Numpty >>
tuesday june 22 - 08:54, Edited
tuesday june 22 - 08:58 To be fair I think it takes far too long to catch up - and perhaps there needs to be a compromise between the advantage of longevity and giving a new manager some kind of realistic hope of eventually closing the gap.
I've fairly recently finished building stadium 11. It took a little over 2 1/2 years starting from scratch. And most likely it will take at least another 18 months to fund and build some high level academies and start training up some top players.
Yes, it's perfectly possible to be competitive before then by spending cash on players rather than buildings. That's a personal choice but I'd prefer to play the long game. Better and more experienced managers may be able to do it a bit quicker.
If I'd been fully aware of those timescales at the very start I probably wouldn't have started playing.
But I don't think there are any easy solutions to this other than perhaps improving the starters bonus. People who have already invested 3, 4 or 5 years gradually closing the gap should not see their efforts undermined by a change that suddenly makes it a lot easier.
The claim that "the bigger team keep get stronger and stronger" is simply not true. Those at the very top of the pile are constrained by the costs of the buildings and the players' wages. Many have already reached their limits and those who are still getting stronger are the "chasing pack".
My one suggestion would be to make a small adjustment to the academies so each level gives less of a benefit.
In any event any kind of salary cap before fixing the wages formula for the top players would make no sense at all.