In a Premier League campaign that is increasingly dictated by injuries, squad rotation and a jam-packed fixture list, the ability of a team to cope when its first‑choice eleven are unavailable has become a decisive factor. Understanding how much quality lies beyond the usual starting line‑up, how much of that quality is retained when backups are called upon, and where each club’s strengths and weaknesses lie, is essential for assessing overall squad depth.
It also matters how often managers actually tap into these alternatives and how effective those players are when they step onto the pitch. Our research set out to answer these questions by constructing a comprehensive Squad Depth Index that blends several data sources. We combined Sky Sports’ Opta playing‑time and match statistics with Transfermarkt’s current market valuations to pinpoint each club’s established first XI and the strongest players available on the bench. The model then evaluated the drop‑off in quality from the first to the second XI, the overall reserve quality, positional coverage, the real‑world rotation that managers employ, and the readiness of each player to step in at short notice.
In addition, we measured the impact of substitutes in attacking situations by analysing their Premier League performances over the previous two full seasons and the current campaign, adjusting the figures for sample size to avoid skew from brief cameo appearances. A separate Competitive Depth Index was also calculated.
This index factors in the performance standard each club is expected to maintain – based on Sky Sports’ super‑computer forecasts – and weighs it against the total market value of the squad as estimated by Transfermarkt. The preparedness component of the model compares squad depth against upcoming fixture congestion, short turn‑arounds and each club’s injury record from last season and the current one.
When all the variables were fed into the system, Arsenal emerged as the clear leader of the Overall Squad Depth Index, and they also topped the Competitive Depth Index. While this result is not shocking given the Gunners’ recent recruitment strategy, it raises the question: what makes Mikel Arteta’s squad so robust and reliable compared with the rest of the English top flight?
Arsenal’s summer transfer window was focused on bolstering depth rather than chasing headline‑grabbing signings. Although the club entertained rumors linking them to stars such as Vinícius Júnior and Julián Álvarez, the actual arrivals – Bruno Guimarães in midfield and Ezri Konsa in defence – added quality to a back four and midfield that were already stacked with talent. Arteta also had to navigate a long list of injuries last season, and the club hopes that a healthier roster this year will allow the depth they have built to shine.
One striking metric is the combined market value of Arsenal’s named substitutes in Premier League matches this season, which averages around £367 million. No other club comes close. It is worth noting that Transfermarkt values tend to be lower than the amounts clubs actually pay; on average Premier League teams paid about 36% above these valuations during the summer.
Applying that premium pushes Arsenal’s bench value nearer to £500 million, underscoring the sheer financial weight of their alternatives. By contrast, the three newly promoted sides – Hull City, Coventry City and Ipswich Town – possess the lowest average bench values. Mid‑table clubs such as Brentford sit in an intriguing position, with an average bench value of £129 million, just outside the traditional "big six". Market value alone, however, does not tell the whole story.
To gauge the practical usefulness of these bench players, we examined their actual output when entering league matches as substitutes over the previous two full seasons and the current campaign. To prevent a player who scores once in a ten‑minute cameo from inflating the rankings, goals and assists per 90 minutes were adjusted toward the league average based on the size of each player’s substitute sample.
When measured by goal involvements per 90 minutes, Arsenal rank second only to Brighton, and in raw totals they lead the league. Since the start of the 2023‑24 season, Arsenal’s squad has contributed 27 goals and assists from 4,340 substitute minutes, delivering an adjusted rate of roughly 0.54 goal involvements per 90 minutes. This indicates that the Gunners can rely on their bench not just to fill gaps but to add tangible attacking threat. Depth becomes especially crucial after the international break, when fixture congestion reaches its peak.
Having a deep pool of players who can maintain performance levels is one thing; actually using them is another. To explore utilisation, we ranked every Premier League player by total minutes played and split them into three tiers: core XI, regular rotation and fringe players. Tottenham Hotspur, for example, have already allocated a relatively high share of minutes beyond their core eleven, despite not competing on as many fronts as some rivals.
This suggests that Roberto De Zerbi is still experimenting with his strongest lineup. Manchester United’s core players account for more than 88% of total minutes, a figure only surpassed by Bournemouth and Everton.
