Ozdec
Player Valuation: £2.5m
You have a group of ManU (way out in front but being pillaged by the Glazers), Arsenal, Man City and Chelsea out in front on turnover, Liverpool run a slightly distant 5th (but at 206m still more than twice the 7th highest in Newcastle at 96m).
Another drop back to Tottenham. Then a drop back to Newcastle, West Ham, Us and Aston Villa (between 96m and 84m in turnover.
Then the rest of the top 17 are all between 67m and 76m.
Money is a good indicator of general form you could put down a order of the teams based on turnover and get a realistic league table for most years.
Massive gap between the top 4 250m + a year with 5+6 still far more than 7th then a small group (7-10th) with a small but appreciable gap over the rest.
That is why you are really starting to see points accumulate to the top teams and more teams being relegation battlers every year. I can forsee that the general trend each year will be to see it require more and more points to get CL and more and more teams will hover around the 30-40 pts at the end of the season. Also teams with turnovers in the 70-100m will not afford 20m+ players while teams with 250m turnover can buy multiple.
If about 7 teams + the 3 promoted teams all have roughly the same finances and lag well behind the top 5-6 then generally that will lead to fairly predictable results between the top teams and those teams. What will determine is how they fare against each other.
A much smaller group of teams become comfortable mid table - not in threat of those with lower resources but generally unable to compete with the top teams.
I am proud to say that the only real outlier to this trend seems to be us. We have the resources to be in the comfortable midtable group but tend to outperform that group. What makes us that little bit better?
Sorry if that is a bit messy - just wanted to get a few more thoughts about it down
Another drop back to Tottenham. Then a drop back to Newcastle, West Ham, Us and Aston Villa (between 96m and 84m in turnover.
Then the rest of the top 17 are all between 67m and 76m.
Money is a good indicator of general form you could put down a order of the teams based on turnover and get a realistic league table for most years.
Massive gap between the top 4 250m + a year with 5+6 still far more than 7th then a small group (7-10th) with a small but appreciable gap over the rest.
That is why you are really starting to see points accumulate to the top teams and more teams being relegation battlers every year. I can forsee that the general trend each year will be to see it require more and more points to get CL and more and more teams will hover around the 30-40 pts at the end of the season. Also teams with turnovers in the 70-100m will not afford 20m+ players while teams with 250m turnover can buy multiple.
If about 7 teams + the 3 promoted teams all have roughly the same finances and lag well behind the top 5-6 then generally that will lead to fairly predictable results between the top teams and those teams. What will determine is how they fare against each other.
A much smaller group of teams become comfortable mid table - not in threat of those with lower resources but generally unable to compete with the top teams.
I am proud to say that the only real outlier to this trend seems to be us. We have the resources to be in the comfortable midtable group but tend to outperform that group. What makes us that little bit better?
Sorry if that is a bit messy - just wanted to get a few more thoughts about it down
