Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

PLEASE READ. boards.ie League Buying from un-managed Poll DECEMBER 2014

Options
12357

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    jukebox2310
    Registered Users Posts: 315 ✭✭jukebox2310


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    I'm at Twente and to be honest it breaks my balls trying to do transfers in this game. I can see why Jimmy left. I started with no cash and traded players on a 2 for 1 basis trying to build the squad up. I have currently about 12 miles in the bank but I know that if buying from.unmanaged is turned off that I will more than likely be beaten on every transfer by the clubs who have stashes of cash. IMO all that will happen is that the biggervclubs will get the best players and the clubs like myself will be left with the players no one else wants


  • Options
    #123
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    What's the vote? 13-13?


  • Options
    #124
    Wilberto
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 8,573 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wilberto


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    What's the vote? 13-13?


    That's what I have it as. Status quo it is then! :D :pac:


  • Options
    #125
    Wilberto
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 8,573 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wilberto


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    I'm trying to figure out if there's anyone left to vote. By which I mean the regulars.


  • Options
    #126
    tupac_healy
    Registered Users Posts: 6,515 ✭✭✭tupac_healy


    LEFT OFF
    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    What's the vote? 13-13?

    Count again..... I withdraw my vote.......

    I have consistently argued this topic based on catering FOR THE MANAGERS WE HAVE...

    If the poxy topic is going to cost more regulars then I say I want no part of it...


    Like I've said ALL along.....


    I want us to finally look after the managers we have, I've said this for seasons now and when the penny finally drops it will be far far too late.... It already is.


    Would I rather see unmanaged turned on or Baz return....

    Easy one...


    Enjoy your vote lads, how it's worth it


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    Why did Baz quit? Because of the ban or because of the vote. I would imagine the former, you can't insult people and expect to get away with it. So his quitting is nothing to do with the vote what so ever. Hopefully he calms down and takes on AC again, good manager who has helped me out in other leagues, would be sad to see him go.

    You obviously feel strongly on this Tupac and so do I. You feel your way is best for the GW and I feel my way is, its a matter of opinion which we're all entitled to, I don't see the point in withdrawing your vote.


  • Options
    #128
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    Wilberto wrote: »
    I'm trying to figure out if there's anyone left to vote. By which I mean the regulars.

    Not a clue, its open till the 8th so not too long to go anyway


  • Options
    #129
    tupac_healy
    Registered Users Posts: 6,515 ✭✭✭tupac_healy


    LEFT OFF
    KERSPLAT! wrote: »

    You obviously feel strongly on this Tupac and so do I. You feel your way is best for the GW and I feel my way is, its a matter of opinion which we're all entitled to, I don't see the point in withdrawing your vote.

    What I gods honestly feel strongly about is keeping the existing managers above all else....

    We've lost Jimmy, which brought up this debate again and weather Baz quit over his ban or not (I'm assuming so) is still a direct result of this debate and if this debate is to cost us managwrsz their ain't no way at all its worth that cost so I'm out, 100% out, I'll have no part of it....

    I retract everything I've said on this topic, I've seen some responses mentioning me and my opinions and I don't want any sort of influence over any part of this.....

    I retract everything and gracefully withdraw.....


    I will say though, we as a gameworld really need to let go of this fascination of the 'incoming managers' and really concentrate on the good lads we have in the GW....


    Sad day lads, I'm done on this thread, going to pop over to the main thread for happier days...


    I withdraw my vote and views on this subject.


  • Options
    #130
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    Are you withdrawing from all debates? Anyone could quit over any disagreement. Seems ridiculous to me but sure whatever you want yourself.


  • Options
    #131
    Comic Book Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,467 ✭✭✭Comic Book Guy


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    I'm a relative newcomer to this league lads and only have experience of this GW rules.
    Some very good points made by both sides of the argument.

    My own feeling is that ultimately the market I think the bigger clubs are the ones that will benefit and the gap in terms of squad depths will widen between the haves and have nots.

    Speaking from a purely selfish point of view I currently have a small budget, with a first team of 87s (4) and 88s (7), after that my squad depth falls of a cliff and I'm very grateful to city, roma, and arsenal managers for the 86s they loaned me. For me to get an 89-90 from unmanaged I would have to offload 2-3 88s in order to outbid the higher division clubs.

    What I would love to see happen if it was opened is an NFL type draft system with the bottom team in div 4 given first choice to bid on a player with no competition in an attempt to spread the wealth but I realise this cant be enforced and would be logistically a nightmare to try and control.