While United’s data indicates they have the resources to rotate, manager Michael Carrick has yet to place full confidence in those options. In contrast, Arsenal and Manchester City see roughly 15% of their minutes coming from players ranked 12th‑22nd in the league, highlighting a more balanced distribution of playing time. To test the resilience of each squad, we simulated a worst‑case scenario where every member of a club’s first XI is unavailable.
Using Premier League playing time to identify the most trusted starters, we built a standardised first XI for each club and then assembled a second XI from the remaining players. Arsenal’s modelled first XI is valued at about £580 million, while their second XI is worth roughly £536 million – a retention of approximately 92% of the estimated value of the starting side even when all eleven starters are replaced. Manchester City’s second XI, by contrast, is valued at £428.2 million less than their first XI, largely because of the steep drop‑off when Erling Haaland is omitted. Two clubs – Aston Villa and Hull City – actually possess second XIs that are more valuable than their usage‑based first XIs, reflecting late‑window transfer activity that could reshape their line‑ups as new arrivals settle.
Depth issues often arise in specific positions rather than across the entire squad. We therefore broke every team down into ten positional categories – goalkeeper, right‑back, centre‑back, left‑back, defensive midfield, central midfield, attacking midfield, left wing, right wing and centre‑forward – and assessed the two strongest credible options for each role (four for centre‑back, where two spots exist).
This granular view revealed that Arsenal, despite their overall strength, are notably thin on the left wing after the departures of Gabriel Martinelli and Leandro Trossard. Liverpool face an even sharper deficit on the opposite flank following the sale of Mohamed Salah. The weakest positions league‑wide appear in the attacking midfield departments of Brighton, Crystal Palace and Newcastle, where the traditional number‑10 role is either under‑utilised or absent.
Everton rank 20th for centre‑forward depth, scoring a low 36.1 in our metric after a failed pursuit of Folarin Balogun. This does not imply that Everton’s starter, Thierno Barry, is the poorest striker, but rather that the quality of his alternatives lags behind those at other clubs.
When looking at overall squad balance, the reigning champions Manchester City rank among the most well‑rounded, with only Aston Villa edging them in the pure Squad Depth Score – a metric that measures the strength of alternatives relative to the first team. Recent departures of players such as Morgan Rogers, Ollie Watkins, Youri Tielemans, Ezri Konsa and Emi Martinez have narrowed the gap between starters and rotation options at several clubs. Youth also plays a pivotal role in depth.
Our model includes development players who have established market values or have already earned Premier League minutes. Chelsea boast the most valuable cohort of young first‑team talent in the league, with seven players aged 21 or under collectively worth £229.5 million. These are primarily home‑grown signings such as Willian Estevão and Geovany Quenda.
Manchester City rank second with a youth value of £190.9 million, followed by Brighton (£179.1 million), Manchester United (£177.1 million) and Bournemouth (£159.5 million). However, value does not always translate into minutes. Brighton and Manchester United are among the top five clubs for minutes played by young players, whereas Manchester City’s youngsters have logged just 257 minutes, and Arsenal’s two young prospects (worth £72.7 million) have accumulated 282 minutes – still more than Leeds United’s solitary minute.
Finally, we simulated the removal of each player from every club’s first XI and rebuilt the strongest possible line‑up from the remaining squad. This exercise highlighted the positions where a single absence would cause the greatest structural weakness. As expected, goalkeepers feature prominently; Brighton’s Bart Verbruggen emerges as the most damaging loss if unavailable.
Among outfield players, Aston Villa’s youngster George Hemmings, Bournemouth’s Adrien Truffert and Crystal Palace’s Adam Wharton represent the biggest potential setbacks for their respective teams. In summary, Arsenal’s blend of high‑valued bench players, effective rotation usage and strong substitute impact places them at the summit of Premier League squad depth. While other clubs possess pockets of strength – such as Chelsea’s youthful assets or Manchester City’s overall balance – the Gunners’ ability to retain roughly 92% of their starting‑XI value even when forced to field an entirely new line‑up underscores the strategic advantage of a deep, versatile roster in a season where injuries and fixture congestion are the norm.