Costav

Antonio Conte, Mourinho, Allegri, even Inter Milan sometimes does it...and this is just considering italian clubs (Conte won with Chelsea too). Repeat with me: "Real life football is not only what happens in England..." "Real life football is not only what happens in England..." "Real life football is not only what happens in England..."

I totally agree with this sentence. The game improved in the last years, that's true. However I was referring not only on direct development of wonderkids, but to young prospect in general. Coming back to the previous example (btw, 22 laugues from 16 countries loaded), Juventus kept Huijsen around 4 years in the U23 team (PLaying in the 4th series in Italy). I found it extremely useless, because they could have developed the player sending him on loan (at least in Serie B) to express his potential. As well as Huijsen, I noticed many other cases (expecially when the club has a B team). I don't fully agree with you on this. It is true that the game is going more and more toward an "easy/accessible" modality (I am one of those who decided to play with hidden attributes because it was becoming too easy), but you can win using non-OP tactics too. However it is true, from what I perceived, that they extremized the positional play and now IFs/ do not cut inside the defenses because there may be a Mezzala occupying the same space. This just as an example. To overcome this issue, we should be able to expressely instruct the players how to move (where to go) in specific situations (exactly as a coach would do during training sessions), but I guess it is too much...

Some of them can developed even later, I guess. In my save, Dean Huijsen is having a very good boost "now" that he's 25. Nonetheless, AI has still a medium/low judgement in development of young players. To stick to this example, he played for the Juventus U23 until the end of the contract, in 2029. No teams bought him earlier, although his rquests were not too high and he has a very good PA (based on scouting judgement).

Positional play has been used for at least 6/8 years outside of the Premier League, although only now is widely adopted by managers in the top5 leagues. As mentioned by other users in other topics, this is the limit of a premier league-centric video game. I don't say that FM is a very bad game, but we need to be honest when evaluating the tactical improvements in the last 5 years: limited (they basically optimized pressing at the team level, which is good, but options are pretty the same from FM19. What they did with some of the new features (agents, club vision, supporters panel) is very good, or at least improved a lot the immersion in the game, but tactics got stuck at middle 10's/late 10's years and this is not what you would expect from football managerial video game (in which you can only develop your tactics and cannot actually play the matches)

Just start as unemployed and then retire yourself. You'll be able to create a new manager that will be allow to coach in every league loaded

You can already do it. For FM24, you can start the game in whatever country that begins the season before the common start for the top 5 league. It may not be 1/7, but I think is close enough.

Give it a couple of seconds, it will come back as intended (right picture). Otherwise click on any team in the calendar and then come back. I know, it's very annoying.

Has this ever happen to anybody? I played overall 20 seasons in FM but I could never spend more than what my budget is... Even when (few days ago) that I used the in-game editor to make one save more challenging (worsening the club finances and making artificially negative the budget), the board changed the budget (from -40 to +15), and reduced drastically the % I can use from players sales (from 100% to 10%). My idea was to create artificially the "have a positive transfer budget after the transfer session" while I had to rebuilt the team, but now I can only try to make the best out of the players available.

I agree 100% on the fact that it should be like this. To maintain the game as realistic as possible, it should be the space for "failure" from the human perspective. Otherwise it will always be easier to overperform compared to the AI. We almost have 100% perfect information availability (100% is achieved by those who use the in-game editor to see CA/PA values of players, never understood where the fun is in doing like this). What I think could be a very good improvement in judging players in other teams is to keep a degree of uncertainty regarding the attributes of the player until he is signed and he does (at least) a short period of training with the new team. If you think about it, you only know "perfectly" the player once you see him every day in training sessions. It will increase the possibility to make "bad choices" from a human point of view. I've playing FM since 2007 and I honestly remember very few bad signings in almost 20 years of playing the game. I don't know if it's just me or not, but IRL the number of bad signing is so much higher than what happens for human manager in FM.

Could it be a specific decision in order to artificially create differences of football style between different countries? At the end, in FM, the football played in Germany is the same played in Italy, in England, in Spain, etc...

Game, set, and match. In addition to this, the tactical part of the game is implemented only based on what the Premier league offers. The inverted-full back is a clear example. It's been at least 8/9 years that some Italian teams adopt it, however was include only now that the Man City uses it. Even the pressing system of the game is now "old" compared to what you can see around the world. Poor tactical knowledge is another part of the game that should be given more attention based on (at least) european-football knowledge, not only looking at premier league and championship league.

Trophies cannot express the goodness of a player. This was the very first year he played in a club able to win at highest levels. Mbappe is widely recognize as one of the best players now-a-day, but he won only one relevant trophy (the world cup in 2018), as well as Pavard, Giroud and many other french players. However nobody would state that he won only one important trophy (compared to Carvajal, for example) so that Carvajal is better than Mbappe. We can discuss concerning his ability to stand the pressure in big matches, but judging a player by his trophies means poor knowledge of football.

