As for the squad cap - almost definitely from me again. Some managers in early setups ie WC 1-100/ EC 1-30. Are hogging literally ALL youth talent in some squads which possess upto around 150 odd players in a squad, this is not only unrealistic, but unfair on other managers who join the setup late or dont have such a great squad and income.

The same principle applies with having all top players in a squad, and thus this would make it more realistic for players to get unhappy and hand in a request.

I know this is all provisional at the moment but if a manager just rejects the transfer request, then there should be a limit either with time or games whereby if the player is still in the same frame of mind, the player is added automatically to the list as the manager would just be able to keep the squad he wants regardless of wether a player puts in a request or not.

especially at the present level in which a players becomes “NMF” after simultaneously playing a league & cup game. any manager will have atleast 25-27 players if he wants to compete in the league as well as the cup & cover up for injuries.

For the transfer requests for players i think the player would have to hand in their transfer request at the beggining of a new season, which would give the manager a season to sell them, and so be able to negotiate a good offer for the player.
If the manager doesn’t sell the player by the time the season ends then the player would become a free agent… either that or the player refuses to sign a new contract, but then the manager could still end up with the same player for upto 5 seasons, by which time everything will have changed anyway

a cap of 100players is realistic though, i also think that people should have to give good reasons that will be looked into by an independant person for turning down reasonable bids, i have seen 99mill bids being declined for players rated 95, that is just stupid, how can new players get anywhere?

People outraged as they have big clubs (first person on here) are wrong as it is likely it will be aimed at clubs with lots of high rated players on the bench, rather than low rated youth. Some teams have Cech and Buffon in the reserves.

HERE HERE. Nail on the head

As for squad sizes, why not have chairman demand that managers sell a certain number of players by a certain date or get fired in a Gold Championship?

PS All these sorts of things that should happen ONLY in Gold Championships

’cause you wouldn’t have to leave ‘em to rot on the bench.. you can use ‘em for cup matches, and let them play every now and then for the last 15 minutes or somethin’ like that, and let ‘em play in friendlies.. it’s not about rottin’ on the bench. Not in my squads at least.

e.g. I’ve played with CSKA M. and finished on fifth position and didn’t get stadium increase…but in other hand Roma has stadium of 89 000 and income of 2 million for each game…

Money is important key and big clubs are in big advantage here…

maybe club’s that are performing well make more money from matchday merchandise as it appears to be that the bigger the stadium the more the merchandise, whereas in reality merchandise sales are based on success (see chelsea’s recent spike in merchandise sales over the last 5 years) e.g. liverpool make more in merchandise than vasco da gama even though vasco have a far larger stadium

for example my good liverpool team makes around £300k per game in merchandise but my crap vasco team makes around £700k in merchandise per game!

I think the solution is to bring in squad caps, bring in transfer requests and then increase the fitness recovery from 10-15 so that players can play 2 games a week without becoming NMF - at the moment you need a league squad and a cup squad plus spares and that doesn’t help.

what about protecting the unmanaged clubs so that people who want to manage them have something to work with? pretty much every club in a gold setup that has been unmanaged for a length of time has had near enough all of its worthwhile talent taken away for a very small amount (relative to what they would get if the club was managed), therefore it is not in the best interests of the GC’s

Ain’t that what “stadium buildin’” got introduced for?

Not only have i already made this clear, but Bed also made the suggestion recently in the forum and plenty of people before us. It’s the only real recurring theme. Apart from more money/less money etc. But why keep changing things for one little problem when the solution for most of them got suggested about 2 years ago i bet, there is no real reason to not have one. A SENSIBLE one.

This is a master plan if you will, as it can only improve the game in plenty of ways and stop most complaining. Taking them added features away again is possible because of the new chairman situation, so there is no reason to have them features now as it’s not so easy to hammer clubs for all their decent players. Them features also contribute to most complaints, as they stop people buying players and thus helps peoples money grow. Most are in agreement that somethings needed, so this would really improve everything, especially if some sort of cap was introduced.

Obviously though just saving them setups is the most important thing.

For the squad cap, I agree that people want to buy youths in the hope that they will become superstars. But having 100 youths in a team is unrealistic (especially in Gold Championships)!

That’s not even the main problem really though mate. Not many usually complain about them because there’s that many, and plenty of teams could maybe have a good few. We don’t need that many i totally agree, but several teams probably could. The key is getting in there for the best, like it is with all players really. But then there’s still far more though, even the scouts in the forum miss some risers and just about every league is well covered too. So there is plenty of them, for everybody.

