Top 100 Rules
Outcome of the Player Concerns Vote Revealed
The Player Concerns Vote was a close one.
Here on our blog, it was 50:50.
On Facebook it was the same.
On WhatsApp there was a clear majority in favour of scrapping the rule.
However several managers voted in both the FB and WA polls. Taking those votes into account, the vote is still just in favour scrapping the rule, 16 to 12.
36 managers voted anonymously on the blog.
26 managers voted publicly on FB.
39 managers voted publicly on WA.
11 managers voted on both FB and WA polls.
Removing their duplicate votes still leaves 36+26+39-11=90 maximum number of unique votes. Minimum 26+39-11=54 votes (assuming all blog votes are duplicates). It's likely that the true number of unique votes is in between 54 and 90, probably around 70.
The other factor to take into account now is the concerns bug which has seen players developing concerns despite playing all matches. SM issued a fix today, but we likely won't see if this fix works until turn 12 of next season.
UPDATE: SM posted more on this in their April update:
...the cause of these issues was related to the changes we made to the transfer ban. A fix was put in place off the back of this work and we are continuing to monitor the system to make sure the desired effect was achieved.
Therefore, we will scrap the L3 concerns rules with immediate effect and keep the L5 concerns settings as normal.
Vote: External Transfer Rule
Last night I did a couple of polls on WhatsApp and Facebook to confirm what I thought we already knew: that we want to keep the new player rule, and change the temporary external player rule.
This was confirmed.
So now we will vote here for a new external player rule.
IMPORTANT: Change to Transfer Limits in Top 100
SM Worlds 2.0
SM introduced - and almost immediately rolled back due to so many bugs - their much vaunted SM Worlds 2.0 yesterday evening.
I guess we can expect to see it again maybe late next week, unless the Gores like paying overtime to their developers to work on the Bank Holiday Weekend.
Implications for Top 100
A couple of immediate ramifications for Top 100 - firstly, one of our longstanding managers Mark Deadman quit Valencia, and I expect a few more to follow suit once the new update is live and the 7 days free Gold membership expires, if not before.
Secondly, the update includes a new £1 billion upper transfer fee limit, as opposed to the old limit which was two times the minimum player value (except for free agents, which was higher).
New Player Rule and Player Concerns Rule
Yesterday, I agreed with the admin team to introduce an immediate temporary change to our rules for signing new players added to the database, and players who were sold due to Level Three concerns.
Previously, the rule stated that managers can only bid the no higher than the first maximum bid for new players, and bids on players sold as a result of concerns have the same in-game limit.
The new rules are that managers can only bid the MINIMUM value, and not higher.
What are Other Game Worlds Doing?
It's my understanding that this rule already works fine in other game worlds, and that the reason we brought in the maximum bid rule for new players - that some players' values increased overnight putting managers in different timezones at a total disadvantage when it came to adjusting their bids - no longer applies (bids made before any value change are accepted and completed and/or values no longer change).
Fair Play
Changing from maximum to minimum bids, therefore, retains the fairness of bidding for everyone, and in a game world where cash has always been worthless, makes no material difference to clubs' finances or competitiveness.
Landucci at Lokomotiv Moskva asked if we can also have a cap on transfer fees for all external players (i.e., including players who are not newly added, not sold as a result of the concerns rule).
Newsfeed Discussion on £1bn Upper Transfer Limit
This provoked a long discussion on the newsfeed. The main point being that some clubs have billions in the bank while most have only a few hundred million, putting them at a distinct disadvantage when bidding on external players with a new £1 billion offer limit. The new £1 billion limit is obviously much, much higher than the previous two times value limit, which kept everything fair in a game world where cash has never had any value.
The other side of the argument is that 1) there are very few players at external clubs who are not newly added, or who are not sold as a result of the concerns rule that anyone wants to buy - they are at external clubs for a reason! There are, of course, occasional exceptions - Samuel Mbangula being one very recent exception. 2) Having a new £1 billion upper limit on transfer bids for all players could enliven the market and create new strategy options for managers.
The counter-argument being that its possible (if not likely) that this scenario would firstly give the rich clubs an immediate unfair advantage, and secondly in the longer term perhaps create a situation too realistic where all the wealth and talent is owned by a few super rich clubs.
New Rule for Offers on ALL External and Free Agent Players
I think, therefore, that at least until the end of this season, we will adopt the precautionary principle approach whereby we keep the transfer limits in Top 100 as they always have been (or as close to), in order to minimise any perceived unfairness and to limit any further disruption midway through the season.
So, from today, ALL TRANSFER OFFERS FOR EXTERNAL OR FREE AGENT PLAYERS must be at the MINIMUM value allowed and no higher, and disclosed (i.e, public so we everyone can see the bid).
This change keeps things pretty much as they were and makes no material difference to anyone because cash has no value in Top 100.
Whether we want to change that in the future will depend on further discussion and/or a vote at the end of this season or later.