Could it be that the players' values is very high DURING the season because it reflects the fact that if a club (think about MLS/Saudi/Chinese ones) want to buy the player they need to spend more because you cannot replace him? Afterthis assumptions it seems to me reasonable to have such fluctuations once the season is over (we may argue the realisticity of the system, but at least there is a logic behind it)

I am not sure about it, to be fair. I would stick to English (not British) because I am sure about it, but it may be the same for other British nationalities

So, to recap, in Italy you have the possibility to sign 2 extra-EU players every year. One is completely free: you can sign whoever you want, without limitations. The other one needs to be marked as "eligibility-restricted non-EU player". When you fill the "eligibility-restricted non-EU player" spot, from that season on you can only sign one extra-EU player. HOWEVER, every year you have the possibility to freed one spot selling outside of the Italy one of your extra-EU players, AND all extra-EU players you buy from any italian team will not count as extra-EU. MOREOVER, The first english player of each season you buy will not be considered as extra-EU (only the first). bonus: don't look at the description you have when you make an offer. It's broken, and it does not count for all possibilities.

100% with you on this! And I hope it will remain the same (coexistence of 2D and 3D) in the upcoming versions.

Although I am not against 3D mode, considering only what the majority of players do/want means that we will end up playing Fifa/eFootball instead of FM. Sometimes it is important to keep the "original" features of a game instead of proposing new ones that do not propose a real improvement. In the case of 2D/3D, 2D is important because as a manager you want to see how the team as a whole moves on the pitch. You cannot have the same effect with this 3D. But I like the idea of a coach POV camera, that would add a lot of realism to the matchday. And would also make the difference between those who "like to watch football played" but understand almost zero tactics and those who want the most realistic immersion possible.

Oh, come on. Question yourself before insulting other users. This comment is just useless and it shows your arrogance. You have several examples that this can happen IRL too. See Bayer Leverkusen and Atalanta as a reference. Moreover, the screenshot you just posted as a proof of poor game working is related a fake in-game poll, which means has 0 values regarding how the ME and the game overall work. However, if you don't like the result of the 1100 votes, you may want to rise a post in the bug tracker section.

I've been the same experience as @NineCloudNine had. It should not depend on responsibilities, or at least not directly. Could it be that in some cases the Negotiation attribute of the DoF has a direct impact on it?

If I am not wrong, this happens anyway, because there are rules that allow the youth players to have professional contacts only when they are 17 y.o. Until then, they are under youth contracts regime. Basically, you see contracts signed by the DoF as youth contract, but in reality they already signed a professional contract (as the one asked to you when negotiating with them individually) and the contract will be automatically converted to the professional one thy signed as soon as they are 17 y.o..

I agree with everything you mentioned prior to this sentence and I do believe the market value in the game is intended to work in this way! I may also agree with the fact that price fluctuations are a bit exaggerated sometimes, but I find the principle behind it totally correct. Something that I would like to be revised is the 6-to-9 months no-moving period after a player move or sign a new contact: again, the rationale behind it is 100% fair, but there are some cases (teams with very high reputation, poor utilization...) when the player may want to join the interested team because it's an opportunity that you cannot miss.

We may say we agree on something!

Thanks for sharing your experience! I agree that, after almost 20 years playing FM, you need sometimes to put limitations to increase the challenge. However here the thing is that doesn't matter if I have negative balances (for more than two years in a row), UCL (i.e. UEFA) FFP is always ok. As an example, I managed to become the coach of As Roma in 2028. The club was absent from UEFA competitions during the last year and I joined the club after a bad season for them (no uefa qualification). I signed the contract right after the last matchday of the season, so I could have a look at the balance of the season that just ended and the previous one: in both seasons the balance was negative (-50M on aggregate). At the end of my first season, we had a slightly negative balance (I sold half of the team, aggregate balance -150M, transfer balance +27M), but still the club was in compliance with the FFP. The season after, same thing. 4 seasons in a row with negative balances at the end of each year and no FFP issue (with FFP previsions of +30/35M). That's why I really struggle to understand how FFP works in FM24. This is just an example, but I have a long experience in the game and I could have brought-up others IRL I see a lot of clubs (and I know Roma is one of them, being a supporter of as Roma) struggling in the transfer windows because they need to sell/reduce expenditures to stay in compliance with FFP, but none of this is implemented in FM.

I've read a lot of posts in the bug forum and it's really a pity that FFP is so poorly implemented, also because although financial struggling is a common issue IRL (and a very cool challenge in the game) in FM it seems to be a very remote option. However, my example is not related to missing sanctions but more on the fact that balances are heavily negative and FFP is still positive (even if market transfers are negative). So I am wondering: what is considered in the FFP? Are there expenditures left out from the calculation?

So basically you can spend as much as you want (or have negative balances) but you will almost never end up in FFP sanctions?