Strength of your squad on paper compared to rest of league?

[Leicester_Loyal]

7 minutes ago, Leeds Fox said:

I’m not disagreeing, but I tend not to watch Man Utd. What does Fernandes do that makes him so good? 

It's hard to even say, he just seems to link up the play between their holding midfields and their forwards so well. He seems to be the player that makes them tick. Various times this season they've been struggling and then he's either been subbed on or just started to take control of the game and they've become a much better side for it.

 

Plus he scores penalties

[Trav Le Bleu]

10 hours ago, surrifox said:

We have a better squad than any of the sides that have beaten us at our place this year 

And to balance that, a worse squad than some of the teams we've beaten.

[Vazman]

1 hour ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...I know logic dictates that we adhere to your take in regard to a skewed meritocracy!!!

  I do not adhere to where you finish determines your rosters strength. Belgium at present is on paper the strongest team in world football, but they are not going to win the European Cup or the World Cup.

 Closer to home had you put our roster up against the rest of the Premiership 2015/16, you would have found that we were a long way from the top of the list.

  You could give Neil Lennon the managers job at Barcelona and you would find, they would not be anywhere, that they should be.   There are other factors that will determine a teams success and a good roster is just a part of the reason.

You have just answered my original point, I said 5th best based on where we finished in the PL last season thats a fact, I also said that what is on paper counts for toffee link back to your point about Belgium on paper, roster is important clearly but I am failing too see how my original point doesn't stand with your answer.

[Charl91]

4 hours ago, teblin said:

Did we not have a fair few out too?

 

4 hours ago, Spudulike said:

But half of our first XI were also missing. 

 

True. But we can't say we have better depth than Liverpool when their "reserves" beat ours  

[Aus Fox]

Man Utd have a cracking squad of players to be fair, the likes of Fernandes, Pogba, Rashford, De Gea would get into most teams. Players like Zach de Beek don’t get a sniff. 
If they had a world class manager in charge they would easily be a top 4 side.

Their squad is still behind Liverpool and Man City, but man for man ahead of the rest.

[Spudulike]

1 hour ago, Charl91 said:

 

 

True. But we can't say we have better depth than Liverpool when their "reserves" beat ours  

Liverpool reserves are better than almost all other clubs reserves (and most first teamers). Could this be the reason why they want 5 subs? 

[Nicolo Barella]

19 hours ago, BrianSwan said:

How would you rank it on paper in the division?

 

Would you say your squad is stronger than Everton, Wolves, Arsenal?

 

I'd say on paper the top 10 are..

 

1. Man City

2. Liverpool

3. Chelsea

4. Man United

5. Spurs

6. Leicester

7. Arsenal

8. Everton

9. Wolves

10. Villa

 

I think Villa, Southampton and West Ham are close on paper. 

Purely in terms of player quality stacked together, I'd say that's a fair assessment of squad strength. If we're also measuring things like mental fortitude of the squad, a few of those teams including ours would drop down the list.