New Player Concerns Rule
Player Concerns
From S22 starting Tuesday 23 January 2024,
- All players on Level Three (or higher) concerns must be sold immediately to an external club.
- No bidding by the selling club on the player when he becomes available.
- Minimum bids only.
The new rule requiring the sale of players with Level 3 concerns adds a layer of strategic complexity to managing in Top 100. Here's some advice based on the SM Game Help.
Understanding Concerns
Trigger Points
Players develop (or reduce) concerns after three consecutive evaluations where they haven't met their playing time expectations. These evaluations typically occur around Turns 12, 24, and 36 during each season.
Expectation Levels
Each player has a target number of games they expect to play based on their rating, squad position, and age. Top players expect more playing time than younger or lower-rated players (but be aware of young players who rise rapidly in ratings, see "Change in Rating" below).
Lack of Games
This concern arises when a player reaches a certain rating and expects to play more than they currently are. Use the Game Help's explanation to identify players at risk.
Lack of Opportunity
Players who see no future playing time due to their position in the squad (5th choice left-back, for example) are more likely to develop this concern.
Change in Rating
As players' ratings change, their expectations and concerns might adapt accordingly.
Advice for Managing Concerns under the New Rule
Proactive Squad Management
Evaluate Regularly
Use the "Lack of Games" explanation in Game Help (above) to understand your players' expectations based on their rating and position. Monitor their concerns throughout the season, especially around Turns 12, 24, and 36.
Rotate your Squad
Give fringe players opportunities to avoid concerns. Utilise cup competitions.
Substitutions
Ensure your key players get sufficient playing time through regular substitutions. Even half appearances count, so utilize your bench effectively.
Loans
Consider sending out on loan (if your chairman will allow) fringe players, young players with potential to rise in rating, or players on concerns to gain playing time and avoid selling at a discount. But note that some older, higher rated players won't like being loaned out!
Youth Development
If you have young players with high potential, prioritize their playing time to prevent concerns and accelerate their development.
Realistic Squad Depth
Don't overstock your squad with high-rated players. Maintain a balanced squad with clear roles for each player to avoid unmet expectations.
Plan Transfers
Identify potential replacements before players reach Level 3 concerns. This allows you to negotiate better deals and avoid forced sales.
Sell Strategically
If selling is unavoidable, prioritize players with lower potential or those whose transfer values might decline due to age. Explore the market for potential buyers who might offer higher prices.
Invest in Youth
Use the funds from player sales to invest in promising young talents who require less playing time and can develop within your system.
Remember
The new rule encourages squad rotation and long-term planning. By proactively managing your team and dealing with concerns strategically, you can turn this challenge into an opportunity to build a well-balanced and sustainable squad for the future.
I hope this advice helps!
S21 Manager Sackings and New Jobs
Thursday (tomorrow) night sees the final round of matches in another exciting season in Top 100. Shortly after 8:00pm UK time, we will know for sure (barring any River Plate/Dinamo Zagreb level on points, goal difference and goals scored shenanigans) who has won and lost, and who will be automatically sacked within the next few hours or days.
When Frank founded Top 100, and as far as I know, he made decisions about who got reappointed, who got offered a new club, and who stayed sacked. Later, if there was lots of interest in a club, he asked a secret panel of trusted managers to decide who got the job. When I took over ownership of Top 100 from Frank in S9, I inherited his secret panel, and we've used it more and more ever since, including in recent seasons under Beddows' stewardship, to decide who should be reappointed or not.
There are some known problems with using a secret panel of managers.
- It's a LOT of extra work - something that Beddows was particularly good at, I have to say.
- It takes a lot longer to do.
- While we always tried to select managers based on their perceived trustworthiness, impartiality and wisdom, it's arguable that it just comes down to being a popularity contest.
- Less popular, but arguably more deserving managers often get repeatedly overlooked.
- People always complain about the panel decisions, particularly when it comes to taking into account managers' achievements and activity.
I'm always interested in doing less work, quicker, and in making decisions that are provably fair and justified, and based on our Top 100 Rules that have been (mostly) unchanged and on the blog since S1.
This season, we're going to decide who stays sacked, who gets reappointed, and who gets offered a new club using the following criteria (from the Top 100 Rules on Manager Sackings, and Malcolm's Stats - which show where a club was expected to finish at the start of the season):
- Has the manager indicated that they wish to stay?
- Were they appointed mid-season?
- Was the club promoted last season?
- Was the team expected to finish in the relegation places?
- Is the manager a real life fan of the club?
- Are they active in the game world (newsfeed, transfers, responding to messages, socials, blog)?
We'll also check the manager's individual record of achievement in the game world, whether there is interest in their job from other managers, and any other mitigating factors (e.g., personal issues, managers on waiting list, etc.).
Hopefully, this will make a simpler, quicker and fairer decision making process, although at the end of the day it will still come down to the decision of the Admin Team.
Two things I would say about this seasons sackings - we've had quite a few managerial changes during the season already, and not many managers waiting or ready to join now from Top 120 or elsewhere, so don't expect a bloodbath. And as this is a new way of doing it (even if it's based on the rules that have been there since the beginning), I think it's only fair to go a little easier on managers this time around. Next season could be different!
