Wenger are (were) responsible for as opposed to head coaches in Norway (i.e.).

In Tippeligaen the clubs are under insane pressure each year to maintain a good balance in the books. This is why all the clubs have people with economic backgrounds running things. Even in a fairly wealthy club like Molde the manager has very little influence on financial matters. I know we'd like to think they do, but in reality they don't. And now, with FFP it is even more important for some clubs to be diligent.

I have no idea how they run clubs in the lower leagues in England, but I very much doubt that they have the final word on matters related to this.

I agree with your last sections. It is getting better and better and will only improve.

[Maaka]

I think that guys like Wenger/Fergie/Mourinho have quite much to say in these discussions, but even they may not have the final word.

Coaches in Norway I'm sure have the option to tell the chairman/board/director what kind of players they'd like, in some cases even suggest specific players, but have little to nothing to say when it comes to negotiations.

What I meant with mid/lower leagues in England (i.e.) is that clubs may have kinda "small" administrations, and that the managers therefore have bigger responsibilities due to limited resources (there's no directors etc., and the chairmen/boards have other responsibilities to cope with outside football, therefore the manager (and maybe his assistant) are in charge of these things).

As I was saying, for the majority of top level (or top two levels in the major leagues) clubs, the "manager" is more like a (head) coach) and have little responsibility for negotiating contracts/transfers (with some exceptions of course), thus the norm in FM should shift this responsibility away from the manager (including us players) over to the directors/chairmen/boards etc. - all in the name of reality.

PS; you ought to post this in the suggestion thread as well.

[Maaka]

Basically, FM still has quite a long way to go to reach really, really good realism.

Transfer system; is getting better, but if you look at it like this, it's not really realistic.

Player attributes; IRL we don't have attributes on each player to tell if he's so or so good, the actual attributes should be "hidden" and the presentation should be replaced with text describing the players upsides and downsides (see another thread for details).

Player interaction; getting better, but still this is far from perfect.

Interaction with others; much the same as player interactions (press conferences and agent interaction included)

But FM is getting better and better for each incarnation, so I'm confident we'll get thereabouts some day.

SI takes advice from the community every year, and they improve year after year.

[grahamf]

I haven't had a club chairman pester me to make a high profile signing or to sign a player for me in the last few versions of FM. Has it been removed? Or have I just been lucky to not have interfering chairmen?

[isignedupfornorealreason]

This is something that could be very cool to see in the future. However, I'm not sure I understand the last statement. Do you believe that a manager today can buy players without the approval of the top brass? Or do mean something else?

I mean, most players would rather not have the step of having to approve decisions and such. They would prefer things to remain as it is now where it is just assumed the board gives the go ahead for any transfer dealings we go through.

[WayneRomney]

I mean, most players would rather not have the step of having to approve decisions and such. They would prefer things to remain as it is now where it is just assumed the board gives the go ahead for any transfer dealings we go through.

Yes, I assumed this is what you meant after re-reading. I believe in FM15 there is a "block transfer" feature, like if you bid 20x market value for a random player they will block it?

Most players would rather not have this happening, I agree fully. What I was talking about, or trying to explain, was that one could have a system where the player identifies targets and you could have some DoF/CEO behind the scenes work done and then they'd report back to with the results ---- or something like that. It could be that they report back with something like "we have reached an agreement with Bor Dortmund over Hummels. The terms are 30m now, 10 more CL play etc etc. His contract will be 130k per week, 4 years". You could go back and say "give him 3+1 year" etc.

That way one could easily recreate transfer sagas we see today, almost every summer window. CR7, De Gea, Bale, Luis Suarez etc. In the game you never get a sense of the excitement surrounding a transfer. You just make an offer, they counteroffer and you meet somewhere in between. Done in less than 30 seconds. If not, the player gets a 150 mill price tag, you try to unsettle him and move on if fail.

I'm just saying there are options to be explored, opinions to be shared and ideas to be thrown out there. Like maaka says, it could be that you are given more control the more success you have, the longer you stay. I remember reading about David Moyes' scouting methods at Everton and it struck me that he had pretty large room for handling stuff himself, only that Kenwright dealt with the transfer process himself.