Every club just about has at-least 1 new player added each season as-well, so there is loads when added to the youngsters that didn’t rise too high from before.

The main problem is when the big teams start clearing the market that’s for lower teams, mainly in the 80’s somewhere to low 90’s. Because all the lower teams get stuck. It doesn’t matter what team you are really either, unless you are very very active you are unlikely to improve much in the old GC’s, if at all once you reach mid 80’s or so. And it’s because it also starts filtering through the rest, and lower teams start hoarding players in the 80’s. But thats only because they can’t improve really.

If we have the level above we simply don’t need what is effectively a lower league’s team sometimes, it just spoils it for the majority as there isn’t as many of the higher rated and we don’t even need to buy any of them if we have the level above, and plenty of that level above sometimes. So there is no nood for any of us to do it.

Even the real low teams soon surpass playing with the 70 odd rated players, because there is loads in the high70’s to low 80’s. So them can’t be the main problem really. The same with most youngsters, as most teams play with better from the off almost. And there is plenty left for them in that market afterwards too.

We have all been guilty of buying too many players, or even being greedy, and a cap could be the only thing that stops that greed, because that’s even worse than not getting players in some setups. People take over small teams and can only buy 1 or 2 decent players because of it, and most end up not lasting 5 minutes. This is despite all the money we all have too, so some teams could maybe do with more!!!

The other suggestions could all be added too imo, as they are all good and can only make the game better as a whole. But like you have said mate and others, rejecting contracts and/or poor morale making them leave will most certainly cause more problems. The cap shouldn’t if done properly.

Very last words, as every angle has well and truly been covered. It does make far more sense than actually losing players for no reason though.

How is that unrealistic? Every team in real life got a lotta youth players.. they got whole trainin’ centers for the youth.. a lotta players here from let’s say below 20 still play for the youth squads of their team but only appeared in the “real” team like once or twice.. so like that “real” teams got lotsa youth players. And even teams like Chelsea and Arsenal they’re gettin’ a whole lot of players under 16 because those players can’t get contracts in their own countries yet but they can in England.. and a lotta teams from Portugal are just buyin’ a whole bunch of Brazillian players.. and then let’s say 3 years laters they sell the best ones for a high price and sent the others back to either Brasil or just put ‘em on the streets..

Real life clubs hog the odd player, but only when they are useful. Man utd even sold Chelsea Juan Veron because he wasn’t needed. He may have been poor to what they expected, but did they even stop a close rival from improving? no, and none of them ever do when the player isn’t needed.

First, Man U had scholes, hargreaves, carrick and anderson (all of them are 90 and above) for their TWO central midfield positions last season and that’s what the rotation is all about. So every 90 and 91 players who don’t play regularly ask for transfer requests/ reject contracts, then all the bench players will be below 90. So imo, I think only 92 and above or something like that should be asking for transfer requests.

Even then, if they are not happy with being on the bench and express desire for transfer requests, the managers should be given a chance to play them (that’s what it’s like in real life, isn’t it?). Or may be, the managers should be able to loan them out instead of selling them.

Everything should be taken into considerations. For example, if the managers don’t play because their fitness is too low (for example, just recover from injuries), should the players be requesting for transfers? So, I guess players should be making requests if they are not playing even though they are fit (85+ let’s say?).

With other potential changes to go with that, like making clubs go by the budget more (even though i agree we could and really should do that anyway as some problems maybe wouldn’t have arrived if that was the case) will literally kill smaller teams and cause more potential problems and unmanaged clubs. Most rely on this too for our fun/enjoyment, as most don’t/can’t get top teams

We wanted more money and now we have it, some teams have far too many players that could and really should be at different clubs and some can’t never buy.

That’s pretty much all the problems that keep persisting or why most recent suggestions have been made, so are the only real things that need improving in some way, but one or two a big way. Especially in older GC’s that people still pay to play in, as that makes it a little more unfair again in my opinion.

Everybody can guess who i’m on about and whilst everybody thinks they go over the top in buying players at times, they are always needed or could be in the future. never far too many or players they will never need or don’t think they might, the same with a certain English side, that still don’t do that. And them are the only even close examples of what happens on here, but still nowhere near as close.

They buy when then seemingly don’t need to, like everybody should be able to onhere and real life, but they are only ever a waste when they don’t show what people expect, not because they weren’t needed from the start.

the only improvement i would suggest to go along with this is that the chairman stops blocking higher rated players being loaned out

i have a team that has a lowest rated player of 90 and he’s a back-up player that will get disgruntled but my chairman would never under the current system let him be loaned out

this should be changed so that us the manager can decide who can be loaned out and who can’t

In the setup I manage in, Man Utd have these players just for centre midfield.

