Do you think, as a winner, that there should be two levels of competition in B3? I mean, each year there are at least 4-5 teams who could buy B3, but probably don't want to compete against each other as they'd deplete their cash reserves too quickly. So we see one dominant team each year that wins it all and it seems too easy - almost like it's a deal between those 4-5 rich teams.
Maybe we'd need "rich teams" competition and "not so rich" teams competition, sort of like normal and "poor man's B3" version. The ones who get to buy B3 can play in rich team competition, while others who like to win with their own players can play against themselves.
I think that everybody have his own strategy in this game. They are a lot of teams with solid bank accounts, but not all of them win trophies;)
But about "rich competition" ant "not rich", hmm this is a very difficult situation, because, how you will separate those teams? I mean, in base of what criteria? Bank account? Somebody will sell all his players and will have a solid bank account, but no good players, is this team rich or poor? In the other hand they will be teams that will invest in players and will have good and expensive players but no money in they bank account:) Is this teams rich or poor? So, it will be very very difficult to divide them and they will be a lot of discussions and debates about that. Like i told you before, every year they are more teams that invest in Different competitions, but not all of them succeed.
On the other hand, do you think that Manchester City or PSG and many other rich teams need to play in a different competition in football? :)))))))