|
Jumping in at eight!
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:38 |
|
|
I'll say 23 players.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
Since someone took 8 just before I got it (dammit!  ) I'll go with...5 players
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
Was going to say nine, but that was taken, so I'm going to pick 11 players.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
Wow, some of you guys are going really high, we've got 23 players total on the first team, three more on loan in the reserves, and about 18ish in the youth squad. And you very seldom get complaints from the youth squad or players on loan. If we end up with 20+ complaining players, I'll be run out on a rail.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
All of them, especially after I tell them to in order to get the manager canned and suck all the money out of this team before they fall back into the abyss. poo poo did I say that out loud? Also good job signing the new keeper through last year fyi.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 03:39
|
|
|
I am super positive, so four.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 04:15
|
|
|
We're going to have to have the talk about 7 times this season (Move me up or down the closest number if that one is already taken). Also you got a slight typo in your new signing where you say you signed him all the way through till 2013 (which is 5 years in the past) and should probably mean 2023.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 04:33
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Also good job signing the new keeper through last year fyi. CVE posted:Also you got a slight typo in your new signing where you say you signed him all the way through till 2013 (which is 5 years in the past) and should probably mean 2023. This is why I need to not breeze through my editing. I'm sure there's even more awkward turns of phrase in there that I'll groan over when I reread this at some point. Thanks for the catch! habeasdorkus fucked around with this message at 04:51 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
14 players. New season's off to a rough start, but I guess that was always on the cards. One thing I am curious about - how many current ability stars does Mujkic have nowadays? I remember he started with five back whenever we first got him, but I assume the quality of the team's caught up to him at least a little by now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Mukjic was described as Premier League talent, which means he should still be 5 stars. It also compares to the rest of our squad, so if he's not it means we've gotten better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
  Mujkic is a 4.5 star player, it's extremely rate for any player to be considered a 5 star player even when they're much better than the rest of your current team. I'd estimate that Mujkic had a 135 CA back when our team average was about 90-95, and he's improved a good deal since, he's still only 21 years old, so he's probably about a 150-155 compared to our current 110-115 average. The only player we have that's four stars is Todd, though several players have reached 3.5 star level. Also, what makes this more difficult to judge is that the star ratings are based upon the scout/coach's Judge Ability/Judge Potential ratings,=. I once hired an old Icelandic centerback as a player/coach in FM12 and he somehow became my default for star ratings rather than my much better rear end Man. His JA/JP was horrific, something like a 1 and a 3, and he rated all my players at below 2.5 stars despite the fact that we easily won promotion from League One that year. I fired him as soon as was feasible. In our game our ratings come from my rear end Man, who has a JA/JP of 17/18, which is as close to perfect as we can hope. When my less talented scouts turn up players that seem great I usually send him out to scout them as well to make sure that they're as good as my scout thinks. habeasdorkus fucked around with this message at 06:08 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
I'm going to be optimistic and say 4 players.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
Five players, and three of them will tell you you're being unprofessional.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 06:44
|
|
|
Mad Wack posted:Five players, and three of them will tell you you're being unprofessional. Now I wish I had any photoshop skills to insert profanity laden screeds at my insouciant players. quote:Young prospect: I don't think you're respecting me enough. habeasdorkus fucked around with this message at 07:49 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 07:29
|
|
|
Exactly Half the Wrexham squad give or take one player in case someone has already predicted that number. (I don't actually know how many players we have at the mo).
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 09:58
|
|
|
Seven players. There aren't really enough numbers for us all to have a unique number, how will you break ties? Or do we all get our football miracles if we win?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 10:27
|
|
|
I'm not sure about it, but I remember reading somewhere that the star rating of your players done by your AssMan depends on your goal this season IE: If your goal is staying away from relegation then a player can be rated as 5 stars but if your goal is winning the league that same player can be rated as say 3 stars.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 10:43
|
|
|
Three players - mostly because everything from eight to four has already been taken and I wanted six.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 11:00
|
|
|
Thirteen Players: because it's goddamn unlucky to get that amount!
