🌍 Weekend Landscape

The WSL returns this weekend after the international break. Manchester City remain the only side with a perfect record after five wins from five, while Chelsea are unbeaten and have conceded only once. London City produced the result of the last round, winning 6–1 at Tottenham to move into the top three. Arsenal, one of the preseason favourites, go into the weekend in 10th after taking five points from five matches, so they need to begin putting their season in a better direction.

They return from an international break in mixed conditions. Some players come back with confidence and rhythm, others with heavy minutes, and coaches have little time to manage workloads and reassemble their sides before the league resumes. The weekend begins at the Emirates, where Arsenal host Birmingham City needing a result to start moving their season in the right direction. Chelsea welcome Tottenham, with Spurs looking to put the 6–1 defeat by London City behind them, while London City return home to face Everton in good form. Manchester City host Brighton, United go to Charlton looking to extend their recent momentum, Aston Villa remain without a league win ahead of Liverpool’s visit, and Crystal Palace host West Ham.

Arsenal v Birmingham City

Sat 17 Oct, 12:45 · Emirates Stadium

Model: Arsenal 90% · Draw 9% · Birmingham City 2%
Most likely scorelines: 3–0 (15%) · 2–0 (14%) · 4–0 (12%)

Arsenal return with plenty to put right. They have one league win and five points from their opening five matches, leaving them 10th at the break. But the underlying picture is less bleak than the table: they have created 8.2 xG while scoring only four goals, and their 240 touches in the opposition box are second-most in the division.

Birmingham are still looking for their first win after taking two points from five matches, though they have carried a genuine attacking threat. Océane Hurtré has scored five of their seven league goals so far, but the other side of their start is 12 conceded. Their 2–1 defeat at Everton before the break was another example: they found a way back into the game, but could not hold on.

This is a must-win in the practical sense for Arsenal. It will not repair their season on its own, but another home result would at least start to move it in the right direction. Birmingham have enough threat to punish a loose performance, yet Arsenal should expect to control the game and finally turn more of that control into goals.

STAT TO WATCH | Four goals from 8.2 xG
Arsenal’s chance creation has not yet translated into goals. Saturday is an opportunity to close that gap.

Chelsea v Tottenham Hotspur

Sun 18 Oct, 12:00 · Stamford Bridge

Model: Chelsea 65% · Draw 22% · Tottenham 12%
Most likely scorelines: 2–0 (12%) · 1–0 (11%) · 1–1 (11%)

Chelsea return from the break in second place, unbeaten after five league matches and with the division’s best defensive record: 12 goals scored, one conceded and four clean sheets. Their 3–0 win at West Ham was their clearest performance yet, with West Ham failing to register either a shot or a touch in Chelsea’s penalty area. Chelsea also won both league meetings with Spurs last season.

Tottenham’s start has still been strong. They have taken 10 points from five games and scored 16 goals, more than any other side, but the 6–1 defeat to London City before the break was a sharp interruption. The question now is whether that was one bad afternoon or an indication that their open approach can be exposed by the strongest attacks.

Chelsea are deserved favourites, particularly at home, but Spurs have enough attacking quality to make this more competitive than the table’s defensive numbers might suggest. A result here would quickly put the London City defeat behind them; Chelsea, meanwhile, can keep pace with Manchester City by extending an already impressive start.

STAT TO WATCH | One goal conceded
Chelsea have conceded only once in five league matches. No other side has matched their four clean sheets so far.

Crystal Palace v West Ham United

Sun 18 Oct, 12:00 · Borough Sports Ground

Model: Crystal Palace 29% · Draw 28% · West Ham United 43%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (13%) · 1–2 (9%) · 0–1 (9%)

Palace return from the break in eighth place, with six points from their first five matches. Three draws have helped them establish a foothold in the division, and their 1–1 draw at Aston Villa before the break showed the resilience that has kept them competitive even when games have turned against them.

West Ham sit three points behind them after a difficult run of four defeats in five. Their 3–0 loss to Chelsea was especially one-sided—West Ham did not record a shot—but their opening-weekend win over London City remains a reminder that there is a result in this side when they get the balance right.

The model gives West Ham a narrow edge, but this feels like a match that could hinge on which team settles first after the break. Palace have been harder to beat than their goal difference suggests; West Ham need to turn their defensive resilience into more sustained attacking pressure.

STAT TO WATCH | Three draws in five
Palace have already drawn three of their opening five league matches—an early sign of a side that has found ways to stay in games.

Charlton Athletic v Manchester United

Sun 18 Oct, 14:00 · The Valley

Model: Charlton Athletic 19% · Draw 25% · Manchester United 56%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (12%) · 0–2 (10%) · 1–2 (10%)

Charlton are still searching for their first point after five league defeats, and their 5–1 loss at Brighton before the break underlined the scale of the adjustment to the WSL. They have scored twice and conceded 15 times so far, so the immediate task is to make this game competitive for longer than they managed at Brighton.

United head to The Valley in a different place from where they were after the opening fortnight. Consecutive league wins over West Ham and Liverpool took them into the break with seven points, and their 1–0 victory over Liverpool also delivered a first clean sheet of the campaign. Phallon Tullis-Joyce made eight saves in that match as United held on under sustained second-half pressure.

United are favourites, but Charlton will see a home match after the break as a chance to reset. The visitors have found momentum, yet their narrow win over Liverpool also showed that they are still a side opponents can create against. Charlton’s first priority will be staying in the game; if they can do that, the pressure shifts.

STAT TO WATCH | Two goals, 15 conceded
Charlton’s first five WSL matches have brought the division’s lowest goals-for total and highest goals-against total.

Aston Villa v Liverpool

Sun 18 Oct, 14:00 · Keys Park Stadium

Model: Aston Villa 12% · Draw 25% · Liverpool 63%
Most likely scorelines: 0–1 (14%) · 0–2 (14%) · 1–1 (11%)

Villa return still looking for a first league win after three draws and two defeats. Their 1–1 result against Crystal Palace before the break was their second match under interim manager Brian Sørensen, and although they led for the first time this season, they could not quite see it through. There are signs of greater control, but four goals in five league matches shows how much remains to be resolved in the final third.

Liverpool sit sixth with seven points and will feel their position should be stronger. They created 1.41 xG from 14 shots in the 1–0 defeat at Manchester United, but left empty-handed after Phallon Tullis-Joyce’s eight saves. The Reds have enough attacking quality to make chances; converting them more regularly is the next step.

Liverpool are favourites, though Villa’s run of draws makes this less straightforward than it first appears. The hosts need to make the game tight and give themselves another opportunity to take a lead; Liverpool need to make their superiority in chance creation count. The match has moved from Villa Park to Keys Park Stadium because Villa Park is hosting six first-team fixtures during October.

STAT TO WATCH | Three draws, no win
Villa have drawn three of their five league matches—the joint-most in the division—but remain without a victory.

London City Lionesses v Everton

Sun 18 Oct, 14:00 · CopperJax Community Stadium

Model: London City Lionesses 66% · Draw 22% · Everton 12%
Most likely scorelines: 2–0 (12%) · 1–0 (11%) · 1–1 (10%)

London City return in third place after a statement 6–1 win at Tottenham before the break. It was their fourth victory in five league matches and took their goals total to 15, the third-highest in the division. The scale of that performance makes this a different kind of test: not whether they can produce a big result, but whether they can carry that level into the next home match.

Everton arrive fifth with nine points, which is a strong return, but their record has been built on narrow margins. They have scored only four league goals in five matches, although Ruby Mace’s brace secured a valuable 2–1 win over Birmingham before the break. That makes their season one of the more intriguing early stories: three wins from a side that has rarely needed to dominate.

London City are deserved favourites at home, with their attacking quality likely to ask more questions than Everton have faced in recent weeks. Everton’s route is familiar: stay compact, make the match uncomfortable, and take the moments that come. Their early points total suggests they are capable of doing exactly that.

STAT TO WATCH | 15 goals in five matches
Only Manchester City and Tottenham have scored more than London City’s 15 league goals so far, while Everton have scored four.

Manchester City v Brighton & Hove Albion

Sun 18 Oct, 14:30 · Joie Stadium

Model: Manchester City 61% · Draw 21% · Brighton 17%
Most likely scorelines: 2–1 (10%) · 1–1 (10%) · 2–0 (8%)

City return as the only side with a perfect record: five wins from five, 16 goals scored and a two-point lead at the top. Their 4–2 win over Arsenal before the break was another emphatic result, but it also showed that their opponents can create moments against them. The task now is simply to keep setting the pace.

Brighton’s season has been uneven, but their 5–1 victory over Charlton was the clearest reminder of what they can produce when their attack clicks. It was their first league win of the campaign and lifted them to ninth, with five points from five matches. The challenge at the Joie Stadium is a different order of difficulty, but they arrive with something positive to build on.

City are favourites and should expect to have most of the ball, but Brighton’s recent performance gives them a reason to be more ambitious than a side merely trying to survive the afternoon. For City, the opportunity is to extend their lead; for Brighton, it is to show that the Charlton result was the beginning of a stronger run rather than a one-off.

STAT TO WATCH | Five wins from five
City are the only team still on a perfect record, having scored 16 goals across their opening five league matches.

Fourteen clubs are competing in the division for the first time. Every match is available to watch live, and more teams are taking games into their clubs’ main stadiums.

But the opening attendance figures point to a more complicated picture.

Across all 14 clubs’ first home league matches, 64,341 people came through the gates—an average of 4,596 and a median of 2,686.

The WSL may have a wider footprint this season, but the typical opening-home crowd was smaller than in any of the previous four campaigns.

First, what are we measuring?

This is not simply a total of the fixtures played in Matchweek 1.

Some clubs began the season away from home, so comparing only the first round would include some clubs and exclude others. Instead, we take each club’s first played home league match and give every team one observation.

For most clubs, that match came in Matchweek 1 or 2.

The same method has been applied to the previous four seasons: for every club, we use the attendance from their first home league match, regardless of the matchweek in which it was played.

The five-season picture

Despite the league expanding from 12 to 14 clubs, this season’s total remains below 2023–24, 2024–25 and 2025–26. Compared with last season, the total fell by 32.4% and the average by 42.1%. The average is the second-lowest of the five seasons studied, above only the disrupted 2022–23 opening-home cycle.

The median delivers an even clearer finding. At 2,686, it is the lowest in the five-season comparison and 31.2% below last season’s 3,904.

The typical club’s opening attendance has fallen.

Why the median matters more than the average

The average is useful, but WSL attendance is increasingly shaped by a small number of very large crowds.

• Arsenal’s 23,900 against Crystal Palace accounts for 37.1% of the opening-home total.

• Arsenal, Chelsea and London City Lionesses—the three highest crowds—account for 57.8% between them.

• Without Arsenal’s Emirates crowd, the other 13 clubs averaged only 3,111.

This concentration is not new.

In 2023–24, Arsenal’s record 54,115 crowd against Liverpool represented almost half of the entire opening-home total by itself.

That is why the average climbed to 9,135 while the median was only 3,548.

The mean tells us about the league’s total reach. The median tells us what the experience looked like for the typical club.

This season, those two pictures are again very different.

The decline is real—but it is not evenly distributed

Eleven returning clubs have opening-home figures in both 2025–26 and 2026–27.

Their combined attendance fell from 93,393 to 59,511, a decline of 36.3%.

At first glance, that looks like a broad league-wide contraction. A closer look reveals something more specific.

The combined attendance of Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea and Everton fell by 34,975.

The total decline across all 11 comparable clubs was 33,882.

In other words, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea and Everton account for more than the entire net decline. The other seven clubs increased their combined attendance by 1,093, or 4.8%.

So the opening figures do not show every WSL club moving backwards at once.

They show a sharp decline concentrated in a small number of fixtures that carried last season’s headline total.

The fixtures changed—and so did the venues

The largest year-on-year falls require context.

Liverpool opened last season with a Merseyside derby against Everton at Anfield and drew 11,904. This season, their first home match was against Tottenham at St Helens Stadium and attracted 2,293.

That is not simply a like-for-like attendance collapse. It is a different opponent in a different venue, with a very different ceiling.

Chelsea remained at Stamford Bridge, but Manchester City were replaced by Aston Villa as the opening visitors. Attendance fell from 14,182 to 7,900.

Arsenal also remained in the same venue, but their opening opponent changed from newly promoted London City Lionesses to Crystal Palace. Their crowd fell from 38,142 to 23,900.

Everton stayed at Goodison Park, but Tottenham were replaced by Charlton. Attendance fell from 6,473 to 1,633.

The WSL therefore began this season without some of the combinations that lifted last year’s opening figures: no Merseyside derby at Anfield, no Chelsea–Manchester City game at Stamford Bridge and a less commercially powerful fixture at the Emirates.

That explains part of the decline.

It does not explain everything.

A capacity problem as well as an attendance problem

Absolute attendance tells us how many people were reached. Occupancy tells us how effectively the selected venue was filled.

