Probably Bournemouth

who decides the worth of the player? is it how much was paid for them?

Their value should be updated weekly like fantasy football so atm Liverpool would only be able to play VVD and Salah then a load of rubbish players. while United could play anyone they want since they suck at the moment. would even things up, constantly keep the table changing

Yeah 200 million seems a bit low in today's market. There is also the factor that United, City, Chelsea, Liverpool etc have more financial resources but the fees they pay reflect that. If United wanted to sign a player Bournemouth, for example, targeted, their transfer value would increase massively

comment by Loco Liverpool (U18018)
posted 25 minutes ago
who decides the worth of the player? is it how much was paid for them?

Their value should be updated weekly like fantasy football so atm Liverpool would only be able to play VVD and Salah then a load of rubbish players. while United could play anyone they want since they suck at the moment. would even things up, constantly keep the table changing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course its what was paid for them. How else would it work

Obviously Arsenal. The highest placed team of non lottery winning clubs for years now.

A salary cap would be better.

You finished below United last year, right? Unless you consider United to be a lottery winner with their ownership? Which begs the question of the Arsenal ownership model

If Neymar is worth £200M then Messi must be worth £400M.

If you're only allowed £200M of talent does he have to play on his own and with his right leg only?

If Neymar is worth £200M then Messi must be worth £400M.

If you're only allowed £200M of talent does he have to play on his own and with his right leg only?

**llocks

merrysupersteve

Agreed our financial model is weird. But how many points ahead of United do you think Arsenal would be if they were allowed to spend the same amount?

If you want to regulate the quality of players across clubs the best way to do it is with a salary cap.
For instance in the Premier League you have 25 players in your squad.
You can only award 25 contracts in £10k p/w intervals starting at £10k. No limit on u21 players but wage is capped at £10k.
The intervals are adjusted for inflation each year.

If a club wants to spends £100m on a player they can only free up a £40k p/w space for that is their choice but if the same player can sign for Wolves for £150k guess what happens?

I’d love it if this happened- teams are given an equal amount and no more, no elevated sponsorship workarounds, nothing, that’s it.

Would make the league very interesting.

comment by Stranglers (U21996)
posted 50 minutes ago
Obviously Arsenal. The highest placed team of non lottery winning clubs for years now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal won the lottery but decided that it wouldn't change them and they didn't want the money so Usmanov upped sticks

Didn't Arsenal win the Danny Fiszman lottery a few years ago?

comment by Stranglers (U21996)
posted 49 minutes ago
merrysupersteve

Agreed our financial model is weird. But how many points ahead of United do you think Arsenal would be if they were allowed to spend the same amount?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arsenal spend loads of money

In recent years, Arsenal have spent quite a lot. Not as much as United or City, but a lot more than Spurs or Liverpool

Until Arsenal start making Van Dijk size purchases without having to sell a big player first they are excused.

And this idea of a club who has fifteen finished article £50 million players on its books who stops spending being compared to a club like Arsenal with our sell to buy policy is just silly.