[WayneRomney]

I haven't had a club chairman pester me to make a high profile signing or to sign a player for me in the last few versions of FM. Has it been removed? Or have I just been lucky to not have interfering chairmen?

I just took the City job and they wanted high profile signings, but they never forced players on me even tho I never signed big name players.

[Sunstrikuuu]

I just took the City job and they wanted high profile signings, but they never forced players on me even tho I never signed big name players.

I too have never seen anything like that, including playing six seasons with a tycoon at Aston Villa and a season with a tycoon at Bordeaux, both of whom had 'moderately agree' or higher in their ownership profiles and had sign high profile players as a philosophy.

One of the biggest things that could happen to improve the transfer system is better modeling of the behind-the-scenes elements, including more enquiries about players and more pressures in lower leagues (by which I mean things like the bottom half of the Bulgarian first division, say, or the Czech second division) to sell players to maintain cash flow. That's the biggest driver of player movement to England, France et al; that it's really, really hard for the vast majority of teams to avoid folding, and that process simply doesn't exist in FM.

[PVP]

Basically, FM still has quite a long way to go to reach really, really good realism.

Transfer system; is getting better, but if you look at it like this, it's not really realistic.

Player attributes; IRL we don't have attributes on each player to tell if he's so or so good, the actual attributes should be "hidden" and the presentation should be replaced with text describing the players upsides and downsides (see another thread for details).

Player interaction; getting better, but still this is far from perfect.

Interaction with others; much the same as player interactions (press conferences and agent interaction included)

But FM is getting better and better for each incarnation, so I'm confident we'll get thereabouts some day.

SI takes advice from the community every year, and they improve year after year.

I echo this statement, needs improving dramatically on the transfer front especially when it comes to incoming bids, or the lack of....

[Dagenham_Dave]

That way one could easily recreate transfer sagas we see today, almost every summer window. CR7, De Gea, Bale, Luis Suarez etc. In the game you never get a sense of the excitement surrounding a transfer. You just make an offer, they counteroffer and you meet somewhere in between. Done in less than 30 seconds. If not, the player gets a 150 mill price tag, you try to unsettle him and move on if fail.

That's because real life follows a 24 hour clock because it's, you know, real life.

In Football Manager, a day lasts a couple of clicks. A week can be done in a matter of minutes or even seconds.

It's difficult to replicate the same sense of 'drama' surrounding a transfer when things happen so quickly in-game. The De Gea situation, for example. This lasted a good two months in pre-season with speculation back and forth. That time in FM would go on for an hour at most if you played it out in one sitting. You're never going to have the same drawn out experience as in real life, unless you actually play the game in real time. Which no-one who isn't utterly insane does.

[Sunstrikuuu]

That's because real life follows a 24 hour clock because it's, you know, real life.

In Football Manager, a day lasts a couple of clicks. A week can be done in a matter of minutes or even seconds.

It's difficult to replicate the same sense of 'drama' surrounding a transfer when things happen so quickly in-game. The De Gea situation, for example. This lasted a good two months in pre-season with speculation back and forth. That time in FM would go on for an hour at most if you played it out in one sitting. You're never going to have the same drawn out experience as in real life, unless you actually play the game in real time. Which no-one who isn't utterly insane does.

One thing that could be done is to restructure the negotiating process such that offers and counter-offers aren't instant except in a specific set of circumstances. That would include both transfer offers, player contracts and even players resigning. Then add more media interactions in the interim. Currently it's not the transfer drama that's not well replicated - Football Manager doesn't do emotion except insofar as events inspire it in the player - it's the whole frenzy of activity. Imagine playing a summer like Arsenal did this year; you sign a player in June, send out two inquiries for a player, one in July and one in August, and send a few kids out on loan. FM would give you a media event when you signed your player, one for each inquiry and perhaps one or two others. Meanwhile, this year, 'will Arsenal sign a striker?', 'will Arsenal sign a DM?', 'will Arsene spend any money?'... those stories were in major newspapers twice a week, all summer. That's a bit excessive, but there are other things that could be done. Let managers approach agents; let managers ask their players to approach other players - technically against the laws of the game, but the Fabregas-to-Barcelona saga and Steven Gerrard's new book are proof, if it was needed, that both are incredibly commonplace. Let players approach the manager to ask for signings, request that the manager not sign anyone in their position or avoid specific players. Let players, during contract (re)negotiations, ask that they play (or not play) specific positions. Increase the number and range of media events, possibly including players declaring interest in clubs without prompting, agents giving interviews touting clients and players and board members speaking out.