Across all 14 opening-home fixtures:

• total attendance was 64,341;

• combined nominal capacity was 302,909;

• capacity-weighted occupancy was 21.2%;

• the median club occupancy was 22.5%;

• seven clubs filled less than 20% of their venue;

• four clubs filled less than 10%.

Those four were:

All four played in venues with capacities above 27,000.

That creates a strategic tension.

Using a larger stadium can increase visibility, improve accessibility and give a club room to grow. But when fewer than one seat in ten is occupied, the result can also be a visibly sparse stadium and a weaker matchday atmosphere.

The answer is not necessarily to retreat permanently into smaller grounds. It is to build sufficient demand around the main-stadium fixtures to justify the move.

Club by club

London City provide the clearest success story

London City’s opening crowd is the strongest positive signal because it offers a rare genuine like-for-like comparison.

They hosted Manchester United at the Copperjax Community Stadium in both seasons.

• 2025–26: 2,800

• 2026–27: 5,402

• Increase: 2,602

• Growth: 92.9%

The club described this season’s fixture as sold out and its biggest-ever home match at the venue.

The nominal-capacity calculation produces an occupancy of 88.6%, illustrating an important limitation of stadium-capacity data: segregation, broadcast positions and unavailable sections can reduce the number of tickets that can actually be sold.

But whichever denominator is used, the direction is unmistakable.

Same opponent. Same venue. Nearly twice the crowd.

That is the clearest evidence of genuine audience growth in this year’s opening figures.

Brighton are also moving in the right direction

Brighton’s first-home crowd at Broadfield Stadium has increased for three consecutive seasons:

• 2023–24: 1,126

• 2024–25: 2,125

• 2025–26: 2,219

• 2026–27: 4,104

Having Arsenal as the visiting team clearly increased the fixture’s drawing power. It should not be treated as pure organic growth.

Even with that qualification, a 66.9% nominal occupancy rate and the continuation of the upward sequence make Brighton one of the more encouraging opening stories.

Tottenham are stable—but not growing

Tottenham offer another useful comparison because they opened at home to West Ham at the same venue in consecutive seasons.

• 2025–26: 1,735

• 2026–27: 1,675

• Change: −60

Their last four opening-home crowds have been 1,605, 1,778, 1,735 and 1,675.

That consistency shows Tottenham have a dependable base. It also shows that the base has barely expanded.

For a team now producing some of the league’s most exciting attacking football, converting on-field interest into attendance growth is an obvious opportunity.

Arsenal still lead—but their opening draw is shrinking

Arsenal remain comfortably ahead of every other club. Their 23,900 crowd was more than three times Chelsea’s second-highest figure.

But their last four Emirates openers have moved in one direction:

• 2023–24: 54,115 against Liverpool

• 2024–25: 41,818 against Manchester City

• 2025–26: 38,142 against London City Lionesses

• 2026–27: 23,900 against Crystal Palace

That is a fall of 55.8% from the 2023–24 record opener.

The opponent changed each year, and the 54,115 crowd arrived when a major WSL fixture at the Emirates still carried more novelty. Arsenal have since made the stadium their permanent league home, giving supporters many more matches from which to choose.

That context matters. So does the trend.

Arsenal are still operating on a completely different scale from the rest of the league, but even the league’s strongest attendance engine cannot be treated as automatic.

A difficult start for the promoted clubs

The three promoted clubs drew a combined 4,830 to their first home fixtures:

• Charlton: 2,151

• Birmingham City: 1,405

• Crystal Palace: 1,274

That is an average of 1,610.

Their venue stories were different.

Crystal Palace’s 1,274 filled 25.4% of the smaller VBS Community Stadium. Charlton’s crowd represented only 7.9% of The Valley, while Birmingham filled 4.8% of St Andrew’s.

These clubs are not only trying to establish themselves competitively. They are trying to build top-flight audiences while playing in venues whose scale can make modest crowds look even smaller.

How those numbers develop across their first five home matches will tell us far more than one opener—but the starting point is low.

Manchester City recorded one of the strongest occupancy rates

Manchester City’s 3,560 against Birmingham City was the sixth-largest opening crowd in the league. In the context of the Joie Stadium, however, it was one of the stronger attendance performances.

The crowd filled 55.2% of the stadium’s verified nominal capacity—the third-highest occupancy rate among the 14 clubs.

It was also 424 higher than City’s 3,136 opener at the same venue last season, an increase of 13.5%, although the opponent changed from Brighton to Birmingham City.

City were some distance from the league’s largest opening crowds in absolute terms, but they filled their selected venue far more effectively than most clubs. It is another example of why attendance and occupancy need to be considered together.

The real opening picture

There are two stories in these numbers.

The first is reach. The WSL now has 14 clubs, more matches and more opportunities to bring elite women’s football to supporters around the country.

The second is depth. Outside a small number of major fixtures, too many clubs are still drawing modest crowds—sometimes into very large stadiums.

London City demonstrate what genuine growth can look like. Brighton’s trajectory is encouraging. Manchester United and Tottenham have retained a stable base.

But the league-wide median has fallen, four main-stadium fixtures recorded occupancy rates below 10% and the aggregate remains dependent on Arsenal.

Should the league be worried? Probably not yet—this is only one home match per club, and the fixture, opponent and venue context matters. But the early warning signs are difficult to ignore.

Expansion has made the WSL wider. The next challenge is to make its audience deeper.

Matchweek 5 produced 28 goals—the most in any round this season—but this was not simply a weekend of overwhelming chance volume. The seven matches generated fewer shots and fewer big chances than Matchweek 4. What changed was how efficiently those opportunities were finished.

There were also several scorelines that need more explanation than the result alone provides: London City and Tottenham created a similar number of chances but very different chance quality; Manchester City were outshot and lost the overall xG contest against Arsenal but were more clinical with the chances they created; and Manchester United beat Liverpool largely because of the round’s outstanding goalkeeping performance.

Here are eight things that stood out in the numbers.

1. Matchweek 5 produced 28 goals from 24.30 xG

The league recorded its highest-scoring round of the season despite producing neither its most shots nor its most expected goals.

Across the seven matches, there were:

• 28 goals from 24.30 xG

• 192 shots

• 70 shots on target

• 34 big chances

• 15 big chances converted

That is a collective overperformance of 3.70 goals—the largest positive goals-minus-xG difference of the season so far.

The contrast with Matchweek 4 is sharp. It produced 19 goals from 23.52 xG, a shortfall of 4.52 goals. In Matchweek 5, overall shot conversion rose from 9.5% to 14.6%, while big-chance conversion jumped from 24.3% to 44.1%.

The volume did not suddenly explode. The finishing did.

2. London City produced 5.99 xG—the highest by any team this season

London City’s 6–1 victory over Tottenham generated several season highs.

They accumulated 5.99 xG and created 10 big chances, the highest single-match totals recorded by any WSL team through five rounds. The two teams combined for 8.40 xG, comfortably above the previous season high of 5.73 from Manchester City–Liverpool in Matchweek 3.

This was not a simple story of London City monopolising the ball or producing far more attacks. They had only 41% possession, while Tottenham created 13 chances to London’s 14 and attempted 18 shots to London’s 21.

The decisive difference was chance quality.

At half-time, both teams had attempted 10 shots and recorded 18 opposition-box touches. London City nevertheless led 3–0 because they had generated 3.07 xG to Tottenham’s 0.79 and put six shots on target to Tottenham’s one.

Tottenham still finished with 2.41 xG. London City did not merely create more; they created much better and executed far more cleanly.

3. Manchester City’s four goals came from only 1.01 xG—but the full story is more nuanced

Manchester City’s 4–2 win over Arsenal produced the largest single-team xG overperformance of the season: four goals from 1.01 xG, a difference of +2.99.

Arsenal had more shots, more shots on target and more overall xG:

• Shots: Arsenal 16–9 City

• Shots on target: Arsenal 9–5 City

• xG: Arsenal 1.61–1.01 City

But Arsenal’s xG advantage was largely created by Lisa Baum’s 0.92-xG opportunity from a corner. In open play, City led the xG 0.92–0.56 and created three big chances to Arsenal’s one.

The goalkeeping numbers widened the difference further. Ayaka Yamashita made seven saves and prevented 0.68 goals for City. Anneke Borbe conceded four from 2.09 xG on target, leaving her with a goals-prevented figure of –1.91.

City trailed twice, but produced all three of their big chances after half-time and won the moments that decided the match.

4. Chelsea held West Ham to zero shots

West Ham became the first team this season to complete a WSL match without attempting a shot.

Chelsea won 3–0 while recording:

• 21 shots to West Ham’s zero

• 2.77 xG to zero

• 15 chances created to zero

• Four big chances to zero

• 67% possession

• 47 opposition-box touches

This was the first time across the opening 35 matches that a team recorded neither a shot nor a chance created.

Chelsea put only three of their 21 attempts on target, but all three resulted in goals. At one end, they completely removed West Ham’s attacking threat. At the other, they made their limited on-target shooting count.

5. Phallon Tullis-Joyce turned Liverpool’s pressure into nothing

Liverpool outperformed Manchester United across most of the attacking measures at the Progress with Unity Stadium in Leigh:

• Shots: Liverpool 15–9 United

• Shots on target: Liverpool 8–3 United

• xG: Liverpool 1.47–0.47 United

• Chances created: Liverpool 9–4 United

United still won 1–0.

Julia Zigiotti Olme scored after six minutes from an attempt worth only 0.04 xG. Phallon Tullis-Joyce then saved all eight Liverpool shots on target and prevented 1.98 goals—the highest single-match goal-prevention figure recorded by any WSL goalkeeper this season.

United did not win the attacking process. They won because their early finish and their goalkeeper were decisive.

6. Brighton responded to an early setback with overwhelming control

Charlton took the lead after three minutes through an opportunity worth 0.82 xG. Almost everything after that belonged to Brighton.

Brighton finished with:

• 76% possession

• 25 shots

• 3.78 xG

• 51 opposition-box touches

• 16 chances created

Charlton managed three shots, three opposition-box touches and two chances created.

The final 5–1 scoreline does need one qualification: Brighton led 3–1 until two set-piece goals in the third and ninth minutes of stoppage time. Those late goals enlarged the margin, but they did not create the underlying dominance. Brighton had already controlled virtually every attacking measure.

7. Everton scored twice without creating a single big chance

Everton’s 2–1 victory over Birmingham was the lowest-xG match of the round at 1.68 combined, yet all three goals were scored.

Everton attempted 17 shots and put nine on target, but none was a big chance. They generated 0.99 xG in total.

Ruby Mace supplied both of them from four shots and only 0.36 xG. Birmingham’s Océane Hurtré also converted a 0.15-xG attempt.

The three goals had a combined shot value of only 0.42 xG. This was a match decided by the execution of relatively difficult opportunities rather than the creation of clear ones.

8. Aston Villa created four big chances and still could not beat Crystal Palace

Aston Villa generated 1.31 xG, created four big chances and missed three of them in the 1–1 draw with Crystal Palace.

Palace created only one big chance, but there was more balance to the match than those totals alone suggest. They edged the opposition-box touches 22–21, matched Villa’s eight second-half shots and generated 0.75 second-half xG to Villa’s 0.79.

Abbie Larkin’s equaliser came from an attempt worth only 0.05 xG. Villa created the clearer opportunities, but Palace maintained enough territorial presence to stay in the contest and found their finish from the least likely opening.

The Matchweek 5 crowd picture

The round drew 26,782 spectators, producing an average of 3,826 and a median crowd of 2,377.

Confirmed attendances, ranked (stadium occupancy in brackets)

1. Manchester City v Arsenal: 12,360 (20.1%)

2. Manchester United v Liverpool: 3,416 (28.5%)

3. Brighton v Charlton: 2,465 (7.6%)

4. Tottenham Hotspur v London City Lionesses: 2,377 (25.6%)

5. West Ham United v Chelsea: 2,185 (35.9%)

6. Everton v Birmingham City: 2,026 (5.1%)

7. Aston Villa v Crystal Palace: 1,953 (5.3%)

Manchester City’s 12,360 at the Etihad Stadium was comfortably the largest crowd and accounted for 46.2% of the Matchweek 5 total.

But the largest crowd did not produce the highest occupancy. That belonged to West Ham, whose 2,185 spectators filled 35.9% of Victoria Road Stadium. Manchester United followed at 28.5%, with Tottenham at 25.6%.

Across the season, 34 of the 35 completed matches have drawn 175,534 spectators—17.6% of the Road to 1 Million target. The average crowd is 5,163, below the 5,495 required to reach one million.

The round in one sentence

Matchweek 4 was defined by opportunities going unused; Matchweek 5 was defined by teams and players extracting far more from the opportunities they had.

🌍 Weekend Landscape

After four matchweeks, the season is beginning to take shape. Manchester City are still the only side with a perfect record, although their 1–0 win at Charlton showed that even the league leaders can be made to work. Tottenham continued their impressive start with a dominant 4–0 victory over Aston Villa, the weekend’s biggest statement, while Chelsea’s 1–0 win over Arsenal ended the Gunners’ 20-match unbeaten league run. London City, meanwhile, have quietly built momentum: they have won three of their opening four WSL matches, with Alexia Putellas’ first league goal helping them beat Brighton last weekend.

