Season 30 Week 3 processing...

MLS

Chicago 9 +11
Cosmos 9 +4 Champions
Galaxy 7 +2 unmanaged
NewYork 6 +7
Harrisburg 6 +3
Tampa 6 +2
Kansas 6 +0 unmanaged

Ireland

Crusaders 7 +6 Champions
Bohemians 7 +5
Cork City 7 +2
Coleraine 6 +3
Glentoran 6 +1
Cherry 6 +1

This is gonna be very close again and I expect it to go to the wire again...

Argentina

Argentinos 9 +16
Estudiantes 7 +5
River Plate 7 +5 Champions
Talleres 7 +4 unmanaged
Boca Juniors 6 +7

League One

Leicester 9 +8
Wimbledon 7 +8
------
Leeds 6 +2
Coventry 6 +2
QPR 5 +1
Norwich 4 -2
------
Derby 3 -1
Blackburn 3 -1

Only Oldham and Stoke remain unmanaged in League One and that makes it very competitive and looks like Wimbledon and Andy Carroll were made for each other...

League Two

Bournemouth 7 +4
Luton 7 +4 unmanaged
------
Brighton 6 +6
Ipswich 5 +4
Cardiff 5 +3
Blackpool 5 +1 unmanaged
------
Sunderland 3 +0

Middlesbrough struggling at the foot of the table a long long ways from the heady days of the Premiership under the control of Dave Cowe in years gone by...

Conference

Wigan 9 +6
Huddersfield 9 +4 unmanaged
Bristol City 7 +8
------
Grimsby 4 +1 unmanaged

Transfers now...

Aston Villa sign Bjorn Engers from Genk for £10millions.

and the big deal saw N'Golo Kante and Serge Aurier join Real Madrid as Timo Werner and Leon Goretzka moved to Schalke.

all this week's deals are detailed on the TP special action order as usual...

Coaching and Financing...

Big win for Plymouth after decided to put out a second string side in the cup - things seem to be moving in the right direction which is good with some good squad rotation going on...

Bit of a wrench letting Kante go but the tactical change and what's best for the team prevailed. 

Kante was pretty much instrumental in Schalke claiming 2 Champions Leagues...look out for Real...

Good win away at Newcastle, 1-0 becoming my favourite score but tougher games ahead I feel

Steady week with an away win and a clean sheet at Athletico. Both Real and Athletico away are now out of the way so happy with where Barca are after a tough run of fixtures.

Paul Hemmings wrote:

Palmeiras 1 Botafogo 2 Sturridge on 90 minutes.
NewYork 0 Cosmos 1 Pulisic.

Only just seen that Botafogo sneaked in a winner!! Get in. .
Delighted with all my teams. 100% Start for all clubs, best taking the points when team is in form. 

Clearly couldn't ask for a better start from any of my teams, long may it continue!

Printing tomorrow morning then I will send out the email turns in the afternoon...

I have received a lot of feedback over the years and the one thing that stands out as being a continuing issue is the poaching of backroom staff. This has always been the number one bugbear for players and the one thing I continually get feedback on, so I've been designing a new system to handle backroom staff and would like your feedback before I consider introducing it.

At the moment I have a system to handle player contracts and another system to handle non-playing staff contracts, what I propose is we use the player contract system to control non-playing staff contracts as well. Logically this makes sense as players and non-playing staff are stored on the same database. But it would involve a few changes to the way non-playing staff are handled.

You would now set the contract length ( 22-88 weeks ) the weekly pay and any signonfee ( 25,000 minimum ). 
- On the upside this means you could keep the same staff member as long as you wanted without having to always double his signonfee ( a big burden for clubs lower down the divisions ) although you would still need to offer him a signonfee the same way you have to offer players a signonfee.
- On the downside it means any staff member whose contract expires would go onto the transfer list on a bosman for other managers to sign and they would stay on the transfer list until somebody bought them but they would still be working for your club.

You can still use the ADVERTISE dealing and the HS special action.

I would also like to add a few wrinkles to the way non-playing staff work.

1) the higher the wage the more effectiveness you get. 
- So 100% would be as it is now. 200% would be double wage, 300% doubled again ( *4 ) 400% doubled again ( *8 ) and so on up to 900%. So for a scout the 100% wage=1000 if you want him on 200% then you'd pay him 2000, 300% pay him 4000, 400% pay him 8000 and so on.

2) Scouts only report on players of a similar star rating to themselves.

3) Scouts return multiple scouting reports based on their effectiveness. So a scout on 300% would return scout reports on 3 players.

So let me know what you think, thanks.

If it makes the game run smoother but still keeps it's level of depth. I'm all for it!

Would the staff have there own transfer list or would they be integrated into the player one?

Also if you off 200% / 300% / 400% would you have to offer signon of 2x, 3x, 3x?

Phil@Watford wrote:

If it makes the game run smoother but still keeps it's level of depth. I'm all for it!

Would the staff have there own transfer list or would they be integrated into the player one?

Also if you off 200% / 300% / 400% would you have to offer signon of 2x, 3x, 3x?

They could have their own list or be integrated might be clearer to keep them separate as they are now.

Signonfees required would be the same as for players ie the longer the contract the bigger the signonfee. ( effectiveness wouldnt effect signonfee required ).

For staff on the transfer list who are bid on by two or more players in the same week we'd use the comparative wage to decide who they signed for as we do for players
wage+(signonfee/10)

How would this affect Staff who have sub categories below them? Would you have to SET them as well or would giving the Lead staff manager 200% also give his sub categories 200%?

Phil@Watford wrote:

How would this affect Staff who have sub categories below them? Would you have to SET them as well or would giving the Lead staff manager 200% also give his sub categories 200%?

Sub categories would stay at 100% maximum effectiveness for now.

All sounds reasonable to me.

This makes a load of sense.

Sounds good.

Would much prefer NPS to have their own transfer list. Would we need to request that?

Also, I can understand that overpaying scouts would produce more scouted players, but what would overpaying other NPS produce? For instance I have a Head Groundsman at 220%, but not sure what benefit I'm getting?

Would an NPS transfer list show things like their Favoured Job, their Star Rating, their maximum effectiveness %age?

Andy.

Andy@Schalke wrote:

Sounds good.

Would much prefer NPS to have their own transfer list. Would we need to request that?

Also, I can understand that overpaying scouts would produce more scouted players, but what would overpaying other NPS produce? For instance I have a Head Groundsman at 220%, but not sure what benefit I'm getting?

Would an NPS transfer list show things like their Favoured Job, their Star Rating, their maximum effectiveness %age?

Andy.

Staff TL would appear as it does now after the player TL.
I'm only implementing Scouts in the inaugral system, will decide what other staff to do for phase two.
Staff TL would include favoured job, star rating, age and wage100% amongst other things.

Email turns all sent out...

Thanks for another great week Paul. 

Just a quick query with a couple of missing players.  Last week for some reason my TM in Charltons youth team didn't play, I checked my sheets I sent in and no changes were made. Not that important, but then this week it happened again but with Nantes.  My TM in my youth team was dropped and replaced by an apprentice for some reason.  Again, no changes were made and haven't been for a few weeks so don't understand it?

Thanks