When the Elliot Anderson deal broke, I texted my brother that it might be the biggest shift in how clubs value players we’ve seen in years. A few months in, I think I was half right.

The Premier League “silly season” has delivered its usual chaos this year, and for Manchester City and new manager Enzo Maresca, the goal would most certainly be to add quality and bring the Premier League trophy up the M6 from North London. Maresca faces the challenge of filling the shoes of his predecessor and mentor Pep Guardiola, and the City front office has put its chips into Nottingham Forest and England midfielder Elliot Anderson. It caused quite the uproar.

It’s not the player himself who’s controversial. Anderson is an exceptional box-to-box midfielder, someone with incisive ball progression who isn’t shy to put in a clean tackle. That was proven by his tireless shifts at this past summer’s World Cup as part of the double pivot with Declan Rice in England’s midfield.

Rather, it’s the fee. Manchester City forked up £116m upfront for the Englishman, breaking the record for a British player and, at the time, becoming the third most expensive transfer in Premier League history, behind only Alexander Isak and Florian Wirtz’s moves to Liverpool last summer.

It’s tempting to read that fee on its own, but it’s important to contextualize it: City brought in £694.1m in revenue last season, while Nottingham Forest brought in £222m, a club record for them, but still only about a third of what the league’s so-called “big six” average. Contrary to popular........

© Sports Business Journal