So, for example, you're Tom Whittaker, manager of Arsenal. Danny Welbeck has been ruled out for six months by reason having had a leg fall off. You want another striker, so you declare interest in Karim Benzema. Santi Cazorla approaches you, grateful that you're looking to improve the team up front. Theo Walcott also meets with you; he's concerned that you might beak your promise to play him as a central striker. Barry Glenndenning of the Guardian says it would be madness if you didn't strengthen up front. Young Fiorentina striker Khouma Babacar, fresh from a Europa League hat-trick, says he's always dreamed of playing for Arsenal, and his agent pointedly notes that Fiorentina have refused to open negotiations over a contract extension. An Arsenal fan spokesman screams "get out while you can, Joel!" on a train platform in Stoke. Mesut Ozil used to play just behind Benzema at Madrid, and contacts him privately; I hope you have a good relationship with your player! Fan favorite Thierry Henry says that while Benzema is a great player, he thinks Giroud, Walcott, Sanchez and eventually Welbeck are more than good enough to win you the league, and backs Walcott to get 20 goals if given the chance. One of your board members leaks your transfer budget, weakening your negotiating position with Madrid, but also possibly making Benzema more aware of the pay rise he could get and thus more likely to want to leave. Any or all of these events, plus random-ish news stories could be sprinkled throughout the new spaces in the negotiating process. Some might have obvious consequences, like breaking a promise to a player; others might affect your relationships with other managers or agents or confidence from your board or fans.

Also can we please de-couple wage and bonus ranges from squad statuses? It's extremely silly to have a player who wants to sign as a backup for, say £27k a week, but you can only offer £17k a week for a backup, but he wants £34k to be a rotation player, so you're actually forced to offer him more than his initial asking wage because squad status, wage ask and available wage range aren't linked logically.

[Maaka]

So, for example, you're Tom Whittaker, manager of Arsenal. Danny Welbeck has been ruled out for six months by reason having had a leg fall off. You want another striker, so you declare interest in Karim Benzema. Santi Cazorla approaches you, grateful that you're looking to improve the team up front. Theo Walcott also meets with you; he's concerned that you might beak your promise to play him as a central striker. Barry Glenndenning of the Guardian says it would be madness if you didn't strengthen up front. Young Fiorentina striker Khouma Babacar, fresh from a Europa League hat-trick, says he's always dreamed of playing for Arsenal, and his agent pointedly notes that Fiorentina have refused to open negotiations over a contract extension. An Arsenal fan spokesman screams "get out while you can, Joel!" on a train platform in Stoke. Mesut Ozil used to play just behind Benzema at Madrid, and contacts him privately; I hope you have a good relationship with your player! Fan favorite Thierry Henry says that while Benzema is a great player, he thinks Giroud, Walcott, Sanchez and eventually Welbeck are more than good enough to win you the league, and backs Walcott to get 20 goals if given the chance. One of your board members leaks your transfer budget, weakening your negotiating position with Madrid, but also possibly making Benzema more aware of the pay rise he could get and thus more likely to want to leave. Any or all of these events, plus random-ish news stories could be sprinkled throughout the new spaces in the negotiating process. Some might have obvious consequences, like breaking a promise to a player; others might affect your relationships with other managers or agents or confidence from your board or fans.

Something like this, great, yeah.

Also can we please de-couple wage and bonus ranges from squad statuses? It's extremely silly to have a player who wants to sign as a backup for, say £27k a week, but you can only offer £17k a week for a backup, but he wants £34k to be a rotation player, so you're actually forced to offer him more than his initial asking wage because squad status, wage ask and available wage range aren't linked logically.

Valid point, very much so.

[Cocu]

I do believe that it's good game design to sacrifice a bit of realism for fun (or a reduction of the frustration factor).

