Well the fact is that D.5 teams do afford players. Not the best ones though. And you cant compare training in a D.5 league with training up a 5-600k player thats just stupid. Cause the fact is that a player that a D.5 team cant afford and a player that almost no team in BB can afford is so far from each other that it cant even be put in the same comparison.
And the road from D.5 to higher leagues where you can afford the player that you are training up compared with the road where you go to the B3 and actually can field a 500k player because of that your going so far into the B3 competition shouldn't be on the same comparison.
You say that these monsters should get their salary cut so that teams can afford them? If so were so far from each others view of this games as we can be.
Cause i think that everyone needs to carefully plan their actions in this game to see to that you keep your team afloat.
If your training up a 400k player you need to plan on that you may not be able to afford that player unless you strip down the salary's of you other players.
Everyone got the same conditions to adapt to and how you go about adapting to them is up to every manager. I see no need for a change in this part of the game as you can field these players if you want but you'll need to make sacrifices.
No,I say that the economic questions are much more greater than simply the "monster player salaries"
I can easily make a choice to go with a skilltrading strategy and lose some seasons training players with a level above what i can actually sustain to raise money for the next season,so it's not a my problem if in a III division I'm training a 150k big man(for example,)
Actually the market need to find better equilibrium,and to move the market some measure is needed,it could be another general cut of the salaries(in equal percentage for all the players) or an increase in incomes(realted to comeptitivity of the leagues); these kind of measures indirectly would affect also salary monster problem