    On the issue of stagnation in transfer market I know I personally haven't added much to it thus far and apologise. I'm not coming from a position of strength given money and squad outlined above hence haven't really entered negotiations with other members cause I don't really think anyone else would be really interested in what I have to offer with the exception of maybe one youth and even he is only a 76. Anyways will try and make more of an effort in that regard in future!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Maldjd23
    Registered Users Posts: 1,029 ✭✭✭Maldjd23


    I have read through the thread and here is what i believe should happen.

    Mac bans the Bayern and Barca managers.
    They get annoyed and quit the league.
    Buying from unmanaged is then turned on.
    I buy Messi and Alaba
    Everyone is happy.


  • Options
    #133
    GT_TDI_150
    Registered Users Posts: 10,917 ✭✭✭✭GT_TDI_150


    LEFT OFF
    Maldjd23 wrote: »
    I have read through the thread and here is what i believe should happen.

    Mac bans the Bayern and Barca managers.
    They get annoyed and quit the league.
    Buying from unmanaged is then turned on.
    I buy Messi and Alaba
    Everyone is happy.

    Messi is too old for you mate ;)


  • Options
    #134
    Al Capwned
    Registered Users Posts: 5,721 ✭✭✭Al Capwned


    LEFT OFF
    Soccer Manager is a game I enjoy, one i look forward to playing when I get home from work or whatever.




    But it's still a game..


  • Options
    #135
    Al Capwned
    Registered Users Posts: 5,721 ✭✭✭Al Capwned


    LEFT OFF
    I'm still undecided as to the poll too btw, but I may lean towards turning it back on. if only for the craic, it might generate a bit of chat in the threads, which tbh is probably the main reason I still play the thing.

    Not sure tho....


  • Options
    #136
    jukebox2310
    Registered Users Posts: 315 ✭✭jukebox2310


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    Twente have voted to keep it off. Think I'd be blown out of the water by the bigger clubs so it wouldn't benefit me in any way. Selfish I know but that's the way I see it for all clubs like me. The best players will end up at the clubs that don't need them and the rest of us will be scrapping for their 87s and 88s


  • Options
    #137
    Colemania
    Registered Users Posts: 4,110 ✭✭✭Colemania


    LEFT OFF
    Can I change my votes lads? Starting to realise I was too hasty in voting to turn this on and agree with what people are saying. There's clubs there in division 1 and 2 and even the odd one in division 3 that have money to burn. They'll end up getting all these players as squad fillers whereby other clubs will get the duds.

    If possible, change my vote or just make a note at the end to mark off my vote


  • Options
    #138
    Mr Blobby
    Registered Users Posts: 5,752 ✭✭✭Mr Blobby


    I just realised that i'll probably be managing another team soon, so I should probably change my vote.

    I vote to keep it off.


  • Options
    #139
    RickyOFlaherty
    Registered Users Posts: 422 ✭✭RickyOFlaherty


    LEFT OFF
    tupac_healy wrote: »
    Unfortunately Mac......

    Longer than that, quit....

    Best of luck Baz, another of the good ones gone..

    Not sure what he said as I presume the post has been deleted .... but banning from the forum is OTT in my opinion ... think just deleting the offending post and sending a private message might have been enough. It is not that busy of a forum to take the time to handle some of the more regular posters with a bit of care (IMHO).

    Voted to keep it on.


  • Options
    #140
    hufpc8w3adnk65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,158 ✭✭✭✭hufpc8w3adnk65


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    RickyOFlaherty wrote: »
    Not sure what he said as I presume the post has been deleted .... but banning from the forum is OTT in my opinion ... think just deleting the offending post and sending a private message might have been enough. It is not that busy of a forum to take the time to handle some of the more regular posters with a bit of care (IMHO).

    Voted to keep it on.

    If you want too Pop me a pm we can talk about it, but please dont question mod instructions on thread as it drags topics off thread.


  • Options
    #141
    ScummyMan
    Registered Users Posts: 7,671 ✭✭✭ScummyMan


    LEFT OFF
    Galatasaray manager here, sitting on a decent pile of cash so I'll vote to turn it on :P


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    phone2000
    Registered Users Posts: 81 ✭✭phone2000


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    Hamburg - Voted to keep it off.

    I can't see how switching this on will get the market moving in any way.


  • Options
    #143
    Beefy78
    Registered Users Posts: 8,163 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    Keep it off.


  • Options
    #144
    tonic wine
    Registered Users Posts: 1,099 ✭✭✭tonic wine


    LEFT OFF
    The gameworld was more enjoyable when we were allowed to buy from un-managed. As a small club(dynamo kyiv) i was able to compete for top players and managed to sign 4/5 89/90 rated players from unmanaged teams which helped me get promoted from div 2. With the rule as it is now, i would not have been able to do this, and i would be stuck with a sh1t team and sh1t players, eventually would have lost interest and stoped playing, as with many players that joined the game since the rule was changed. Lets be honest, who wants to trade 90+ players for two 88's ect. You don't have an opportunity to compete for the better players as it is now. The transfer market is the best part of the game and with this rule change you have taken away from the best part of the game

    I don't see how it has benefited the gameworld as a whole since it was changed. It may have protected teams, but we have lost players and players lose interest logging in to see they got hammered again because they can't manage to sign better players to improve their team. Where's the fun in banging your head off a wall trying to sign the better players for cash. It rarely happens.