[Cheshire Gaz]

One thing that could be done is to restructure the negotiating process such that offers and counter-offers aren't instant except in a specific set of circumstances. That would include both transfer offers, player contracts and even players resigning. Then add more media interactions in the interim. Currently it's not the transfer drama that's not well replicated - Football Manager doesn't do emotion except insofar as events inspire it in the player - it's the whole frenzy of activity. Imagine playing a summer like Arsenal did this year; you sign a player in June, send out two inquiries for a player, one in July and one in August, and send a few kids out on loan. FM would give you a media event when you signed your player, one for each inquiry and perhaps one or two others. Meanwhile, this year, 'will Arsenal sign a striker?', 'will Arsenal sign a DM?', 'will Arsene spend any money?'... those stories were in major newspapers twice a week, all summer. That's a bit excessive, but there are other things that could be done. Let managers approach agents; let managers ask their players to approach other players - technically against the laws of the game, but the Fabregas-to-Barcelona saga and Steven Gerrard's new book are proof, if it was needed, that both are incredibly commonplace. Let players approach the manager to ask for signings, request that the manager not sign anyone in their position or avoid specific players. Let players, during contract (re)negotiations, ask that they play (or not play) specific positions. Increase the number and range of media events, possibly including players declaring interest in clubs without prompting, agents giving interviews touting clients and players and board members speaking out.

So, for example, you're Tom Whittaker, manager of Arsenal. Danny Welbeck has been ruled out for six months by reason having had a leg fall off. You want another striker, so you declare interest in Karim Benzema. Santi Cazorla approaches you, grateful that you're looking to improve the team up front. Theo Walcott also meets with you; he's concerned that you might beak your promise to play him as a central striker. Barry Glenndenning of the Guardian says it would be madness if you didn't strengthen up front. Young Fiorentina striker Khouma Babacar, fresh from a Europa League hat-trick, says he's always dreamed of playing for Arsenal, and his agent pointedly notes that Fiorentina have refused to open negotiations over a contract extension. An Arsenal fan spokesman screams "get out while you can, Joel!" on a train platform in Stoke. Mesut Ozil used to play just behind Benzema at Madrid, and contacts him privately; I hope you have a good relationship with your player! Fan favorite Thierry Henry says that while Benzema is a great player, he thinks Giroud, Walcott, Sanchez and eventually Welbeck are more than good enough to win you the league, and backs Walcott to get 20 goals if given the chance. One of your board members leaks your transfer budget, weakening your negotiating position with Madrid, but also possibly making Benzema more aware of the pay rise he could get and thus more likely to want to leave. Any or all of these events, plus random-ish news stories could be sprinkled throughout the new spaces in the negotiating process. Some might have obvious consequences, like breaking a promise to a player; others might affect your relationships with other managers or agents or confidence from your board or fans.

Also can we please de-couple wage and bonus ranges from squad statuses? It's extremely silly to have a player who wants to sign as a backup for, say £27k a week, but you can only offer £17k a week for a backup, but he wants £34k to be a rotation player, so you're actually forced to offer him more than his initial asking wage because squad status, wage ask and available wage range aren't linked logically.

Great post. The media currently feels like it's on the outskirts of the main game. These suggestions put it right in the thick of it.

[DMaster2]

You already have the option to make the director of football make the signings. I prefer to decide myself who to buy, when and for how much, be it for first team or youths.

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Great post. The media currently feels like it's on the outskirts of the main game. These suggestions put it right in the thick of it.

However, I don't feel SI would test the interactions enough if they did implement it and it would likely be quite irksome.

[Cheshire Gaz]

Agreed that it would be a hell of a lot of work. I wouldn't miss the media interactions if they went completely in their current state. If we ever ended up with anything like Sunstrikuuu's idea it would breathe more life into the gameworld.

[Lawlore]

What I meant with mid/lower leagues in England (i.e.) is that clubs may have kinda "small" administrations, and that the managers therefore have bigger responsibilities due to limited resources (there's no directors etc., and the chairmen/boards have other responsibilities to cope with outside football, therefore the manager (and maybe his assistant) are in charge of these things).

