sc91

To turn that on it's head, I am sure SI will accurately reflect this in the games box price.

I actually don't think SI struggles on that front. I'll maintain my stance that I had on the debacle that was FM24, they know a product will sell regardless, so subconsciously the effort won't be so high but the need to have the constant flow of cash is. I do wonder to think how bad things must be to cut content and delay.

Honest answer? SI have a monopoly.

I'd imagine it'll still be a full price game (and I think for what FM24 was, that was high). Personally I would pay full price if it became a live service and constantly updating but as it's going to be a 26 version, then I'll wait till then, 25 appears to be a 'beta' of the new works.

That seems fair enough. It certainly puts me into the camp of 'skip this year, wait till the next.' Let them iron out the kinks with 25 and see what 26 can deliver.

Yeah, I do agree, though I will note that this is a feature that has been a request/hope to be updated for years, so if it's with the intent that it taken to come back better, then fine, even then though, at least leave the limp corpse that it currently is in, rather than a removal. Might just be me, a football manager sim without international management feels so immersion breaking.

I'm always a sceptic when a company cuts a long term feature (international management), no doubt to be reintroduced later on down the line as a feature for a later version.

Cutting parts to the game once again screams inability to take on tasks they said they could do. Another version to skip.

Yeah it is, you were still having a league that was transitioning into the modern powerhouse that it is today, and had the overbearing influence of the domestic game that would spill into the national side, the stories of how split England were during those years along club lines echoed with how you had amazing individual players, but a pretty crap team. Those days are gone, there's neither the malice/club rivalry spill over, generally as players just don't have that mentality amongst themselves anymore. You've got players who find genuine value in playing for England rather than a chore that ruining the title race. On the same hand, no one would believe in 2016 if you said you'll reach two finals (and be within a whisker of winning it), a semi final and a quarter final all with Gareth Southgate at the helm. And on the latter, I agree, you can't, but you can have the arrogance and swagger to demand it. Reality is that for the last four tournaments, England have been there for there abouts, there isn't going to be some massive tail off in player depth, England have a realively young squad and beyond that a likely conveyor belt of talent in the youth groups. So, yeah, outside looking in, this isn't England of those years, there is, at least in my eyes, an inevitability that they'll win something. Much like the German side under Low, or Spain during the all conquering Barcelona era, to me, it's when you win one, not if.

Sometimes a manager/coach goes as far as they can go, and someone else is needed to pick up the reins and complete the job. Top of my head, it's like the Eagles under Andy Reid, no matter what happened they just couldn't get over the line, someone else came in, used the nucleus (near enough) and got them the maiden win. It's also why it is an appealing job for any manager with an eye to international management, England has all the components in place, to the point that even the reserves are players of quality. Rather than the 90s/00s when you were crap, the reality is that with England it's a case of when you'll win one, not if.

You've got some of the best young talent in the world delivering in the too leagues in the world. Key players over the past 6 years? You've failed in the past 6 years. England youth is strong, one residing notion that was missed during this is that the core is actually pretty damn good, and they're really young. Saka, Bellingham, Foden, Rice, Palmer, Mainoo, list goes on. That's a ridiculously strong young team and they first name internationals. Gut feeling is like Germany where these players will gel and have time to deliver. Frankly, you need a manager to do so.

That's it, the second you actually put it on Spain, they were all over the place, gaps coming the defense, midfield absolutely not having an idea where to go, and low and behold England scored a quite deserved goal. Horseshite that other teams had chances they could have buried, welcome to football, England equalised and then took the foot straight off a Spanish side they'd give the run of the field for 60 minutes and then now had them all in a panic. **** poor management, and going 'oh well, they were the best' is absolutely copium, you had them vulnerable, weak, open and on the ropes and then sat back after equalising, baffling. The Italians were the same but at least have quality in defense to fend off such attack, but my word, we say people see football through different lenses and it might be my slight bias to following a team where stats don't tell the story, but they were absolutely there, wide open, ready to be beaten.

Each to their own, I'll sit in neutrality but England *let* Spain control that.

Really? That backline faltered immediately when they had a threat in number 9. No coincidence that once Watkins was on that Spain were open. They had 60 minutes of a training game vs Harry Kane.

Outside looking in, this is the one they should have won. Spain were poor.