After taking just two points from their first four league matches, Aston Villa parted ways with Natalia Arroyo this week, with Brian Sørensen taking interim charge. Wednesday’s Players Cup win over Newcastle offered an immediate lift, but their league performance still needs to follow.

This weekend brings a different set of tests. City host Arsenal in the headline fixture, with Arsenal looking to respond after defeat at Chelsea and City aiming to turn their fast start into a significant early gap at the top. Elsewhere, Tottenham meet London City in a contest between two sides seriously knocking on the door of the top four; United’s first win gives their meeting with Liverpool a different feel; and Chelsea travel to West Ham with the chance to maintain their strong defensive start. Villa, Brighton, Everton, Birmingham and Charlton all arrive with more immediate questions of their own.

Manchester United v Liverpool

Sat 3 Oct, 13:30 · Progress with Unity Stadium

Model: Manchester United 42% · Draw 31% · Liverpool 27%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (14.8%) · 0–0 (12.1%) · 1–0 (11.7%)

United’s first two league matches made for a difficult start to Eva Olid’s tenure, but the mood has shifted quickly. They have now won three in a row across league and cup: 10–1 against WSL2 side Sheffield United, 2–1 over West Ham for their first league points, then 5–1 away at WSL2 side Durham on Wednesday.

The cup results need their proper context, but they have followed a league win and given United a much steadier platform than they had a fortnight ago. Liverpool bring momentum of their own: Sunday’s 2–0 Merseyside derby victory was followed by a 4–3 Players Cup win at Birmingham, sealed by Natalia Ramos in stoppage time.

United are narrow favourites at home, though this is not a comfortable call. The draw remains a serious possibility, and 1–1 is the model’s most likely single scoreline. This is a chance for United to show that their recent improvement carries into the league; Liverpool can make an equally strong early statement with another result away from home.

STAT TO WATCH | Three wins in seven days
United’s run includes two Players Cup matches against WSL2 opposition, so West Ham remains the most meaningful marker—but the pressure around their start has undeniably eased.

West Ham United v Chelsea

Sun 4 Oct, 14:00 · Victoria Road Stadium

Model: West Ham 10% · Draw 20% · Chelsea 69%
Most likely scorelines: 0–2 (13%) · 0–1 (10%) · 1–1 (10%)

Chelsea have quietly built momentum since their opening-weekend draw with Aston Villa. They have won their last three league matches, most recently beating Arsenal 1–0 to end Arsenal’s 20-match unbeaten WSL run. That was followed by a goalless draw away at OL Lyon in the Champions League on Wednesday, a valuable early point in their European campaign.

West Ham lost 2–1 at Manchester United last weekend but responded well in the Players Cup, coming from behind to beat Southampton 3–1. That result does not change the scale of Chelsea’s task, but it gives them something positive to take into a difficult home fixture.

Chelsea are clear favourites, with the model leaning toward a controlled away win. West Ham’s best route is likely to keep the game close for as long as possible, but Chelsea’s recent defensive record suggests opportunities may be limited.

STAT TO WATCH | Three clean sheets in four league matches
Chelsea are the only WSL side to have conceded just once so far.

Everton v Birmingham City

Sun 4 Oct, 14:00 · Goodison Park

Model: Everton 45% · Draw 30% · Birmingham City 25%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (14%) · 1–0 (10%) · 0–0 (10%)

Everton have taken six points from their opening four league matches, but the picture is less secure than that record suggests. Their two wins, against Charlton and West Ham, were both 1–0 victories decided by opposition own goals. The results count, but Everton are still waiting for one of their own players to score in the league.

Birmingham have shown that they can cause problems in attack. They drew 2–2 with Brighton and 3–3 with Crystal Palace, then scored three again in Wednesday’s 4–3 Players Cup defeat to Liverpool. The other side of that is clear too: Birmingham have conceded 10 league goals already, and their attacking approach is leaving space for opponents to exploit.

Everton are narrow favourites at home, but this has the feel of a game in which both sides have something to prove. Everton need more attacking output to make their points total sustainable; Birmingham need to find a balance between carrying a threat and keeping the game under control.

STAT TO WATCH | No Everton player has scored in the league yet
Everton’s two WSL wins have both come through opposition own goals.

Aston Villa v Crystal Palace

Sun 4 Oct, 14:00 · Villa Park

Model: Aston Villa 47% · Draw 29% · Crystal Palace 24%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (14%) · 1–0 (11%) · 0–0 (10%)

Villa’s start has been too uneven. They opened with an encouraging draw at Chelsea, but have taken only two points from four league matches and their 4–0 defeat at Tottenham last weekend proved to be Natalia Arroyo’s final game in charge. Brian Sørensen has stepped in on an interim basis, beginning with Wednesday’s 3–1 Players Cup win over Newcastle.

That cup result gives Villa something to build on, but the league picture still needs to change quickly. They have produced flashes without sustaining them, and now need to show that the response under Sørensen can carry into Sunday.

Palace, meanwhile, have been the brightest of the promoted sides so far. Five league points, including last weekend’s 3–3 draw at Birmingham, have given them a useful platform; Wednesday’s 3–0 Players Cup win over Charlton added a more composed defensive response. A result here would further strengthen the sense that Palace are adapting well to this level.

Villa remain narrow favourites, but they are also the side with more to prove. Their new interim coach has a first chance to turn a midweek lift into a meaningful league result.

STAT TO WATCH | Two points from four league matches
Villa have created only 1.70 xG across their opening four WSL fixtures; 0.58 of that came in the opening draw at Chelsea.

Brighton v Charlton Athletic

Sun 4 Oct, 14:00 · American Express Stadium

Model: Brighton 62% · Draw 26% · Charlton Athletic 13%
Most likely scorelines: 1–0 (15%) · 2–0 (14%) · 1–1 (12%)

Brighton are still waiting for their first league win, but their opening four games have contained more promise than their two-point return suggests. They created 3.17 xG in the draw with Aston Villa and 1.77 xG in last weekend’s defeat at London City, only to leave both matches without the result their chances pointed towards. Wednesday’s 1–0 Players Cup loss to Tottenham added another frustration.

Charlton did offer a more resilient display in last weekend’s 1–0 defeat to Manchester City, keeping the champions to a single goal after difficult earlier results. But Wednesday’s 3–0 Players Cup loss at Crystal Palace showed that the defensive issues have not disappeared. They return to Brighton having faced them in the competition only a week ago, when Brighton won 4–0.

Brighton are clear favourites and have the chance to turn encouraging underlying performances into a first league win. Charlton’s task is to take the defensive discipline they showed against City and make this a much more compact, competitive contest than their last meeting with Brighton.

STAT TO WATCH | 8.33 xG, two league points
Brighton have created 8.33 xG across four league matches—the fifth-highest total in the division—yet have scored only three times and remain without a win.

Tottenham Hotspur v London City Lionesses

Sun 4 Oct, 14:00 · Brisbane Road

Model: Tottenham Hotspur 32% · Draw 28% · London City Lionesses 40%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (14%) · 1–2 (9%) · 0–0 (8%)

Tottenham have made one of the strongest starts in the division. They are unbeaten after four league matches, have scored 15 goals, and followed Sunday’s 4–0 win over Aston Villa with a 1–0 Players Cup victory at Brighton in midweek. The results have been emphatic, but this is their most demanding league test so far.

London City have also won three of their opening four league games. Their response to the defeat at West Ham has been convincing: 4–1 at Charlton, 2–0 against Brighton, then a 1–0 Players Cup win at Ipswich on Wednesday. They arrive with momentum and, unlike Spurs, have already shown they can win away from home in the league.

The model gives London City a narrow edge, though this is one of the weekend’s closest calls. Spurs’ attacking form makes them difficult to oppose; London City’s early results suggest they are ready for a match of this level. It also has the feel of an early head-to-head that could matter in the race behind the established leading group: whichever side can take points from meetings like this may give itself the best chance of breaking into the top four.

STAT TO WATCH | 15 goals in four league matches
Tottenham have scored more WSL goals than any other side so far, while conceding only twice.

Manchester City v Arsenal

Sun 4 Oct, 16:30 · Etihad Stadium

Model: Manchester City 27% · Draw 27% · Arsenal 46%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (12%) · 1–2 (9%) · 0–2 (7%)

Manchester City are still the WSL’s only perfect side: four wins from four. The demands of Europe are beginning to test that run though. Last weekend’s 1–0 win at Charlton was far tighter than their earlier league results, before Thursday’s 1–1 Champions League draw with Real Madrid. City have still found a way through every league test, but the challenge is now to manage major games arriving one after another.

Arsenal began the season as the leading title contender, but their campaign has yet to properly take shape. They have taken five league points from four matches, then let a 2–0 lead slip in Wednesday’s 2–2 draw at Paris FC. They travel to the Etihad seven points behind City, knowing that a home win would stretch that gap to 10 after only five rounds.

The model gives Arsenal the edge, but City’s perfect league record and home advantage make this far from straightforward. It is too early for a result to settle the title race, but this is a major early test of Arsenal’s ability to stay in touch—and of City’s ability to maintain their pace across two competitions.

STAT TO WATCH | 12 points from 12
City have won all four league matches so far, scoring 12 goals. No other WSL side has a perfect record.

🌍 Weekend Landscape

Manchester City remain the only team with a perfect league record after three matchweeks. The main thing to watch this weekend is how they handle the turnaround from Europe. City came from two goals down to draw with Bayern in midweek before facing Charlton on Saturday.

Arsenal and Chelsea also had difficult moments in Europe. Arsenal controlled much of their game against HB Køge but struggled to turn that control into goals, eventually needing a stoppage-time penalty to win. Chelsea beat Austria Wien 1–0 in midweek, but there is a concern around Keira Walsh ahead of Sunday’s meeting with Arsenal.

Manchester United produced the eye-catching result of the midweek games, beating WSL2 side Sheffield United 10–1. There were also wins for Liverpool, Everton, London City and Brighton against WSL2 opposition, while Tottenham and West Ham drew 0–0, with West Ham winning on penalties. For United in particular, the question now is whether that big win gives them something to build on as they return to the league against West Ham.

Charlton Athletic v Manchester City

Sat 26 Sep, 13:30 · The Valley

Model: Charlton 8% · Draw 16% · Manchester City 76%
Most likely scorelines: 0–2 (11.2%) · 0–3 (10.0%) · 1–2 (8.9%)

Manchester City remain the league’s only perfect side, with 11 goals from their first three matches. Charlton are still looking for their first point after defeats to Liverpool, Everton and London City, and they also lost 4–0 to Brighton in the Players Cup in midweek.

City are clear favourites here. The one thing to watch is how they handle the turnaround from Tuesday’s trip to Bayern, where they had to come from 2–0 down to earn a draw. Charlton have conceded nine goals in their first three league games, so keeping City quiet will be a difficult task.

STAT TO WATCH | 11 goals in three league matches
City have scored at least three goals in each of their first three WSL games, while Charlton have conceded nine across their opening three.

London City Lionesses v Brighton

Sat 26 Sep, 17:00 · CopperJax Community Stadium

Model: London City 36% · Draw 32% · Brighton 31%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (15.0%) · 0–0 (12.5%) · 1–0 (10.9%)

There is very little between these two on paper. London City have scored seven goals in their first three league games, including four against Charlton last weekend. Brighton are still looking for their first league win, but they created 3.17 xG against Aston Villa last weekend and only scored once in a 1–1 draw.

Both teams also won in midweek, with London City beating Leicester 2–0 and Brighton beating Charlton 4–0. For Brighton, the question is whether they can start turning the chances they are creating into goals.

STAT TO WATCH | 3.17 xG, one goal
Brighton created 3.17 xG against Aston Villa but scored only once.

Manchester United v West Ham United

Sun 27 Sep, 13:00 · Progress With Unity Stadium

Model: Manchester United 37% · Draw 33% · West Ham 30%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (15.0%) · 0–0 (13.1%) · 1–0 (11.5%)

Manchester United scored 10 against Sheffield United in midweek, but their league attack has been a different story. They have taken one point from their first three games and created just 1.19 xG, although last weekend’s draw at Arsenal was a better result.

West Ham have three points from their opening three games and also won on penalties against Tottenham in midweek. This looks like a tight game on paper.

STAT TO WATCH | 1.19 xG in three league matches
United have created just 1.19 xG across their opening three WSL games. After scoring 10 in midweek, the question is whether they can create more when they return to the league.

Tottenham Hotspur v Aston Villa

Sun 27 Sep, 14:00 · Brisbane Road

Model: Tottenham 56% · Draw 27% · Aston Villa 18%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (12.8%) · 1–0 (11.8%) · 2–0 (11.2%)

Tottenham have taken seven points from their first three league games and scored 11 goals, including seven against Crystal Palace last weekend. They drew 0–0 with West Ham in the Players Cup in midweek before losing on penalties.