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 11:30
|
|
|
Six Players just because. Also kind of disappointed that Boro haven't got promotion back to the Premiership under not-Tony Mowbray. Still at least they beat the Welsh upstarts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 12:07
|
|
|
Eleven Players You'll have a roughly 50/50 mollify/not at all happy rate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 13:35
|
|
|
Twenty(20) Players.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:Seven players. There aren't really enough numbers for us all to have a unique number, how will you break ties? Or do we all get our football miracles if we win? I'll be flipping coins at that point. FailAtMagic posted:I'm not sure about it, but I remember reading somewhere that the star rating of your players done by your AssMan depends on your goal this season IE: If your goal is staying away from relegation then a player can be rated as 5 stars but if your goal is winning the league that same player can be rated as say 3 stars. That makes sense, and would explain why our star levels are pretty high as I'm only expected to avoid relegation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
Football related shenanigans: http://imgur.com/gallery/g1Mn3lP That's quite nice (and clever) of Wolves. It's got to hurt watching your favorite team get relegated twice in a row (Wolverhampton went from the Premier League to League One).
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
habeasdorkus posted:Football related shenanigans: http://imgur.com/gallery/g1Mn3lP Classy. It's certainly up there with the guy who applied to manage Middlesbrough in 2009 citing Football Manager in his CV.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 16:12
|
|
|
habeasdorkus posted:When my less talented scouts turn up players that seem great I usually send him out to scout them as well to make sure that they're as good as my scout thinks. Edit: In terms of pure star ratings, anyway. They're less good at understanding specialist players. Revenant Threshold fucked around with this message at 17:42 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Also, even mediocre scouts can get a good read on a player if you have them follow the player for three matches rather than just write up a scouting report. It takes longer, but it's much more accurate than the simple scouting report. No matter what level you start at you should be able to find scouts with 12 or better JA/JP, which allows you to get decent scout reports from the get go. eta: And yeah, you're absolutely right about specialist players. One reason why Bailey is able to play at a level far above his scouted recommendation (he's been a two star player since we got to League One) is because he's got a Corner attribute of 15, along with decent composure and crossing stats (each 13, I think). That's not accounted for when considering him as a player, but the lion's share of his assists comes from corner kicks where he places the ball perfectly. habeasdorkus fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Mar 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
Guitar_Hero posted:Classy. It's certainly up there with the guy who applied to manage Middlesbrough in 2009 citing Football Manager in his CV. As someone with a little knowledge on the general topic: This happens with sports far, far more often than you'd think. I've never heard of someone coming across Fantasy Football, but it's bound to happen too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
habeasdorkus posted:So I really wonder how the TV rights work in Football Manager. I know I can watch every English Premier League game live on my computer through NBC, and they have five or six games a week broadcast on their sports network with one on the flagship network. So I have to believe that, along with the nation-wide games broadcast by BSkyB and BT (which is worth a billion pounds a year!), every single game is broadcast in England for local fans. I doubt that I, as an American, could watch every Fulham game while the actual supporters living in London couldn't. I just have no clue how much those rights are worth. Likewise, rebroadcast rights for the big European leagues are also probably much more valuable than a sport like baseball, I know the EPL rights went to NBC for $83.3 million a year over three years. Right. To clarify, watching the PL in England is an enormous pain in the rear end. Watching the Championship even more so. The bolded point is one of the reasons that us denizens of TRP like to spout about football being dead, because it is infinitely easier to watch the PL in anywhere that isn't the UK. So, first off, cashmoney. The Premier League owns the rights to the broadcasts. It sells them to BT and BSkyB for the aforementioned billion quid, plus more for rights to highlights, radio, international rebroadcast etc. This is then divvied up amongst the clubs in a meritocratic way. It's expected that whoever wins the league this year will receive £100M for TV rights, and even the bottom team will take home £70M. Clubs have absolutely no freedom to negotiate their own deals in the way that an MLB franchise would with their local tv partners. The only way to make more money from tv is to win more games. This is to avoid the PL becoming like La Liga, where Real and Barca rake the majority of La Liga's revenue, and all the lesser clubs wither from lack of money. The problem is that the broadcast deal is very restricted. Games in the First Division, before it became the Premier League and Sky really existing, were generally played at 3pm on Saturday afternoon, because 3pm on Saturday afternoon was when you played football goddammit. Once live broadcasting really took off, teams noticed a dip in attendance and got pissed off. As a result, the 3pm games on Saturday in England are never broadcast live. Games are also broadcast one at a time. So say that there are two games on at 4pm on Sunday. One of them will be shown live on Sky or BT, and the other won't be shown live. Anywhere. Except outside the UK What this means is that half the PL games will