For any big new jobs, and/or jobs where there is a lot of interest, I do intend to consult the Managers' Panel (so sign up, if you haven't already, if you want to be part of that), but the final decision will still be made by the Admin Team.
Fictional Extra Time (FET) and Away Goals
In the knockout stages of friendly competitions (i.e., the Youth Cup and Shield, and the World Club Cup and Shield), if the scores are level at full-time, we follow standard rules for deciding the winners.
One Leg Ties
Fictional Extra Time decides the winner:
- One goal scored for the team with most possession.
- One goal scored for the team with the most shots on target.
- One goal scored for the team who scored first in normal time.
If scores are still level, the team with the most "possession + shots on target" gets one extra goal (see original FET rule: https://smtop100.blog/youth-cup-format-rules/youth-cup-knock-out/)
Two Leg Ties
The team with the most Away Goals is the winner.
If the tie is still level (i.e., both legs ended with the same scoreline), then Fictional Extra Time in the second leg decides the winner, as above.
Player concerns vote results
Last week, we proposed holding a vote on a suggestion by some Top 100 managers for a new rule:
Players on Level 3 concerns MUST be sold to an external club.
- Players must be sold for cash, and the selling team cannot bid on the player when he becomes available again.
We used StrawPoll for the first time (thanks to Beddows for his advice), and used the "unique token id" feature to ensure one manager one vote.
In less than three days, we had 92 votes out of 100.
One manager told me he couldn't decide which way to vote, and so didn't vote at all. Another tried to vote, but couldn't work out how to do it (sending the hyperlink isn't directly possible via SM private messages). Another quit (Partizan). Five didn't respond at all to any messages I sent them (one of those because he hasn't logged into SM during this time).
A very impressive turnout!
Anyway, without further ado, here are the results:
| Yes | 51 | 55.43% |
| No | 41 | 44.57% |
| Total Votes | 92 | 100% |
Strawpoll offers some interesting extra data:
And for Eurovision and conspiracy fans:
| COUNTRY | VOTERS | VOTES PER OPTION |
| United Kingdom | 55 (59.78%) | Yes : 28 (50.91%) No : 27 (49.09%) |
| Italy | 11 (11.96%) | Yes : 3 (27.27%) No : 8 (72.73%) |
| Portugal | 6 (6.52%) | Yes : 5 (83.33%) No : 1 (16.67%) |
| United States of America | 4 (4.35%) | Yes : 2 (50.00%) No : 2 (50.00%) |
| Romania | 3 (3.26%) | Yes : 2 (66.67%) No : 1 (33.33%) |
| India | 2 (2.17%) | Yes : 2 (100.00%) No : 0 (0.00%) |
| Argentina | 1 (1.09%) | Yes : 1 (100.00%) No : 0 (0.00%) |
| Switzerland | 1 (1.09%) | Yes : 1 (100.00%) No : 0 (0.00%) |
| Australia | 1 (1.09%) | Yes : 1 (100.00%) No : 0 (0.00%) |
| Hungary | 1 (1.09%) | Yes : 1 (100.00%) No : 0 (0.00%) |
| Croatia | 1 (1.09%) | Yes : 1 (100.00%) No : 0 (0.00%) |
| Malta | 1 (1.09%) | Yes : 1 (100.00%) No : 0 (0.00%) |
| France | 1 (1.09%) | Yes : 0 (0.00%) No : 1 (100.00%) |
| Bolivia | 1 (1.09%) | Yes : 1 (100.00%) No : 0 (0.00%) |
| Bosnia and Herzegovina | 1 (1.09%) | Yes : 0 (0.00%) No : 1 (100.00%) |
| Greece | 1 (1.09%) | Yes : 1 (100.00%) No : 0 (0.00%) |
| Spain | 1 (1.09%) | Yes : 1 (100.00%) No : 0 (0.00%) |
Poll Results: New Player Free Agents
UPDATE: Results of the poll.
New players are added to the Soccer Manager database every day. There's often one or more hot, new footballing talent among them who lots of managers want to bid for.
That's all fine for twenty four hours or so. Then, sometimes, players' values increase, and as they do so, the maximum bid increases, too.
For anyone who happens to be able to re-bid, that's fine, and a bit of a bonus. Some of the most sought-after young players can have half the game world or more bidding for them.
If half of those aren't able to re-bid because they're at work, or asleep, that improves your chances of winning!
But it's not really fair on those who, through no fault of their own, simply can't re-bid on a daily or regular basis.
Suggested new rule for Top 100:
All bids on new free agents must be public, and no bids higher than the first (maximum) bid.
Suggested sanction for breaking this rule:
One month ban on bidding on new player free agents, and having to sell the player signed illegally once they come off their transfer ban.
Sanctions increase as per regular transfer ban sanctions for repeat offenders
[crowdsignal poll=10280429]