Aston Villa are still looking for their first league win after draws with Chelsea and Brighton and a defeat to Manchester City. They did beat Nottingham Forest 2–0 in the Players Cup on Wednesday.

STAT TO WATCH | 11 goals in three league matches
Tottenham have scored 11 goals in their opening three WSL games, while Villa have conceded six.

Birmingham City v Crystal Palace

Sun 27 Sep, 14:00 · St Andrew’s @ Knighthead Park

Model: Birmingham City 39% · Draw 32% · Crystal Palace 29%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (14.9%) · 0–0 (12.6%) · 1–0 (11.5%)

There is very little between these two on paper. Birmingham have one point from their first three league games, with a 2–2 draw against Brighton their only point so far. Their other two games were defeats to Manchester City and Chelsea.

Palace took four points from their first two games without conceding, beating Everton and drawing with Arsenal, before losing 7–0 to Tottenham last weekend. They responded with a 1–0 win over Watford in the Players Cup on Wednesday.

STAT TO WATCH | Four points and two clean sheets before Spurs
Palace did not concede in their opening two league games before allowing seven against Tottenham.

Liverpool v Everton

Sun 27 Sep, 14:00 · St Helens Stadium

Model: Liverpool 43% · Draw 34% · Everton 23%
Most likely scorelines: 0–0 (16.4%) · 1–0 (15.3%) · 1–1 (14.6%)

Liverpool have scored seven goals in their first three league games, including four against Charlton and two against Manchester City. They also beat Sunderland 4–2 in the Players Cup in midweek.

Everton lost their opening game to Crystal Palace but have since beaten Charlton and West Ham 1–0. They also beat Birmingham 2–0 in the Players Cup on Wednesday.

STAT TO WATCH | Two 1–0 league wins in a row
Everton have followed their opening-day defeat with two consecutive wins without conceding.

Chelsea v Arsenal

Sun 27 Sep, 16:30 · Stamford Bridge

Model: Chelsea 25% · Draw 29% · Arsenal 46%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (14.0%) · 0–1 (10.4%) · 0–0 (9.7%)

Chelsea have taken seven points from their first three league games, scoring eight goals. After drawing with Aston Villa on the opening weekend, they beat Manchester United 5–0 and Birmingham 2–0. They also beat Austria Wien 1–0 in the Champions League in midweek.

Arsenal are also unbeaten, but have scored only twice in their first three league games. They needed a stoppage-time penalty to beat HB Køge in midweek.

STAT TO WATCH | Two league goals in three matches
Arsenal have scored only twice in their opening three WSL games, while Chelsea have kept clean sheets in their last two league matches.

Matchweek 3 produced 25 goals across seven matches, the highest-scoring round of the season so far.

But some of the most interesting numbers were behind the scorelines.

Arsenal had 58 touches in Manchester United’s box and drew 1–1. Aston Villa took a point despite producing just 0.03 xG. Chelsea reached Birmingham’s box 59 times. Tottenham managed 82 box touches against Crystal Palace.

And the three promoted clubs were outshot 91–15 between them.

So there was plenty going on beyond the results.

Here are eight things that stood out.

1. The league created 28.24 xG — the highest total of the season so far

The seven matches produced 28.24 xG and 25 goals — both season highs.

Matchweek 1 produced 19 goals from 18.21 xG, while Matchweek 2 produced 20 from 20.61 xG.

That is 37% more xG than Matchweek 2 and 55% more than Matchweek 1.

Some of that came from a few very one-sided games. Tottenham–Palace alone produced 4.83 xG, while City–Liverpool reached 5.73.

But even with that context, Matchweek 3 produced far more xG than either of the first two weekends.

2. Manchester City and Liverpool produced 11 big chances between them

This was the most open game of the weekend.

City’s 4–2 win over Liverpool produced 29 shots, 11 big chances and 5.73 xG between the two teams.

Most of that came from City. They created eight big chances and 4.27 xG, with Khadija Shaw alone producing 2.97 xG from nine shots.

Lauren Hemp scored twice and put all five of her shots on target.

Liverpool had their moments too. They produced 1.46 xG and scored twice, so this wasn’t a game where all the chances went one way.

But City simply created far more of them.

Eight big chances and 4.27 xG tell you just how much Liverpool had to deal with.

3. London City produced the highest xG of the weekend

Tottenham scored seven, but they did not produce the highest xG of Matchweek 3.

That belonged to London City.

They generated 4.96 xG in their 4–1 win over Charlton, along with 27 shots, nine big chances and 39 touches in the opposition box.

They also had 76% possession, adding to just how one-sided the numbers were.

Isobel Goodwin scored twice from 1.56 xG, while Mapi León created five chances and completed 14 passes into the final third.

For a team that scored four, the numbers suggest they could easily have had more.

4. Chelsea reached Birmingham’s box 59 times — Ellie Carpenter did so 16 times by herself

Chelsea won 2–0, but the numbers suggest the game was much more one-sided than the scoreline.

They had 22 shots, 3.90 xG and 59 touches in Birmingham’s box. Birmingham managed five shots, 0.52 xG and just seven box touches.

And then there is Ellie Carpenter.

She recorded 16 touches in Birmingham’s box.

Carpenter alone had more than twice as many opposition-box touches as Birmingham did as a team.

Chelsea also created five big chances, but converted only two of them.

So while the 2–0 scoreline was comfortable, Chelsea had enough chances to win by more.

5. Arsenal had 58 box touches. Manchester United had three. It finished 1–1

This was probably the clearest example of the scoreline not telling the full story.

Arsenal had 17 shots to United’s four, produced 1.96 xG to 0.74 and recorded 58 touches in the opposition box to United’s three.

But United scored first and still left with a point.

Phallon Tullis-Joyce made six saves and prevented 0.97 goals, while United scored from their only recorded chance created.

Arsenal eventually equalised in the 90th minute through Smilla Holmberg, assisted by Leah Williamson.

Arsenal reached United’s box 58 times. United reached Arsenal’s three times. They still came away with the same number of points.

6. Aston Villa took a point with 0.03 xG

If the Arsenal–United result was surprising, this one was even harder to explain from the numbers alone.

Brighton had 25 shots to Villa’s two, produced 3.17 xG to 0.03 and recorded 48 touches in the opposition box to Villa’s four.

And yet it finished 1–1.

A big reason was Akane Okuma. She made seven saves and prevented 1.69 goals, the best goal-prevention figure of the weekend.

Villa then equalised through Lynn Wilms in the 89th minute.

Two shots. 0.03 xG. Four opposition-box touches. One point.

7. Tottenham recorded 82 box touches after Palace’s seventh-minute red card

Crystal Palace were down to 10 players after just seven minutes, so the context here matters.

But even with that advantage, Tottenham’s numbers were huge.

Spurs finished with 42 shots, 4.69 xG and 82 touches in Palace’s box. Palace managed four shots, 0.14 xG and just three box touches.

Interestingly, Tottenham still had to wait until the 49th minute for the opening goal.

Once Tottenham finally broke through, the goals came quickly.

Spurs scored six more times in the final 41 minutes, with Olivia Holdt completing a hat-trick. Signe Gaupset created seven chances, while Victoria Pelova recorded 16 touches in the opposition box.

The red card changed the game, but Tottenham still had to turn that advantage into goals. Once the first one arrived, they did.

8. Only 0.06 xG separated West Ham and Everton

After some very one-sided games, this was about as close as Matchweek 3 got.

West Ham and Everton both had 50% possession and three shots on target each.

The xG was almost identical too: 0.88 for West Ham and 0.82 for Everton.

West Ham did create two big chances to Everton’s one, but neither of theirs went in.

In the end, the difference was an own goal. Laia Codina turned the ball into her own net in the 90th minute to give Everton the win.

After a weekend full of huge gaps in shots, xG and box touches, this one really did come down to a very small margin.

The wider warning for the promoted clubs

There was one other pattern from Matchweek 3 that was difficult to miss.

Charlton, Birmingham City and Crystal Palace lost by a combined score of 13–1.

But the underlying numbers were even more one-sided.

Together, the three promoted sides were outshot 91–15, conceded 13.55 xG while producing just 1.36, and allowed 180 touches in their own boxes while managing only 21 at the other end.

Those are enormous gaps.

There is some important context. Palace played with 10 players from the seventh minute against Tottenham, which clearly contributed to the scale of their numbers.

But the red card does not explain the whole pattern.

Charlton allowed London City 27 shots and 4.96 xG. Birmingham gave up 22 shots and 3.90 xG against Chelsea.

So across all three matches, the promoted teams struggled not only to keep chances out, but to spend enough time threatening at the other end.

The early challenge for the promoted clubs is not just turning performances into points. It is finding a way to compete territorially and create enough attacking threat of their own.

It is only Matchweek 3, so it is far too early to turn that into a season-long conclusion.

But after this weekend, the gap between the promoted sides and their opponents is one of the early trends worth watching.

Lauren Hemp’s second goal against Liverpool arrived in the 95th minute and made it 4–2 to Manchester City.

It capped a night in which she scored twice, put all five of her shots on target, created four chances and delivered five accurate crosses.

It was the clearest individual performance of City’s season so far.

And it raises a bigger question:

Could this be Hemp’s best WSL season yet?

Three matches cannot answer that. But they can tell us whether this start looks different from the ones that came before.

So far, it does.

Hemp has two goals, one assist, 14 shots, 15 chances created and 43 touches in the opposition box.

She is shooting more than she did across the opening three appearances of any of the previous three seasons, while still creating chances at a very high rate.

In other words, she is still creating for others, but she is also becoming more of a goal threat herself.

Five days before the Liverpool game, her assist at Aston Villa took her to 100 WSL goal contributions — 52 goals and 48 assists at that point.

The benchmark: 2023–24

If we are asking whether this could be Hemp’s best WSL season, we need something to compare it against.

For a full season, 2023–24 is the obvious benchmark.

Hemp scored 11 goals and supplied eight assists, giving her 19 direct goal involvements in 21 appearances. She also led the WSL for assists.

Her numbers were actually better on a per-minute basis in 2024–25, but there is an important bit of context: she played only 730 league minutes before a knee injury interrupted her season.

So for a full campaign — combining output, availability and influence — 2023–24 is the season to beat.

And that gives us a useful target for this season.

With three matches already played, City still have 23 league matches remaining. Hemp would need nine more goals and seven more assists to match her 2023–24 totals.

There is one important thing to note, though: the WSL expanded from 12 to 14 teams this season, meaning clubs now play 26 league matches instead of 22.

So there are four more league matches available this season than there were when Hemp set that 2023–24 benchmark.

Her scoring rate so far is comfortably ahead of what she would need. Her assist rate is also ahead of the rate required to match that benchmark.

To go beyond the 2023–24 benchmark rather than simply match it, Hemp would need at least 12 league goals or 20 combined goals and assists.

But after only three matches, simply projecting those numbers across the season doesn’t tell us much.

The more interesting question is whether something in her role has changed.

Is Hemp getting more opportunities to score while still creating at the level we have come to expect from her?

The early numbers suggest she might be.

Every recent start compared

The best way to see whether this start is actually different is to compare it with how Hemp began previous seasons.

So rather than comparing full-season numbers, we looked at her first three league appearances in each of the last four seasons.

There is one small detail worth noting. In 2023–24, Hemp did not play in City’s third league match against Bristol City, so her third appearance came in Round 4.

In terms of chance creation, 2024–25 is the closest comparison. Hemp created 5.04 chances per 90 across those first three appearances, almost identical to her 5.00 per 90 this season.

But there is one number that really stands out.

Hemp is getting into the opposition box far more often than in any of those previous starts.

So far this season, Hemp is averaging 14.33 box touches per 90. In 2024–25, the next-highest of these four starts, that figure was 6.12.

That is more than double.

The opening three matches

The overall numbers tell us that Hemp’s start looks different. But the three matches also show how that has developed game by game.

Birmingham City

Hemp did not score or assist, but there was plenty happening underneath those headline numbers.

She created seven chances, the most by any player in the match, produced 0.93 xA and had 16 touches in the opposition box.

So even without a goal or assist, she was heavily involved.

Aston Villa

This was where the scoring threat became much clearer.

Hemp registered an assist, but she also produced 0.98 xG and 1.03 xA. Her combined 2.01 xG+xA was the highest of any player on the pitch.

She wasn’t just creating chances for others. She was also getting into positions to finish chances herself.

Liverpool

And against Liverpool, we saw both sides of her game.

Hemp scored twice from 1.06 xG, created four chances and produced 0.70 xA. All five of her shots were on target.

She also led the match for goals, chances created, big chances created, xA, shots on target and accurate crosses.

This is what makes the start so interesting: Hemp isn’t having to choose between creating and scoring. So far, she is doing both.

One game isn’t enough to say this is the new normal.

But across the first three matches, we have already seen Hemp create at a high level, get into the box regularly and become more of a goal threat herself.

What has changed?

For wide players, there is often a trade-off. If you start shooting more, you may end up creating less for others. And if most of your job is creating chances, you may not get into scoring positions as often.

