Board Satisfaction Seems Off

[Toronto Blizzard]

I'm not sure this is the most appropriate place for this (so, Mods, please feel free to move), but I've never had an "E" rating before, especially when you consider:

• With the exception of going out a round early in the Pokal, I'm "on course," or better on all of the metrics.
• I was predicted to finish ninth, but am currently second, nearly halfway through the season.
• Other vision metrics (graduate players from the youth team and sign four-year contracts) are premature to judge on (I've been in the job seven months)

Is this a bug?  Is there something else I can do about this?  I had a bit of a bad run of form in the Bundesliga, but have turned it around the last few games.

Edited July 13, 2020 by Toronto Blizzard

[FrazT]

To be honest, this module is flawed and needs some adjustment. The idea is good but the boards interpretation of your performance is sometimes way off.

[KingCanary]

36 minutes ago, FrazT said:

To be honest, this module is flawed and needs some adjustment. The idea is good but the boards interpretation of your performance is sometimes way off.

I find their attitude to transfers to be the weirdest part.

There seems to be no interest from my board in whether the player I've signed is actually good and playing well- instead it is all about what add ons were in the deal or if the wages were reasonable. It also can't differentiate between deals done by me, the board or my DoF. The board signed two players for me when they arrived yet those deals still appeared in my performance review.

Competition performance seems to work reasonably well though.

[Toronto Blizzard]

Update: I was sacked mid-February.  In fairness, after a hot start (7W 0L 0D) things went sideways (3W 7L 5D).  Still I was sixth at the time and the previous manager got years to take the club to 8th, 11th, and 12th place finishes.  

Oh well, back to the job ads...