[Discussion] Player Contracts

[Saethdar]

I am confused by the constant harping by my players to play "first team" football - here's why:

I play a 4-2-3-1 formation in the EPL, usually with one replacement for each position, for a total of 22 players. Then I usually add a backup or hot prospect for the leftover positions to max out my squad at 25.  However, I've been managing a team for 10 years and still can not for the life of me understand why my players are complaining to me about a lack of first-team football.  First of all, NONE of the players have a contract above "Rotation."  Their agents didn't like it, and they charged more for that (which is their job, I understand), but ultimately, it is the player who agrees to the contract.  Also, for the majority of the team, playing half of the season (or more, due to injuries) should certainly justify their "rotation" status - let alone "Backup," or "Hot Prospect!" (How many "Backup" goalkeepers do we see in a season?)  I feel that this is a VERY undefined area of the game that has neither been addressed adequately in the manual, or in the game as far as player or manager expectations go.  As managers, we should not be getting complaints from players that acknowledge they are backups or hot prospects, period.  The prospect of signing for us may be less attractive (hence the higher salaries required to entice them - fair enough) but they should "know" what they signed up for.

Comments and feedback welcome, naturally.

Saethdar

[Cougar2010]

One of the SI staff did give an overview a while ago but I can't remember it exactly.

I rarely have issues and have used the following for well over 10 years:

Key - Plays most games although often happy with two out of three.

First Team - One in two.

Rotation - One in three.

Backup - One in four.

 

Those are starting, not sub appearances.

They are also then modified by player rep & hidden attributes like loyalty, ambition etc.  High loyalty reduces the ratio, high ambition pushes expectations up.  Aside from his contract and squad status if a player is say a 4* player and the best in his position on paper he'll expect to play as a first teamer irrelevant of his contract.  If he has high ambition & low loyalty then he'll expect more still.

After a couple of seasons at a club you should get an idea of which players complain more than others.

[Saethdar]

Thanks, I appreciate the feedback. However, I don' t think that the "ratio" of games played per player is accurate as befits real life.  I can understand that high ambition, loyalty, player reputation etc. would affect the players' expectations (which should affect their demands for their next contract).  However, there are some additional factors involved.  If they have *agreed* to play for a club as a Rotation or Backup player, there should be dialogue options available to the manager to reflect the appropriate squad status.  And you mentioned that "aside from his contract and squad status, if a player is a 4* player... etc."  There should NOT be exceptions.  If the player is unwilling or unhappy to play at anything less than a "first-team" basis, that should be addressed during contract negotiations.  At the moment, the only issue that the players bring up is their wage (AI agents do bring up requested squad statuses, which is fantastic, and demand more compensation if the player isn't given the squad status that they want, which is also great, although it gets a bit exorbitant at times).  I would recommend that instead of a "per game" basis, a percentage of played games would be more reasonable.  For example (obviously these are approximations...):

Hot prospect and Backup: 0-10%. Be glad you're registered as part of the first team.
Rotation: 30%: I understand injuries occur. I'll be happy to fill in or take advantage of first-team opportunities.
First team: 30-40%: I am an important player, but understand that I need rest between matches (includes substitutions).
Key player: 40% and over: I am the best that you have and you will play me as often as you can without allowing fatigue to set in (includes substitutions.

As I said earlier, a more succinct definition of player roles and contracts, and their subsequent ramifications in-game, should be specifically detailed in the manual.  As of now, there is almost nothing.  Literally.

Cheers,

Saethdar

[FrazT]

This is an area of the game that I have been critical of for some versions now.  It appears that the game puts a weighting on some competition games above others, so playing 50% of games may not satisfy even a rotation player if he is not getting league games for example.  I have raised this in the Bugs forum and asked for considerably more clarity to enable us to understand what the players are wanting.

Whilst, like Cougar, I rarely have any serious issues with the player demands, it seems ridiculous that when you are picking a team, you are not necessarily picking the best players but having to check your promises to make sure that they are all getting their game demands.

I had an issue last season with my 4-1-2-2-1 formation where I play the same 2 players ( on Rotation status) in rotation in the DM position.  Apart from 2 games where 1 was injured and the other suspended, when I played another player at DM, they played all the rest of the games between them.  At one point towards the end of the season, they both complained withing 2 days of each other about not getting enough first team football!

[ilkork]

+1 all the way from me!

Thank god we have a mod on our side for that stupid thing that's been going on for some years now...
I know how to handle it when situations like these arise, but man, not realistic at all.

Player: I want more match time.
Me: Ok, fair enough.

I then continue doing exactly whatever I was doing before, I offered him the same amount of matches as before, and the promise still succeeds .
So, why moaning in the first place?


I understand @Cougar2010's explanation, which makes sense, but @Saethdar's reply makes more sense.
If a player agrees to a Rotation status, then he should NOT complain. If he feels he is the best in his position compared to the rest of my team, he should have asked for a higher squad status in the contract negotiations screen and/or have it locked.
Period.

 

[Saethdar]

Agreed, @ilkork. Or at best, semi-negotiable (which I still haven't figured out the point of, yet... another area that could benefit from a little extra attention )

[ilkork]

Yeah, I should have added "and/or have it locked".
Did it now .
Semi-negotiable isn't a bad idea as well.

Off-topic about that: For example, you may have your transfer offer accepted for 8M and the player has the minimum fee as semi-negotiable and the max he can accept is 30M, because he treats your club as stepping stone and he won't accept you putting unrealistic values, like 100M.


Let's hope they improve this area for FM18 mate...

[Neil Brock]

Reviewed so locked.