So far, that hasn’t been the case with Hemp.

She has taken 14 shots, which works out at 4.67 per 90 — higher than her first-three-appearance rate in each of the previous three seasons.

At the same time, she is creating 5.00 chances per 90, well above her full-season rate of 2.31 in 2023–24.

But the biggest difference is how often she is getting into the box.

Hemp has already had 43 touches in the opposition box, or 14.33 per 90. That is well above her full-season rate in each of the previous three campaigns.

Those numbers may come down as the sample gets bigger. Three matches is still three matches.

But the gap in box touches is difficult to ignore.

In fact, her current box-touch rate could fall by more than 40% and still be above her 2023–24 rate of 8.18 per 90.

That is why this looks like more than just a good run of finishing. Hemp is getting into scoring areas much more often while still creating chances for others.

How much of City’s attack runs through her?

Hemp is not doing it alone. Khadija Shaw remains a huge part of City’s attack.

But Hemp’s share of their chance creation is hard to miss.

She has created 15 of City’s 52 chances (28.8%), produced 2.66 of their 7.01 xA (37.9%) and created six of their 15 big chances (40.0%).

With 14 accurate crosses, she also account for 53.8% of City’s total.

So far, more than a third of City’s xA and 40% of their big chances have come from Hemp.

Her 2.66 xA has resulted in only one assist, so the assist total doesn’t quite show how much she has created so far.

Her 2.20 xG tells us something else too. She isn’t just taking more shots — she is getting good chances to score too.

Is this enough to call it her best season?

Not yet.

Three matches is still a very small sample, especially when the benchmark is her full 2023–24 season.

And 2024–25 is a good reminder of how quickly an excellent start can be interrupted.

But three matches are enough to make the question worth asking.

Hemp is creating chances at almost the same rate as she did at the start of 2024–25, while getting into the opposition box far more often. She is also taking more shots without losing the creative side of her game.

That combination is what makes this start different. She is still creating for others, but she is also getting herself into positions to score much more often.

Hemp’s next two league appearances should tell us a bit more.

If the shots and box touches are still at similar levels after five appearances, we’ll have stronger evidence that something has actually changed in her role.

And if that continues, then the question becomes even more interesting:

Could this really be Lauren Hemp’s best WSL season yet?

🌍 Weekend Landscape

After two matchweeks, Manchester City are the only team with a perfect record. Beyond that, almost every team still has a question mark. Chelsea followed a frustrating 1–1 draw at home to Aston Villa with a dominant 5–0 win over Manchester United. Crystal Palace have four points and are yet to concede. That in itself feels like a miracle, considering they have conceded 28 chances while creating only six. And Arsenal have controlled long spells of both matches, yet have only one goal to show for it.

This weekend should start to answer some of those questions. City v Liverpool is the first meeting of two sides near the top, at least at this early stage. Arsenal v United puts a dominant Arsenal attack still searching for its cutting edge against a United team needing a response. West Ham v Everton, Palace v Tottenham and Brighton v Villa all offer early opportunities to establish whether encouraging starts are sustainable.

Manchester City v Liverpool

Fri 18 Sep, 19:00 · Joie Stadium · Sky Sports

Model: Manchester City 44% · Draw 30% · Liverpool 27%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (13.9%) · 1–0 (11.1%) · 0–0 (10.4%)

Manchester City are the only team to have won both of their opening games. They beat Birmingham 3–1 before winning 4–1 at Aston Villa, scoring seven goals from 5.95 xG across the two matches. They have started the season strongly at both ends of the pitch.

Liverpool are unbeaten too. They opened with a 4–0 win at Charlton before drawing 1–1 with Tottenham last weekend. They have looked much more settled than they did at the start of last season, although City will provide their biggest test so far.

Our model has City as favourites, but Liverpool still have a reasonable chance of getting something from the game. The draw probability is also relatively high, so the model expects this to be closer than City’s first two games.

STAT TO WATCH | 7 goals · two matches

City have scored seven times already, more than any other side so far. Liverpool’s task is to reduce the number of high-quality moments City can create — because once the champions find rhythm, they are difficult to contain.

Charlton Athletic v London City Lionesses

Sat 19 Sep, 12:30 · The Valley · BBC One

Model: Charlton Athletic 14% · Draw 28% · London City Lionesses 59%
Most likely scorelines: 0–1 (16.9%) · 0–2 (13.7%) · 0–0 (13.0%)

Charlton have had a difficult start back in the top flight. A 4–0 loss to Liverpool was followed by a narrow 1–0 defeat at Everton, and they have created just 0.60 xG across the two games. They have been fairly organised defensively, but going forward they need to offer more.

London City have had a mixed start. They beat Manchester United 2–1 in their opening game, then lost by the same scoreline at West Ham despite creating 1.50 xG. They should carry more attacking threat here, although Charlton at home may not make it easy for them.

Our model has London City as clear favourites. For Charlton, the challenge is to stay in the game and give themselves — and the home crowd — something to work with.

STAT TO WATCH | 0.60 xG · zero goals

Charlton have created just 0.60 xG across their opening two matches. They have had some good spells, but they need to create much more going forward if they are to start picking up points.

Chelsea v Birmingham City

Sat 19 Sep, 12:45 · Stamford Bridge · Sky Sports

Model: Chelsea 74% · Draw 18% · Birmingham City 9%
Most likely scorelines: 2–0 (12.3%) · 3–0 (10.1%) · 1–0 (9.3%)

Chelsea have shown plenty of attacking threat in their first two games. They created 3.60 xG in the opening draw with Aston Villa, before putting five past Manchester United last weekend. Five different players scored at Leigh, which shows just how many different attacking options they have.

Birmingham, though, have made an encouraging start. They gave Manchester City a difficult game in their opener, then led Brighton for much of last weekend’s 2–2 draw. Océane Hurtré has scored in both league games, while Lily Crosthwaite got her first WSL goal against Brighton.

Our model gives Birmingham only a 9% chance of winning, so Chelsea are clear favourites. But Birmingham have already shown in their first two games that they can compete at this level.

STAT TO WATCH | 19 shots · two matches

Lauren James has taken 19 shots across Chelsea’s opening two WSL matches. Her movement as a roaming false nine gave Manchester United plenty of problems, and Birmingham will have to find a way to deal with both her direct threat and the space she creates for others.

Arsenal v Manchester United

Sat 19 Sep, 17:30 · Emirates Stadium · Sky Sports

Model: Arsenal 68% · Draw 23% · Manchester United 9%
Most likely scorelines: 1–0 (16.6%) · 2–0 (15.9%) · 0–0 (10.8%)

Arsenal have taken four points from their opening two games, although they probably feel it should have been six. They beat Brighton 1–0 before drawing with Crystal Palace despite creating 2.56 xG and taking 30 shots. Creating chances has not been the problem so far; taking them has.

Manchester United have had a much more difficult start. They lost 2–1 to London City Lionesses before a 5–0 defeat at home to Chelsea. Across those two games, they have conceded seven goals while creating just 0.45 xG. Both meetings with Arsenal finished 0–0 last season, but United come into this one in very different form.

Our model has Arsenal as strong favourites. United kept them out twice last season, but given how little they have created so far, they may need another strong defensive performance to get something from this game.

STAT TO WATCH | 3.88 xG · one goal

Arsenal have created 3.88 xG in two matches but scored once. The chance creation is already there; more ruthless finishing would make them extremely difficult to stop.

Brighton & Hove Albion v Aston Villa

Sun 20 Sep, 14:00 · American Express Stadium · Sky Sports+

Model: Brighton 56% · Draw 26% · Aston Villa 18%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (12.6%) · 1–0 (11.1%) · 2–0 (10.8%)

Brighton are still looking for their first win under Arturo Ruiz, but there were encouraging signs against Birmingham. They came from two goals down to draw 2–2, created 2.69 xG and found a late equaliser through Kiko Seike. They now return to the Amex for the first of four league games there this season.

Villa have also had a difficult start. They held Chelsea despite conceding 3.60 xG, then lost 4–1 to Manchester City after conceding another 3.42 xG. Those are two of the strongest attacks in the league, but Villa are still giving up too many good chances.

Our model gives Brighton the edge. They have created enough chances in their first two games to have more than one point, while Villa have struggled to keep chances out at the other end. This looks like a good opportunity for Brighton to get their first win.

STAT TO WATCH | 2.69 xG · two goals

Brighton created 2.69 xG at Birmingham, the third-highest total of Matchweek 2, but still needed a late equaliser to draw 2–2. The result was frustrating, but the number and quality of chances they created was encouraging.

Crystal Palace v Tottenham Hotspur

Sun 20 Sep, 14:00 · Selhurst Park · Sky Sports+

Model: Crystal Palace 19% · Draw 28% · Tottenham Hotspur 54%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (13.0%) · 0–1 (12.4%) · 0–2 (11.0%)

Crystal Palace have made a strong start back in the WSL. They beat Everton 1–0 before holding Arsenal to a goalless draw at the Emirates, despite Arsenal creating 2.56 xG and taking 30 shots. Palace have scored only once in two games, but four points and two clean sheets is an impressive return.

Tottenham are also unbeaten after beating West Ham 3–1 and drawing 1–1 at Liverpool. They have offered more going forward than Palace so far, which makes this an interesting matchup against a team that has proved difficult to break down.

Our model gives Spurs the edge, although the draw is also a real possibility. Palace have defended well in their first two games; the bigger question is whether they can create enough at the other end.

STAT TO WATCH | 3.60 xG faced · zero goals conceded

Palace have kept two clean sheets despite opponents creating 3.60 xG across their opening two matches. The results have been excellent, although the underlying numbers suggest they have still given up plenty of chances. Tottenham, with four goals already, will test that again.

West Ham United v Everton

Sun 20 Sep, 14:00 · Chigwell Construction Stadium · Sky Sports+

Model: West Ham United 37% · Draw 32% · Everton 31%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (14.8%) · 0–0 (11.6%) · 1–0 (10.5%)

Our model has this as the closest game of Matchweek 3. West Ham responded to their opening defeat at Tottenham by beating London City Lionesses 2–1, with Kelly Gago and Viviane Asseyi getting the goals. They also did a good job defensively. Katie Zelem made six interceptions, while West Ham regularly stopped London City from playing through midfield.

Everton also have three points after beating Charlton 1–0, although the winner was an own goal and Charlton finished the game with nine players. Everton created more in their opening defeat to Crystal Palace, but two games into the season, none of their own players has scored yet. Finding more threat in front of goal remains the obvious issue.

There is very little between the teams in our model, with West Ham given a slight edge at home. This looks like one of the hardest games of the weekend to call.

STAT TO WATCH | 2.04 xG · no player goal

Everton have created 2.04 xG across their opening two matches, but their only goal was Charlton’s own goal. They are creating chances; the problem so far has been finishing them.

Welcome to Part 3, the final instalment of our 2026–27 WSL summer transfer analysis. In Part 1, we examined Arsenal, Liverpool, Crystal Palace, Tottenham Hotspur and Manchester United. Part 2 turned to West Ham United, Aston Villa, Everton, Birmingham City and Charlton Athletic. We complete the series with Chelsea, Manchester City, Brighton & Hove Albion and London City Lionesses — four clubs with different ambitions: reclaiming the title, building on a domestic double, turning defensive progress into attacking improvement, and pushing higher after a promising first WSL season.

The framework is unchanged. We begin with each club’s 2025–26 baseline, assess what departures have removed from it, then examine whether the arrivals have addressed the resulting needs. The result is two judgments: a window verdict on the quality of the summer business, and a squad impact verdict on whether the team is now stronger, weaker or broadly unchanged.

🔵 Chelsea

The baseline

Chelsea entered the summer after a season that was successful by most standards but represented a clear step backwards by theirs. They finished third on 49 points, six behind champions Manchester City, after scoring 44 league goals and conceding 20. Champions League qualification and a successful League Cup defence confirmed that Chelsea remained an elite side, but their six-year WSL title run had ended.

Their summer task was therefore not to rebuild a failing team. They needed to restore the attacking reliability that had deserted them, close the gap to City and preserve one of the league’s strongest defensive foundations. For a club of Chelsea’s pedigree, remaining inside the top three was not enough; the window had to create a squad capable of returning to the title.

What Chelsea lost before they could improve

Chelsea’s material outgoing group accounted for 3,780 league minutes and 14 goal involvements. Sam Kerr was the defining loss: seven goals and two assists in only 695 minutes. Her 0.91 goals per 90 showed that, even after returning from a long injury absence, she remained Chelsea’s most efficient penalty-box finisher.

The departures also removed experience across the spine and wide areas. Millie Bright contributed 1,185 minutes and the captaincy, while Johanna Rytting Kaneryd supplied 1,001 minutes, two goals and two assists. Niamh Charles added 636 minutes of left-sided versatility, and Guro Reiten’s limited 263-minute season understates her longer-term importance.