    I won't have an opportunity to reply on this thread. Just giving my opinion.


  • Options
    #145
    tonic wine
    Registered Users Posts: 1,099 ✭✭✭tonic wine


    LEFT OFF
    phone2000 wrote: »
    Hamburg - Voted to keep it off.

    I can't see how switching this on will get the market moving in any way.

    A team that has some attractive better players becomes unmanaged. Other teams compete for these players with huge amounts of cash. the club loses these players, but are left with a huge bank balance.

    A new manager comes in. When another team becomes unmanaged, he has a huge bank balance to go and sign their players and the cycle continues. Otherwise cash is useless. From experience, it was the only use for cash.


  • Options
    #146
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    tonic wine wrote: »
    A team that has some attractive better players becomes unmanaged. Other teams compete for these players with huge amounts of cash. the club loses these players, but are left with a huge bank balance.

    A new manager comes in. When another team becomes unmanaged, he has a huge bank balance to go and sign their players and the cycle continues.

    It seems that the bank balance is removed by SM after a few days, according to a few here.

    So you'd be left with no good players, no money and a team of rejects, good luck getting a manager for them


  • Options
    #147
    tonic wine
    Registered Users Posts: 1,099 ✭✭✭tonic wine


    LEFT OFF
    KERSPLAT! wrote: »
    It seems that the bank balance is removed by SM after a few days, according to a few here.

    So you'd be left with no good players, no money and a team of rejects, good luck getting a manager for them

    Unless that is something new, it wasn't the case.
    There's a few managers on here that said (not this thread, other threads on this topic) when they took over (before the rule change) they had massive balances and it was the only way they could sign players when another team became unmanaged.

    I had with Kyiv. Obviously if you put in extra work and buy cheap risers, you can multiply your balance very easy and use the cash to buy from unmanaged.


  • Options
    #148
    KERSPLAT!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    tonic wine wrote: »
    Unless that is something new, it wasn't the case.
    There's a few managers on here that said (not this thread, other threads on this topic) when they took over (before the rule change) they had massive balances and it was the only way they could sign players when another team became unmanaged.

    I had with Kyiv. Obviously if you put in extra work and buy cheap risers, you can multiply your balance very easy and use the cash to buy from unmanaged.

    I'll check tomorrow but a couple of the lads were discussing it and said that the budget is reduced to the start out budget after a few days, I think Baz said it, will find it and post here. People have complained of budgets shrinking while waiting to take over with no transfers in or out, this could be why.


  • Options
    #149
    tonic wine
    Registered Users Posts: 1,099 ✭✭✭tonic wine


    LEFT OFF
    And this is another point that needs to be picked up on. Maybe we should be concentrating on improving the game world experience for the current active managers in an effort to stop the decline in numbers, and maybe start listening to why managers have lost interest and are leaving the game.

    I think most of it comes down to not been able to sign players. This rule does not really effect the big clubs IMO, and i'll include myself in that category. For example, deals i've done myself are all PX, which involved a straight swap 94 px 94, and a 91 plus cash px for 89+90 player.

    Small teams don't have these players to start out with, so don't have the players to do PX deals for the higher rated players.

    Therefore they are not able to do any px deals for 90+ players.
    They can't use cash to buy any 90+ players.
    What options are they left with?
    Where's the enjoyment going to come from?
    How long will they stay active before giving up?


  • Options
    #150
    Beefy78
    Registered Users Posts: 8,163 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    I HONESTLY COULDN'T GIVE A FIDDLERS
    You're always going to lose players though. Nothing will stop that. Turning it back on will just make it more difficult to replace them. I built a nice little team at Panathinaikos. Left to join Shakhtar, the old team was gutted straight away and other than a few weeks has been without a manager as a result ever since (IIRC).

    As frustrating as it is being unable to improve my side now it'll be worse if we do this as within hours the bigger sides will have snapped up the better unmanaged players making it more difficult for a mid-ranking side like mine who could actually improve with the addition of a few affordable 89s.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    MRPRO03
    Registered Users Posts: 272 ✭✭MRPRO03


    LEFT OFF
    I would be in favour of turning it on but on a condition that squad sizes can only be a certain number, so players would be spread around better. I am finding it near impossible to sign players from other managed teams.


Advertisement