Pirlo, Gattuso, Xavi, Lampard, Nasri, Riquelme, David Silva, Carrick, Raul Garcia and Gago.

Then centre forwards.

Ronaldo, Rooney, Eto’o, Ibrahimovic, Henry, Gomis, Tevez, Adriano, Benzema, Rossi, Shevchenko and Bojan.

It’s not realistic that one team in real life could have all these players. It just wouldn’t happen and therefore should not happen in SM.

Sm’s mission states “Make the world’s best soccer manager game then let the world play it for free!”

Well in our league it’s only the worlds best game for one club, I think the idea of players handing in transfer requests when they are not playing is an excellent idea, but it has to be made realistic and other clubs should then be able to pick up these players at a knock down price.

Cutting squad sizes is a must to maybe a maximum of 22 first team players (Enough for 2 players in every position) and maybe a youth team of no more than 11 under 18’s.. When youth players then turn 19 you should have the choice of whether to sign them to a senior squad contract or realese them as is the case in real life..

and how about if a club puts a bid in for an ‘unused’ player the player can ask for it to be accepted

Although i am only new to this game, i clearly believe a lot of money can be made from buying youth players in cheaply and then selling them on. Introducing this squad cap would help spread the talent and therefore make the game more enjoyable for everyone and realistic as its not like all the wonderkids all come from the same one club…..how can you not support this idea.

If something aint done about the two points i make, i cannot see why new people to the game are gonna stick around, cause they just cant buy anyone unless its from and unmanaged team (and there only so many players at these teams). Do Something…….the smaller peoples squad the better the game, simple……

Add a player cap or have transfer request added. If I had to choose between the two, I would say transfer request.

Just as SM has Club Chairmans who make determinations on whether deals go through or not, they can have players decide if they want to leave or not. In most cases, this won’t happen. Based on the players rating compared to the rest of the squad, a player would expect to play a certain amount of games. The chance of a transfer request being handed in grows over time if the player isn’t playing when he expects/should. This effects the players morale. If the morale stays low enough over a certain period of time, the risk of a transfer request becomes more and more likely.

As for the fellow who complained about needing 50 players because of all the competitions. It’s called managing. No club has 50 or so players to compete. No player only plays at 95% or higher. Players get tired, fatigued during a season and play as such. That is why good clubs lose to lesser clubs sometimes. You have to make a decision which competition is more important to you. That is why it is so hard to pull off a double or a treble. Some of the big clubs don’t care about the smaller league cups, so they play their “youths”. They don’t have 50 senior players for each competition. That is why Milan succeeded almost every year in the Champions League, but struggled to win Serie A and the Italian Cup. They made it their priority. You have to make a decision.

It’s common sense, if a player doesn’t play as much as he should ….over time, he becomes unhappy and hands in a transfer request. It’s a part of life, it’s a part of football. Deal with it. Impliment it.

I also don’t think chairman should automatically renew all expiring contracts. This is what makes clubs sell players alot of times, out of fear of losing them on a free transfer. If I have Player A who wants a transfer and his contract is about to expire, I should be forced to sell him or risk losing him as a free agent. In which case, the club who pays the most gets him off the free agent list. If a player has a long contract but has already handed in a transfer request and has not been transfered after an extended period of time, the player can refuse to play for the club (this is extreme and would only occur in the most extreme situations).

but it’s also not fair for managers who manage well with their money, they can do nothing about it while watching other teams take the good players away even with plenty of cash on hand
at a point, buying off all the good players from the market is also an strategy for the club, the managers are nothing wrong about it by having a good insight for investing well with their money

Guardado(91); Scweinsteiger(92); Bentley(90); Kompany(90); Xavi(96); Pirlo(95); Sneijder(94); Gattuso(94); Hitzlsperger(92); De Jong(91); Modric(91); Muntari(91); Montolivo(91); Kuzmanovic(89): Biglia(88); Kaka(98); Iniesta(95); Diego(94); Ribery(95); Mcgeady(90) Cristian Rodriguez(89)

13 of these players haven’t palyed more than 1 game all season!!! this is ridiculous th this monopoly can happen… in real life these players would leave… simple - here its fine leaving it even harder for teams like myself. i would love some of those players above but what can i do if the manager is happy having players he will never use just so another team can’t have them! DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!!!!