Chelsea therefore had several different problems to solve. They needed to replace Kerr’s decisive finishing, replace Kaneryd’s wide attacking output, cover Charles at left-back and redistribute Bright’s defensive workload without weakening a back line that conceded only 20 goals. Just as importantly, they had to replace the leadership and big-match authority carried by Kerr, Bright and Reiten—qualities that cannot be captured by minutes alone.

Did Chelsea solve the problems?

Chelsea responded to their attacking decline with volume and variety. Manaka Matsukubo, Melvine Malard and Giulia Dragoni combined for 4,977 recent league minutes, 24 goals and 11 assists. Matsukubo arrives after 11 goals and four assists in the NWSL, while Dragoni contributed seven goals and four assists in Serie A. Malard provides the most direct centre-forward response with six WSL goals, but she does not automatically replace Kerr’s elite finishing.

Katie McCabe is the clearest positional solution. Her 1,522 Arsenal minutes give Chelsea an experienced, proven left-sided replacement for Niamh Charles. The centre-back question is less direct: Chelsea have not signed a successor to Millie Bright, instead trusting Naomi Girma, Nathalie Björn, Kadeisha Buchanan and Veerle Buurman to absorb the defensive workload. That may preserve the playing level, but Bright’s leadership remains harder to replace.

Across the incoming group, Chelsea have added €2.45m in current market value, 6,965 recent league minutes, 26 goals and 15 assists, including Maika Hamano’s return from her Tottenham loan. Combined with the attacking quality already retained, the window gives them more routes to create and score while protecting the left side of the defence. Chelsea have strengthened the squad and addressed several of last season’s weaknesses, but the two hardest questions remain unresolved: whether the new attack can replace Kerr’s scoring efficiency and whether the existing defensive group can replace the authority that left with Bright. The window gives them a route back to the title, rather than compelling evidence that the gap has been closed.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Qualified Positive
Squad impact: Strengthened in attack; leadership weakened

Chelsea have added the attacking variety last season lacked. Matsukubo, Malard and Dragoni bring current production, while McCabe directly reinforces the left side. But Kerr’s finishing and Bright’s captaincy have not been replaced like for like, leaving important responsibility with the existing squad. The footballing options are stronger; whether that is enough to close the title gap will depend on finishing efficiency and how quickly a new leadership core emerges.

🔵 Manchester City

The baseline

Manchester City entered the summer as WSL champions and FA Cup winners after a very strong domestic season. They finished first on 55 points, four ahead of Arsenal, while scoring a league-high 62 goals and conceding only 19. This was not a squad requiring reconstruction; it was the standard every other contender was trying to reach.

City’s task was to protect that championship-winning core while preparing for the additional demands of Champions League football. With the league’s most productive attack and a defence that conceded only 19 goals, there was little need for major structural change. The priority was to preserve that balance while ensuring the squad had sufficient quality and depth to compete across multiple fronts.

What Manchester City lost before they could improve

City’s outgoing group accounted for 2,530 league minutes, 11 goals and seven assists. Kerolin is the defining attacking loss: nine goals and five assists in just 895 minutes, equivalent to a goal involvement every 64 minutes. Her departure removes a wide forward whose speed, direct running and finishing gave City another way to decide matches.

The other departures affect cover and experience across the squad. Leila Ouahabi contributed 1,000 minutes and two assists at left-back, while Khiara Keating supplied 360 minutes in goal. Laura Coombs scored twice in 159 minutes, although her retirement also removes experience that her limited recent workload cannot capture. Naomi Layzell’s loan to Everton takes away a further 26 minutes of defensive contribution, while Lily Murphy’s loan to Aston Villa removes 90 minutes of attacking rotation.

City therefore needed to replace decisive wide production, restore depth at left-back and maintain sufficient goalkeeper and midfield cover for a heavier schedule.

Did Manchester City solve the problems?

Beth Mead adds WSL experience, creative delivery and intelligent movement to City’s wide options. She offers a different profile from Kerolin, whose speed and direct running gave the champions a particular attacking threat. Mead contributed two goals and five assists in 1,015 league minutes, compared with Kerolin’s 14 goal involvements. Her arrival gives City another way to supply Shaw and combine with Miedema, but Kerolin’s individual threat and recent production have not been fully replaced. For Mead to close that gap herself, she would need to produce at a level she has not reached in recent seasons.

Niamh Charles addresses the vacancy left by Ouahabi, bringing 638 recent league minutes, while Risa Shimizu’s return from Liverpool adds another 1,018 minutes of recent defensive workload and strengthens the full-back options. Together they improve City’s capacity to cover both flanks. The goalkeeper and midfield questions remain with the existing squad, which must absorb Keating’s workload and the experience lost through Coombs’s retirement.

Across the incoming group, City have added 2,671 league minutes, two goals and six assists. That leaves them 141 minutes up, but nine goals and one assist down on the departing contribution. City have addressed the full-back positions and added an experienced attacking option, but their business does not resolve every problem raised by the departures. With the title-winning core still in place, they have the quality to absorb some of those losses internally; the uncertainty is whether enough of Kerolin’s production and direct threat can be replaced while carrying the additional demands of Champions League football.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Neutral
Squad impact: Largely unchanged; attacking threat slightly weakened

City protected the core of their championship-winning squad and strengthened their full-back options, but the window does not clearly leave them stronger. Mead adds experience and creativity, yet Kerolin’s direct threat and recent production have not been fully replaced. The champions remain formidable, but they appear to have fallen short of the window’s wider task: strengthening a title-winning squad for the additional demands of Champions League football.

🔵 Brighton & Hove Albion

The baseline

Brighton entered the summer after a season of mixed progress. They finished seventh on 26 points, two places and two points below the previous campaign, but reached their first Women’s FA Cup final. Their defensive improvement was substantial: league goals conceded fell from 41 to 28, helped by Chiamaka Nnadozie and Moeka Minami. But their goals scored dropped from 35 to 27.

The summer task was to build on that defensive progress while restoring creativity and spreading the scoring responsibility. Kiko Seike’s eight league goals gave Brighton a reliable attacking reference, but they needed more support around her and greater consistency in supplying chances. The priority was therefore to preserve Brighton’s improved defensive platform while building an attack capable of making it count at the other end.

What Brighton lost before they could improve

Brighton’s outgoing group accounted for 3,444 league minutes, two goals and nine assists. The central loss is creativity: Nadine Noordam contributed five assists in 1,008 minutes, while Rosa Kafaji’s loan spell produced two goals and three assists in 966 minutes. For a team that scored only 27 league goals, losing those ten combined goal involvements creates an immediate challenge.

Rachel McLauchlan’s departure removes 1,200 minutes and one assist, along with the versatility to cover both defensive flanks. Her workload matters to a side seeking to preserve its defensive improvement. Sophie Baggaley contributed another 270 minutes in goal; her exit changes the cover behind Nnadozie.

Brighton therefore had two connected tasks: rebuild the creative contribution lost through Noordam and Kafaji, and replace dependable defensive cover without weakening their foundation. The attacking requirement was especially demanding. Matching the departing production would only restore what Brighton already had; moving beyond seventh required the new group to offer more.

Did Brighton solve the problems?

Lia Wälti and Emilie Joramo give Brighton a different midfield balance. Wälti brings experience, composure and the ability to organise possession, while Joramo adds ball-winning and carrying. Their combined 3,069 recent league minutes and six assists provide evidence of regular involvement. Neither could be treated as a direct replacement for Noordam’s five assists; the stronger case is that they can improve how Brighton recover the ball, progress it and sustain attacks.

Nadia Krezyman and Emily Murphy address the need for more attacking support around Seike. Krezyman supplied five goals and five assists for Dijon, while Murphy contributed six goals and four assists for Newcastle. Those 20 goal involvements offer a credible route to replacing Kafaji’s contribution and spreading responsibility, but both must translate that output into the WSL. At the back, Gabby George adds experience and positional flexibility, although her 395 league minutes at Manchester United leave a substantial recent workload gap against McLauchlan’s 1,200.

Across the five incoming outfield players, Brighton have added 6,546 recent league minutes, 14 goals and 15 assists. The recruitment addresses the right areas: midfield control, attacking variety and defensive cover. It also brings substantially more recent attacking production than the departing group, although that comparison spans different leagues and season structures. Brighton have therefore done more than simply replace what they lost and have given themselves a credible route to improvement. The remaining question is whether the new attackers can translate their production into the WSL.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Positive
Squad impact: Strengthened in midfield and attacking options; defensive depth less certain

Brighton have recruited with a clear purpose. Wälti and Joramo offer greater midfield control and variety, while Krezyman and Murphy give Seike more attacking support. George brings defensive experience. The window provides a credible route beyond last season’s limitations; the next step depends on translating production from other leagues into consistent WSL contributions and George providing the dependable defensive workload lost with McLauchlan.

🔵 London City Lionesses

The baseline

London City Lionesses entered the summer after finishing sixth on 27 points in their first WSL campaign. Eight wins established them in the top half, with their ambitious recruitment supplying the experience and quality needed to compete immediately. But 28 goals scored and 35 conceded also showed the distance still to travel: London City had established themselves at this level without yet matching the league’s leading sides.

The summer task was to turn that promising foundation into a team capable of challenging higher up the table. They needed greater attacking consistency and a stronger defensive platform, with enough additional quality across the squad to narrow the gap to the teams above them. The challenge was no longer simply to establish London City in the WSL, but to build on sixth place and make further progress.

What London City lost before they could improve

London City’s outgoing group accounted for 5,249 league minutes, two goals and three assists. The largest losses were concentrated in defence. Saki Kumagai contributed 1,534 minutes, 18 starts, two goals and one assist before joining West Ham, while Wassa Sangaré supplied 1,485 minutes, 17 starts and two assists before returning to OL Lyonnes at the end of her loan. Rofiat Imuran’s move to Aston Villa removed another 706 minutes and nine starts at left-back.

Julia Roddar contributed 671 minutes of midfield cover, while Katie Zelem’s London City contribution was limited to 153 minutes before her January loan to West Ham became permanent. Sanni Franssi’s Sunderland loan removed another 411 minutes of attacking rotation. Cerys Brown, Lotta Lindström and Teyah Goldie supplied 289 minutes between them. Those exits reduced options across the squad, although the principal attacking contributors remained.

The summer task was therefore to replace significant defensive workload and maintain reliable cover while building beyond the existing attacking level.

Did London City solve the problems?

Alexia Putellas, Nicole Anyomi and Kadidiatou Diani substantially expand London City’s attacking options. They bring 27 goals and 15 assists from their recent league campaigns, with Anyomi alone contributing 13 goals and six assists for Eintracht Frankfurt. Rosa Kafaji adds another two goals and three assists from her Brighton loan. That is considerable production entering a squad whose outgoing group contributed only two league goals, although the challenge is to combine their different strengths with Godfrey, Goodwin and the retained creators in a coherent attack.

María León addresses the central defensive need and offers a route to improving how London City build from defence. Janni Thomsen adds experience and workload at full-back, while Daniela Arques provides another midfield option. Those additions help replenish the defensive and midfield depth lost over the summer, although Imuran’s departure also leaves left-back workload to be absorbed by the retained options. Mary Earps strengthens the goalkeeping group, joining a position where Elene Lete already played every league minute last season. Her arrival adds competition and depth rather than filling a hole left by an outgoing starter.

Across the incoming group, London City have added 10,861 recent league minutes, 34 goals and 28 assists. Against the departing contribution, that represents a net increase of 5,612 minutes, 32 goals and 25 assists. The recruitment supports a substantial improvement in quality and options, even allowing for differences between leagues. London City have recruited far beyond the attacking production that departed and added quality across the defensive and midfield areas. The remaining test is whether the new arrivals and established performers can form a coherent, balanced side.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Strongly Positive
Squad impact: Strengthened substantially; balance and integration remain the test

London City have added substantial quality while retaining their principal attacking contributors. Putellas, Anyomi, Diani and Kafaji raise the attacking possibilities, while León strengthens their central defensive options. The scale and quality of the recruitment provide a credible platform to challenge beyond last season’s sixth place. The task now is to turn those individual upgrades into a balanced side, with clear roles and enough continuity for the collective improvement to translate into progress up the table.

Data sources

Transfers were reconciled from club announcements, destination-club confirmations and reputable football reporting. Previous-season league minutes, goals and assists were compiled from provider and competition records; league tables and team baselines come from completed 2025–26 match results. For players arriving from calendar-year competitions, such as the NWSL, we use the full 2025 league season rather than an incomplete 2026 sample. Where a player had already changed clubs before this transfer window, we credit only their production at the club they are actually arriving from, even if that spell is shorter than a full season, rather than reaching back to an earlier, non-contiguous club. Market values are Soccerdonna estimates captured on 4 September.

📅 What’s Next

This completes our 2026–27 WSL summer transfer analysis, covering all 14 clubs across three parts. At the end of the season, we’ll return to these verdicts in our transfer retrospective series, just as we did for last season’s window.

We’ll examine which signings delivered, whether the problems identified here were solved, and where our judgments held up or missed the mark.

