I thought of an idea about sides that are left unmanaged, molested and/or deserted I would love some opinions on.

So if a side becomes unmanaged the computer then puts weekly bids in for that side original players (who are at other unmanaged sides) in hope to get the side back to its real life squad and appealing to manage again.
So if say a Chelsea side becomes unmanaged then in order to make them more attractive then in the time they have been unmanaged the computer put random cash bids in for Chelsea’s real life players to other unmanaged sides which will all get accepted. Obviously acceptable cash offers.

I believe this would be a good idea because a new manager wants to take an unmanaged aide, it’ll be as the real life as possible which is why we want to manage certain sides at the start of the game to begin with. Obviously when a side becomes unmanaged the computer resets the clubs bank balance anyway, so there will be funds to do this and also further to accommodate this, the computer would also sell the non real life spurs players to fund on the UE as well. (not selling pot players tho)

I know what people will say, why should someone’s hard work be undone? Well no one should really benefit from someone else’s hard work, I mean I wouldn’t want to inherit someone else’s side and claim the glory. Plus I believe most would prefer to take a new side on as original as possible in order to reshape them how they want.

What do you think?

I thought of an idea about sides that are left unmanaged, molested and/or deserted I would love some opinions on.

So if a side becomes unmanaged the computer then puts weekly bids in for that side original players (who are at other unmanaged sides) in hope to get the side back to its real life squad and appealing to manage again.
So if say a Chelsea side becomes unmanaged then in order to make them more attractive then in the time they have been unmanaged the computer put random cash bids in for Chelsea’s real life players to other unmanaged sides which will all get accepted. Obviously acceptable cash offers.

I believe this would be a good idea because a new manager wants to take an unmanaged aide, it’ll be as the real life as possible which is why we want to manage certain sides at the start of the game to begin with. Obviously when a side becomes unmanaged the computer resets the clubs bank balance anyway, so there will be funds to do this and also further to accommodate this, the computer would also sell the non real life spurs players to fund on the UE as well. (not selling pot players tho)

I know what people will say, why should someone’s hard work be undone? Well no one should really benefit from someone else’s hard work, I mean I wouldn’t want to inherit someone else’s side and claim the glory. Plus I believe most would prefer to take a new side on as original as possible in order to reshape them how they want.

What do you think?

i think its time ue seriously did something about managers that take teams fuck them up by selling there best players then dumping them after 5 turns because they cant win a game.

thats why unmanaged sides are not appealing and thats why some teams have better reserve sides than some teams first 11.

not bad, an alternative could be that players ratings rise at unmanaged clubs to make them more attractive? is it true that players ratings don't rise at EOS if club is unmanaged?

Added pot to a couple at Grasshoppers and seen them again recently and there has been no movement (including eos)

not bad, an alternative could be that players ratings rise at unmanaged clubs to make them more attractive? is it true that players ratings don't rise at EOS if club is unmanaged?

this is a better option I would think, because with the original idea of this thread, the only players released by big sides to non managed sides will likely not be very good players
probably around low 90oa 34pv, whilst the big stars to end up at massive clubs with good managers who are under no obligation or requirement to sell.
if they were to be enticed it would have to be a stupid offer, for example, the computer offering 50+m for a 30m player.

I have some reasonable players at aik in 119 such as hassler and kheidra, no money offer would be sufficient for me to want to give them up.

the idea by the original poster is very good though.

Just to play devil's advocate,

If "Chelsea" were to bid on old players and resign them, then that will be stripping other teams. For example

Anderlecht have
2 X Chelsea players
2 X arsenal players
3 X Barcelona players
Just hypothetical

All three of these clubs become unmanaged and then Anderlecht go on to lose 4 of these 7 players. Who would then want to manage Anderlecht?
It's easy to say having Chelsea better than Anderlecht is more important but it isn't more important to the players paid up for a team in Anderlechts league, as you have stripped a team making his league weaker.

Personally not for me because of this reason.

Spot on muscles. Why not just have the unmanaged clubs players rise?