No, I've just begun my research on it a few hours ago, didn't really bother looking up the abnormalities at the start of the league. We can trace it down by simply looking up his transactions tho :P
I didn't mean to change the system to be salary based, because it would be even more unfair. I find the rating system good as is, except for a lack of restrictions. Also, I'm adressing this to, maybe, find an easy to implement solution to it.
It's a competetive game, so dodging all unfairness is not a possible task (64th and the 1st team won't have a complete 50/50, so it's automatically unfair, but at an acceptable rate), but when top 10 teams don't even have a chance at beating the number one team, well, it's not great. Especially, when the Tier3 mammoths can even compete with an ease when upped a tier (or two, even).
That's why I'd love to see something like a hard salary cap in the games - you can't use players, whos combined salaries exceed X amount. Well, a tier (or an elevated average of sorts) based salary ceiling.
Or if possible, some sort of a relegation/promotion game for the league abnormalities. But I haven't had the time to figure out how that'd work (or if it'd work).
As you've mentioned, since we do get compensation for the games, it's not something I'd be very angry about if it wasn't fixed, however it's something I'd be extremely happy about if it was :P