🌍 Weekend Landscape

Last weekend delivered 19 goals, but its biggest lesson was that scorelines can mislead. Chelsea created 3.60 xG against Aston Villa but scored only once; Everton created more than Crystal Palace and still lost. At the other end, London City’s 2–1 win over Manchester United gave their ambitious rebuild an immediate lift, while Liverpool and Tottenham scored seven goals between them. The opening weekend gave us plenty of statements, but few certainties.

Matchweek 2 gives us the first chance to test those opening-week signals. London City must now back up their opening win in a tricky derby at West Ham. Chelsea travel to United needing to turn their dominance into goals, while Liverpool v Tottenham tests how much of either side’s attacking start carries into a tighter contest. Aston Villa, after frustrating Chelsea, now try to do the same to champions Manchester City.

West Ham United v London City Lionesses

Sat 12 Sep, 12:45 · Chigwell Construction Stadium

Model: West Ham 20% · Draw 31% · London City 50%
Most likely scorelines: 0–1 (15.0%) · 1–1 (14.0%) · 0–0 (14.0%)

London City were unbeaten in last season’s two league meetings with West Ham, but their trip to Dagenham was far from straightforward. They led through Jana Fernández before Oona Siren’s superb volley earned West Ham a 1–1 draw. London City had the better of the underlying numbers—1.20 xG to 0.25—but still left with only a point. That is the warning as they return to Dagenham in Matchweek 2.

Our model makes London City favourites, but this looks far from straightforward. Their 50% win probability gives them a clear edge, while the 31% draw probability reflects the possibility of another tight contest. London City arrive with confidence after beating Manchester United 2–1 on opening weekend; West Ham need a response after their 3–1 defeat at Tottenham. The challenge for London City is to turn their stronger attacking threat into a result this time.

STAT TO WATCH
0.25–1.20 xG · 1–1 scoreline
West Ham took a point from the last home meeting despite creating very little. London City produced far more attacking threat but could not make it count. Saturday tests whether they can do so this time.

Manchester United v Chelsea

Sun 13 Sep, 12:00 · Progress With Unity Stadium

Model: Manchester United 29% · Draw 32% · Chelsea 40%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (15.0%) · 0–0 (12.0%) · 0–1 (11.0%)

Chelsea took four points from the two league meetings with United last season, drawing 1–1 at Leigh before winning 1–0 at Stamford Bridge in May. But this fixture now comes with a very different opening-week contrast. Chelsea left their 1–1 draw with Aston Villa frustrated after creating 3.60 xG; United lost 2–1 at London City after producing only 0.25 xG. One side needs its pressure to become goals, the other needs to find a route to goal at all.

Our model gives Chelsea the edge, but only narrowly. A 32% draw probability—and 1–1 as the most likely scoreline—shows how competitive it expects this to be. Chelsea will look to turn last week’s chance creation into goals; United need a much stronger attacking display than they produced at London City. Last season’s 1–1 at this ground is also a reminder that United can make this fixture difficult for Chelsea.

STAT TO WATCH
3.60 xG · 0.25 xG
Chelsea produced Matchweek 1’s highest xG total; United were at the other end of the scale. The question on Sunday is whether Chelsea can turn that dominance into goals—and whether United can offer far more going forward.

Liverpool v Tottenham Hotspur

Sun 13 Sep, 14:00 · St Helens Stadium

Model: Liverpool 41% · Draw 33% · Tottenham 26%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (15.0%) · 0–0 (14.0%) · 1–0 (14.0%)

Last season’s meetings were split: Tottenham won 2–1 in north London, then Liverpool won 2–0 at St Helens. But Liverpool’s home victory was far tighter than the score suggests. It was still goalless after 90 minutes before Mia Enderby struck twice in stoppage time. That is the recent history behind a fixture that looks balanced again.

Both sides arrive with opening-week momentum. Liverpool began with a 4–0 win at Charlton; Tottenham beat West Ham 3–1. Those results brought seven goals between them, but this should tell us more about how much of that attacking threat carries into a much tighter contest. Our model leans Liverpool at home, yet the 33% draw probability—and 1–1 as the likeliest scoreline—underline just how finely balanced this looks.

STAT TO WATCH
90+4 · 90+5
Enderby’s two stoppage-time goals settled Liverpool’s last home meeting with Spurs after 90 goalless minutes. With the model again expecting a tight game, patience may matter just as much this time.

Aston Villa v Manchester City

Sun 13 Sep, 18:30 · Villa Park

Model: Aston Villa 18% · Draw 24% · Manchester City 58%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (12.0%) · 1–2 (10.0%) · 0–2 (10.0%)

Manchester City demolished Villa 6–1 in December, but the return at Villa Park was a different story. Villa held the champions to 0–0 in March and in fact edged the xG, 1.57 to 1.03. Their opening-week draw at Chelsea carried the same message: Villa may not dominate the ball, but they have become very difficult to break down and very capable of keeping a heavyweight within reach.

City still arrive as clear favourites after beginning their title defence with a 3–1 win over Birmingham. But Villa’s opening draw at Chelsea is another reminder that this may not be straightforward. City should control territory and create the greater volume of chances; Villa’s challenge is to absorb that pressure, stay level deep into the game and make their moments count. A 58% City win probability gives the champions a strong edge, but leaves plenty of room for Villa to frustrate them again.

STAT TO WATCH
0–0 · 1.57–1.03 xG
Villa held City at Villa Park in March and carried a genuine attacking threat of their own. That is the template they will try to repeat.

Birmingham City v Brighton

Sun 13 Sep, 14:00 · St Andrew’s @ Knighthead Park

Model: Birmingham City 22% · Draw 31% · Brighton 46%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (14.0%) · 0–1 (14.0%) · 0–0 (13.0%)

Birmingham lost 3–1 at Manchester City, but their return to the top flight was more competitive than the scoreline suggests. They created 13 shots and 1.22 xG against the champions, showing enough attacking threat to suggest they can cause Brighton problems at home. Brighton, meanwhile, lost 1–0 to Arsenal in Arturo Ruiz’s first match in charge—a narrow defeat that gave the new manager a solid defensive platform, but little attacking reward.

Our model gives Brighton the edge, but this looks far from straightforward. Birmingham have a 53% chance of avoiding defeat, showing just how competitive the model expects this game to be. Brighton will want control and patience; Birmingham have already shown enough at Manchester City to believe this is a genuine opportunity for their first point—or more—back in the WSL.

STAT TO WATCH
13 shots · 1.22 xG
Birmingham produced both against the champions. If they carry the same attacking threat into their first home game, Brighton may have a real contest on their hands.

Everton v Charlton Athletic

Sun 13 Sep, 14:00 · Goodison Park

Model: Everton 50% · Draw 31% · Charlton 18%
Most likely scorelines: 1–0 (16.0%) · 0–0 (15.0%) · 1–1 (13.0%)

Everton may have left VBS Community Stadium with nothing last weekend, but that defeat was not as damaging as the scoreline suggests. They created more than Crystal Palace—1.04 xG to 0.71, but lost 1–0. Charlton had a far more difficult return to the WSL: they were beaten 4–0 by Liverpool after creating just 0.08 xG. So both sides arrive needing a response, but for very different reasons.

Our model makes Everton favourites, though not by a huge margin. The 31% draw probability reflects an Everton side that still need to convert their good spells into goals, against a Charlton team that will need to be far more organised and resistant than they were at the Valley. Being at home gives Everton the edge; the question is whether they can turn last weekend’s encouraging performance into their first points.

STAT TO WATCH
1.04–0.71 xG · 0–1 result
Everton created the better chances at Palace but still lost. Against Charlton, that performance level needs to bring a result.

Arsenal v Crystal Palace

Sun 13 Sep, 14:45 · Emirates Stadium

Model: Arsenal 76% · Draw 18% · Crystal Palace 6%
Most likely scorelines: 2–0 (17.0%) · 1–0 (15.0%) · 3–0 (12.0%)

Both teams began their 2026-27 campaign with a 1–0 win. The similarity ends there. Arsenal controlled their victory at Brighton, creating 1.32 xG to the hosts’ 0.70. Crystal Palace, on the other hand, beat Everton while producing less than their opponents, 0.71 xG to 1.04. Palace showed they can stay disciplined and take a moment when it comes; Arsenal showed they can control a match away from home.

Our model makes Arsenal an overwhelming favourite for this one. Palace’s opening clean sheet gives them something to build on, but the Emirates is a far more demanding test of that resistance. Arsenal should establish territory early and create a much larger volume of chances. Palace’s challenge is to keep the scoreline alive long enough for their efficiency and confidence from opening day to matter.

STAT TO WATCH
1.32–0.70 xG · 0.71–1.04 xG
Arsenal won their opener by controlling the chances; Palace won theirs without doing so. Sunday tests whether Palace can make the same approach work against the league’s strongest favourites.

Welcome to Part 2 of our 2026–27 WSL summer transfer analysis. In Part 1, we examined Arsenal’s title push, Liverpool’s rebuild, Crystal Palace’s survival bid, Tottenham’s playing-quality upgrade and Manchester United’s unsettled transition. This instalment turns to West Ham United, Aston Villa, Everton, Birmingham City and Charlton Athletic — five clubs with very different starting points, from established WSL sides seeking progress to promoted teams preparing for the step up.

The framework is unchanged. We begin with each club’s 2025–26 baseline, assess what departures have removed from it, then examine whether the arrivals have addressed the resulting needs. The result is two judgments: a window verdict on the quality of the summer business, and a squad impact verdict on whether the team is now stronger, weaker or broadly unchanged.

🟤 West Ham United

The Baseline

West Ham finished 10th on 19 points in 2025–26, scoring 20 league goals and conceding 45. They stayed clear of the relegation play-off, but not by enough to call the season comfortable: this was a side that needed a more reliable route to goals and far greater defensive security.

The summer task was therefore broader than replacing individual departures. West Ham needed to protect the competitive edge built under Rita Guarino, improve a defence that conceded more than two goals per game, and find enough attacking depth to avoid placing the scoring burden on one forward.

What West Ham lost before they could improve

West Ham’s most important losses were concentrated in the spine of the team. Shekiera Martinez, Katrina Gorry, Shelina Zadorsky and Verena Hanshaw combined for the goals, midfield intensity, defensive experience and leadership that carried much of the side’s competitive weight. Martinez was the clearest statistical departure: six league goals in 1,533 minutes, from 19 starts, made her West Ham’s leading scorer.

Gorry’s 1,296 minutes do not need goals or assists to explain their value. She was captain, the side’s main midfield organiser and a source of defensive intensity. Zadorsky added roughly 855 league minutes as vice-captain and left-sided centre-back cover, while Hanshaw brought about 934 minutes, a league goal and two-way work from full-back or wing-back. Kinga Szemik’s departure then removes a goalkeeper who started 19 of 22 league matches.

That leaves a clear replacement brief: replace Martinez’s goals collectively, rebuild the left side of the defence, find a more secure goalkeeping answer and make sure the exits of a captain and vice-captain do not leave a thinner, less coherent team.

Did West Ham solve the problem?

West Ham have replaced Martinez’s goals collectively rather than asking one arrival to become an automatic first-choice striker. Kelly Gago scored four times in 703 Everton minutes, while Ebony Salmon added two goals and an assist in 962 minutes for Aston Villa. Together, they match Martinez’s six-goal output and give Guarino different profiles in the forward line — though neither arrives with Martinez’s 19-start role already secured.

The defensive response is more substantial. Constance Picaud arrives after playing every league minute for Fleury, keeping nine clean sheets with a 74.7% save rate; she gives West Ham genuine competition after Szemik’s 19-start season. Laia Codina and Nadine Riesen bring high-level defensive experience and 2,313 recent league minutes between them, while deadline-day arrival Saki Kumagai adds another senior option with the authority and international pedigree that the departures had removed.

The six new senior arrivals — Picaud, Codina, Riesen, Gago, Salmon and Kumagai — bring 7,222 recent league minutes, nine goals and seven assists. Katie Zelem and Estelle Cascarino’s permanent deals matter differently: both preserve contributions already present during their 2025–26 loans. West Ham have addressed the right areas and added real depth; the remaining uncertainty is whether the new forward collective can replace Martinez’s dependable starting role, and whether anyone can immediately replace Gorry and Zadorsky’s leadership.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Positive
Squad impact: Strengthened in depth and balance; leadership thinner

West Ham have rebuilt intelligently around their most obvious weaknesses. Picaud, Codina and Riesen add more security and quality to a defence that needed it, while Gago and Salmon give the attack more routes to goals after Martinez’s exit. Keeping Zelem and Cascarino prevents another reset, and Kumagai adds important experience. But the captain, vice-captain and leading scorer have all left; until the new group settles and a leadership core emerges, this is a positive, better-balanced squad rather than a complete transformation.

🟣 Aston Villa

The baseline

Aston Villa finished ninth on 20 points in 2025–26. They scored 28 league goals, but conceded 48 — the second-highest total in the division. The season was not a relegation fight, yet it never developed into a push towards the teams above them either.