never be shown live in the UK. At the beginning of the season, Sky and BT will go through a complex pick'em process to decide what matches they want to show live each weekend. The rules of the pick game were set out in the broadcast contracts when Sky and BT bid on them. Generally Sky gets first pick of the games most weekends, with restrictions such as having to show each team a certain number of times. It does result in awful awful decisions such as a couple of weeks ago, when Sky had picked (long in advance) to show an Aston Villa v Norwich game which was absolutely loving dreadful, while Liverpool and Swansea had a 4-3 thriller that wasn't broadcast. People get round these restrictions by buying VPNs and accounts for things like Al-Jazeera sport, or some Kiwi channel. It's hosed up. If anyone has any questions from the above stream of consciousness, I'm happy to try and answer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
Why are games only aired one at a time? Is it a case of the Premier League requiring another billion in order to air the other simultaneous games on a separate channel?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Jesus, I always assumed that it was probably like the way the Big Four American leagues work- a handful of games are shown nationally live on premier channels like ESPN/ABC, Fox, Turner Networks, etc., with most leagues also owning and operating their own networks, and the rest of the games generally being sold out by the teams to local networks, like the plethora of Fox Sports networks, such as Fox Sports Detroit. So at some events you get up to three separate networks broadcasting- the home team's local channel, the away team's local channel, and the national network. Then, since most games can't be viewed outside the market (which are generally pretty big), most providers also offer packages that allow you to view all out-of-market games, and as habeasdorkus said, there's also things like NFL Sunday Ticket, MLB At Bat, etc., digital streaming services for the non-national, non-local games.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Yeah, no. Basically, the UK is a small enough market that there's no such thing as a "local" network or market. Sky broadcasts the same stuff to Lands End as it does to John O'Groats. And the games are broadcast one at a time because gently caress you, as far as I can tell. I think in general, the PL pays more than lip service to the idea of ensuring that people actually bother to physically go to games. It seems odd given that they are in all other ways rapacious mercenaries who'd sell their grandmother for a pound, but I guess they think it's more profitable that way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 01:49
|
|
|
tarbrush posted:It does result in awful awful decisions such as a couple of weeks ago, when Sky had picked (long in advance) to show an Aston Villa v Norwich game which was absolutely loving dreadful, while Liverpool and Swansea had a 4-3 thriller that wasn't broadcast. Hey, the Villa v Norwich game was last weekend and it resulted in a wonderful 5 goal first half! You're thinking of the other Villa game that was on TV, against Newcastle, buddy! Seriously though, Villa have 5 TV games in a row, not that I'm complaining...
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 01:56
|
|
|
Geoff Peterson posted:As someone with a little knowledge on the general topic: This happens with sports far, far more often than you'd think. I've never heard of someone coming across Fantasy Football, but it's bound to happen too. On the other hand, Moneyball, right? I know, totally different sort of nerd. Also pretty different sort of sport, I think baseball lends itself better to that sorta analysis.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
tarbrush posted:Right. To clarify, watching the PL in England is an enormous pain in the rear end. Watching the Championship even more so. The bolded point is one of the reasons that us denizens of TRP like to spout about football being dead, because it is infinitely easier to watch the PL in anywhere that isn't the UK. Interesting. In Germany the money is payed out just the same but we still have most games going on at the same time and if you payed for it you can watch any game you like or every game in a conference. Luckily our attendance numbers are still top notch so I hope the minor inconvenience of rescheduling some games (1 more game on Saturday evening instead of afternoon) and staggered Sunday games will be the end of it concerning tv deals.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 03:00
|
|
|
After a few days of serious binging, I've finally caught up. Awesome LP, I feel like far more of a fan of Wrexham than I am of any real teams. Management/simulation games like this have always interested me. In theory, it seems like a great deal of fun to manage a team, or in a Paradox game, a nation, to greatness. In practice, I take one look at miles of spreadsheets and maths and am immediately bored out of my mind. I really appreciate good LPs like this which turn the game into a fascinating experience.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 03:02
|
|
|
habeasdorkus posted:Football related shenanigans: http://imgur.com/gallery/g1Mn3lP On the other end of the spectrum, it has been endlessly entertaining to take the piss out of my brothers and friends who are Wolves fans because haha your team is in loving League One
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
dadgummit posted:On the other end of the spectrum, it has been endlessly entertaining to take the piss out of my brothers and friends who are Wolves fans because haha your team is in loving League One This.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:38 |
|
|
tarbrush posted:
poo poo, that's horrible. The NFL has rules about if a game doesn't sell out it gets taken off the TV, but between there being only 8 home games a year and corporate sponsors buying giant blocks of seats if there is a chance to not sell out, this isn't a problem. Anyway, enjoying the thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2014 06:41
|
|