This is a key point shouldn't be lost in all of this- although a lot of the thread is focusing on clubs with big reps and the transfer sagas that dominate the back pages, for the vast majority of clubs that exist, all that hullaballoo simply isn't the transfer process. At smaller clubs with smaller boards and scouting teams, the manager is more involved with identifying and securing targets, more akin to what is currently in game.

So, whilst I like the wall-of-text post and recognise how this would make it more realistic at the top end, it's important to remember this isn't "Premier League Manager", but "Football Manager". The answer is not in looking for a new one-size-fits-all solution, but to make the transfer process realistic across the board and to be appropriate to the club, for both large clubs (in the way mentioned) and small ones.

In some ways, it ties back up to how the DoF role in game is one that was implemented basically as another assistant to the manager, rather than as something that should been both a help and a hindrance- as they are in real life. Another cook making the broth, so to speak.

[Kriss]

However, I don't feel SI would test the interactions enough if they did implement it

Don't be insulting, this isn't the first such comment by you, let it be the last

[isignedupfornorealreason]

Don't be insulting, this isn't the first such comment by you, let it be the last

There's a rule on that now is there?

[Kriss]

There's a rule on that now is there?

Yes there is, you don't insult SI on their own forum.

[Sunstrikuuu]

So, whilst I like the wall-of-text post and recognise how this would make it more realistic at the top end, it's important to remember this isn't "Premier League Manager", but "Football Manager". The answer is not in looking for a new one-size-fits-all solution, but to make the transfer process realistic across the board and to be appropriate to the club, for both large clubs (in the way mentioned) and small ones.

In some ways, it ties back up to how the DoF role in game is one that was implemented basically as another assistant to the manager, rather than as something that should been both a help and a hindrance- as they are in real life. Another cook making the broth, so to speak.

Well, it's a manager simulation that dates back to a time when directors of football weren't really that common. More than anything else, it's an Alex Ferguson simulator, where the player has an iron grip from day 1 over things that they probably shouldn't, no matter what the level. Without some fundamental rethinking of the foundations of the game, I don't think that's going to change.

[Jibby123]

For realism it could be polished but handing over anything regarding transfers in/out and contract negotiations to any AI would be a game-breaker for me. I am the dictator and in control of all and everything (until the chairman tells me I am not ).

[RBKalle]

Directors of football are a relatively new thing in UK, but have been the norm elsewhere (e.g. Italy) for decades, so depending on where you play, the all-knowing, all-seeing manager role is a bit of a stretch.

Actually, the smaller the club, the LEAST input the head coach has on the transfers. Sure, he'd tell the owner "I'd like to have a tall striker like Joe Bloggs from Random FC" or "I think we need a faster winger, what about John Doe?" but it rarely goes beyond that kind of request.

A lower-league coach will never be able to negotiate behind the owner's back to sign a player.

Things may have changed at Top Clubs where the chairman/board aren't truly "into" football or aren't familiar with the domestic scene, so they trust the manager's views, if he's reputable enough. Otherwise the head coach/manager is just the guy picking the starting XI and setting the training schedule.

DoF mode or not, that'd be reflected in a much more aggressive way in FM, especially at a lower level and for clubs with a very interference-prone chairman.

Clubs like Palermo and AC Milan, just to name two with a very vocal owner, shouldn't allow you to run the show... In an ideal setup, you'd be presented with signings you didn't suggest and you didn't even know about... Kinda like "oh, here's This Guy, I think he's a great striker, you'd better play him all the time". And you MUST, otherwise you'll face private and public scrutiny for not complying.

In a lesser fashion, even the "quieter" boards should still try to enforce their own views and choices, unless you're truly one of the most respected managers in the gameworld.

I can hardly imagine an unexperienced guy walking in at any decent Top-tier club and splashing millions on random players with the board signing checks and nodding in agreement.

[samdiatmh]

In FM15? I have never ever encountered this on FM15. I have seen them accept bids 4x the market value, but never have I experienced a chairman buying a player.

It used to be on old versions

I still remember signing Sivok on FM07 as Chelsea boss because it was 'high-profile' enough to appease Abramovich (and stopped him from signing some AMR when we've already got 20 of them) and I needed a DM

haven't had it in the more recent versions (because I've created my own low-interference chairman)