Villa’s summer task was therefore to make the squad more reliable at both ends: find a way to replace the goals of their leading scorer, reduce the fragility around the back line and establish a clearer goalkeeping solution. This was a reset around a useful core, not a simple like-for-like rebuild.

What Aston Villa lost before they could improve

Villa’s outgoing group supplied 4,821 league minutes, 14 goals and three assists. The loss is heavily concentrated in Kirsty Hanson, who played 1,681 minutes and scored 12 of Villa’s 28 league goals. That was 43% of the team’s scoring — not simply a departing wide player, but Villa’s clearest route to turning pressure into goals.

Sabrina D’Angelo is the other major workload loss after 1,277 league minutes and 15 starts in goal. Ebony Salmon then removes 962 minutes of forward rotation, while Jenna Nighswonger’s loan return takes away 507 Villa minutes and one assist from the left side. Those exits leave fewer established options in goal, attack and defence before Villa can claim to have improved any of them.

Staniforth and Nunes combined for only 218 league minutes, while Sarah Mayling contributed another 176 Villa minutes before her January loan to Leicester became permanent. Their departures reduce experience and depth, but the summer requirement was clear: find new sources of goals to replace Hanson’s output, rebuild the goalkeeper group, and add enough defensive stability that Villa are not again defined by conceding too freely.

Did Aston Villa solve the problem?

Villa have recruited several ways to share the attacking responsibility. Mia McAulay brings 11 goals and six assists from 1,725 league minutes for Rangers, adding a substantial source of recent scoring, although that production must translate from the Scottish league to the WSL. Kamilla Melgård arrives after 2,427 Liga F minutes, four goals and seven assists for Madrid CFF, bringing availability and creativity. Amalie Vangsgaard adds a different centre-forward profile after three goals and two assists for Juventus, while Lily Murphy’s loan from Manchester City offers another wide option following a limited 90-minute league season.

The defensive and midfield additions also address clear needs. Justine Kielland brings 1,565 Bundesliga minutes, two goals and three assists from midfield, while Mathilde Harviken adds 1,323 Serie A minutes and Champions League experience at centre-back. Rofiat Imuran strengthens the left-back options after 706 WSL minutes and nine starts for London City Lionesses, adding cover following Nighswonger’s loan return and Mayling’s departure. In goal, Akane Okuma and Emily Ramsey create competition alongside the retained Ellie Roebuck, but the evidence does not yet establish a clear successor to D’Angelo.

Across the nine incoming players, Villa have added 11,181 recent league minutes, 20 goals and 19 assists. That exceeds the departing contribution by 6,360 minutes, six goals and 16 assists, although the comparison spans different leagues. The recruitment gives Villa greater depth and a broader attacking response to Hanson’s departure than a reliance on Melgård and Vangsgaard alone. The remaining question is whether those options can produce consistently in the WSL while the defensive additions and goalkeeper competition help reduce the goals conceded.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Qualified positive
Squad impact: Deeper and better balanced; attacking options strengthened

Villa have broadened their options across the squad. McAulay adds meaningful recent scoring alongside Melgård’s creativity and Vangsgaard’s centre-forward experience, while Murphy provides further attacking depth. Kielland, Harviken and Imuran reinforce midfield and defence, and the goalkeeper group offers competition. The recruitment addresses the right areas, but production from other leagues must translate and the new defensive and goalkeeping arrangements still have to prove themselves.

🔵 Everton

The baseline

Everton finished eighth on 23 points in 2025–26. They were clear of the relegation places, but 25 goals scored and 37 conceded left them with a negative goal difference and little margin for error. It was a season of stability rather than real upward momentum.

The summer task was to add more attacking threat without weakening the defensive base that kept Everton in the division’s middle ground. Above all, they needed a credible plan for replacing Martina Fernández, whose minutes and reliability had made her the foundation of the back line.

What Everton lost before they could improve

Everton’s outgoing group supplied 5,423 league minutes, eight goals and six assists. Martina Fernández is the defining loss: 1,951 minutes, two goals and two assists, with starts in all 22 league matches before Barcelona activated their buy-back. Replacing that level of availability at centre-back is the window’s clearest unresolved task.

The attacking loss is spread across Kelly Gago, Katja Snoeijs and Toni Payne. Gago leaves after four goals in 703 minutes; Snoeijs contributed two goals and an assist; Payne added 1,077 minutes and two assists from wide areas. Emily Ramsey’s 540 minutes in goal, plus Elise Stenevik’s 428 minutes of defensive cover, remove further depth from a side that could not afford to become thinner.

Everton therefore needed more than fresh attacking names. They needed to replace Gago’s goals, maintain their goalkeeping depth and find a credible successor to Fernández’s ever-present defensive role.

Did Everton solve the problem?

Everton’s clearest answer is Holly McNamara, who arrives with 14 goals and five assists in 1,611 A-League minutes for Melbourne City. She gives Everton the scoring profile they lacked too often last season. Hannah Cain adds 1,597 recent WSL minutes, while Noémie Mouchon and Jutta Rantala offer further forward options after disrupted seasons at Leicester.

The defensive response is less certain. Naomi Layzell arrives on loan with only 26 recent WSL minutes, while Hannah Silcock brings potential and useful depth but not evidence equivalent to Fernández’s 22-start role. Rylee Foster gives the goalkeeper group competition behind Courtney Brosnan, but she is a depth solution rather than a direct answer to Everton’s central-defensive loss.

Across the incoming group, Everton add at least €210k in listed market value, 5,099 recent league minutes, 16 goals and seven assists — twice the goal output of the departing group. The recorded net swing is −324 minutes and −€360k in listed value, but +8 goals and +1 assist: an incoming group with slightly fewer recent minutes and a lower listed-value floor, but meaningfully more attacking end product concentrated heavily in one signing.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Qualified positive
Squad impact: Attack strengthened; centre-back succession unresolved

McNamara gives Everton a signing with genuine game-changing upside, while Cain, Mouchon and Rantala make the forward line deeper and less dependent on one source of goals. But Fernández was Everton’s highest-minute player and no arrival yet matches her experience or workload at centre-back. Everton have raised their attacking ceiling; whether they have protected their floor depends on how quickly the new defensive group settles.

🔵 Birmingham City

The baseline

Birmingham City return to the WSL as WSL2 champions, promoted after winning the decisive final-day match at Charlton. They finished on 44 points, level with Crystal Palace but ahead on goal difference, having scored 46 and conceded 24 across 22 matches. That is a promotion-winning record — but also a reminder that their summer starts from a different question: can the team that mastered WSL2 become competitive quickly at the higher level?

The task was not to abandon the attack that won promotion. Wilma Leidhammar, Martha Harris and the retained forward group have earned the chance to test themselves in the WSL. Birmingham instead needed to add top-flight experience through the spine, replace the leadership and goalkeeping security that left, and give a newly promoted side enough resilience to ensure promotion is not followed by an immediate survival fight.

What Birmingham City lost before they could improve

Birmingham’s outgoing group is not defined by a mass loss of current WSL2 production. The clearest departures are experience, leadership and goalkeeping continuity. Adrianna Franch played 827 league minutes last season, while captain Christie Harrison-Murray supplied 846 minutes at the heart of the defence. Together, they leave a newly promoted side without two of the figures who helped turn a strong Championship squad into champions.

The most visible attacking departure is Lotta Lindström, whose three goals and one assist in 719 league minutes made her a useful part of Birmingham’s promotion attack. The remaining exits carried far lighter recent workloads: some were fringe contributors, some had spent time away from the club, and others had not established themselves in the promotion-winning side. That matters because Birmingham are not trying to rebuild an entire XI.

But the losses still sharpen the summer brief. Birmingham needed a goalkeeper solution after Franch, a way to replace Harrison-Murray’s leadership and centre-back reliability, and enough proven top-flight experience that their retained WSL2 attack would not be asked to make the step up without support.

Did Birmingham City solve the problem?

Birmingham have used the window to strengthen the spine rather than replace their attack from scratch. Lisa Naalsund arrives with 824 WSL minutes and three goals from Manchester United, bringing top-flight midfield experience to a promoted team. Millie Turner adds 521 WSL minutes, a goal and an assist, plus the leadership of a player who has competed at the league’s highest level. Jade Rastocle complements them with 1,878 recent league minutes for Montpellier: a younger centre-back addition with the workload to compete for a role quickly.

The goalkeeper response is deliberately collective. Sophie Baggaley brings 270 recent WSL minutes, while Katie Startup provides another senior option after a season without top-flight league action. Neither arrives as a proven like-for-like successor to Franch, but together they create a genuine competition rather than leaving Birmingham dependent on one new starter. The defence has also gained more experience around Harrison-Murray’s exit, even if replacing a title-winning captain is not a numbers exercise.

Across Turner, Naalsund and Rastocle, Birmingham add 3,223 recent top-flight league minutes, four goals and one assist. Crucially, they have retained the promotion attack rather than trying to replace Lindström externally: Crosthwaite, Sarri and Leidhammar combined for 22 WSL2 goals last season. Birmingham have added the WSL experience and defensive structure they lacked, while trusting the players who won the division to provide the goals.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Qualified positive
Squad impact: Stronger through the spine; attack untested at WSL level

Birmingham have avoided an indiscriminate promotion rebuild. Naalsund, Turner and Rastocle add the top-flight experience, leadership and defensive depth a newly promoted side needs, while the retained forward group preserves the attack that won WSL2. The unanswered questions are in goal and in transition: the new goalkeeper competition must settle quickly, and Birmingham’s 22-goal retained attacking core must show that its promotion form can travel.

🔴 Charlton Athletic

The baseline

Charlton entered the summer as a promoted side, but not an uncomplicated one. They finished third in WSL2 on 42 points, having led the division by nine points earlier in the campaign before Birmingham and Crystal Palace overtook them on the final day. Promotion still came through a goalless play-off against Leicester, won on penalties — proof of resilience, but also of how fine the margins had become.

Their underlying platform was defence. Charlton conceded a division-low 21 league goals, kept eight clean sheets and were comfortable succeeding without dominating possession. The task for the summer was to make that structure survive against stronger WSL attacks, while adding enough attacking threat so that they don’t spend every week defending their way to safety.

What Charlton Athletic lost before they could improve

Charlton’s departures remove 5,192 recorded league minutes and 18 goal involvements, but the replacement task is concentrated in four players. Katie Bradley is the defining loss: 1,781 minutes, four goals and one assist from a player who was central to the team’s set pieces and familiarity with the system. Karin Muya adds a further 1,258 minutes of regular midfield workload.

Amalie Thestrup’s exit removes the side’s most regular centre-forward reference: 1,192 minutes, three goals and one assist. Emma Bissell is the more unusual loss. Her workload was only 345 minutes, but she produced four goals and two assists — the kind of bench efficiency that is difficult to plan for, particularly after promotion.

Charlton therefore needed to replace Bradley’s influence across midfield and set pieces, find enough forward production to cover Thestrup and Bissell, and make sure the departures did not loosen the defensive organisation that had carried the promotion campaign.

Did Charlton Athletic solve the problem?

Charlton have brought in more attacking evidence than they lost. Lorena Azzaro is the clearest new scoring arrival after eight goals and two assists in 970 Première Ligue minutes for Paris FC. Emily van Egmond adds 1,307 recent WSL minutes, one goal and one assist from midfield, while Paula Partido offers another attacking option after a season split between Liga F and London City. None is a simple Bradley or Thestrup replacement, but together they broaden a group that needed more than one route to goal.

The defensive additions are designed to protect Charlton’s identity rather than reinvent it. Ashleigh Neville brings recent WSL experience and athleticism at full-back; Grace Johnston arrives after playing every minute of Perth Glory’s league season; and Leah Davidson adds 1,261 A-League minutes and three assists from midfield. Anna Koivunen gives Sophie Whitehouse real goalkeeping competition, but Whitehouse’s 1,980 promotion-season minutes and eight clean sheets mean this is depth, not an automatic change of number one.

Across the seven new arrivals, Charlton have added 7,963 recent league minutes and 19 goal involvements. Keira Flannery’s permanent move matters differently: it secures the 1,891 Charlton minutes she had already supplied on loan, preserving rather than adding to the promotion baseline. Charlton have invested in experience, scoring and defensive availability; the question is whether a group assembled from several leagues can preserve their defensive discipline while producing enough at WSL level.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Qualified positive for survival
Squad impact: Strengthened in experience and depth; attack must translate

Charlton have recruited with a clear understanding of what promotion requires. Azzaro offers the most credible new source of goals, while Neville, Johnston, Davidson and van Egmond add experience and workload around a defensive base that already worked. Keeping Flannery preserves an important part of that base. But Bradley’s influence, Bissell’s efficiency and the need for goals from several new leagues mean Charlton’s survival case still depends on quick adaptation rather than recruitment alone.

Data sources

Transfers were reconciled from club announcements, destination-club confirmations and reputable football reporting. Previous-season league minutes, goals and assists were compiled from provider and competition records; league tables and team baselines come from completed 2025–26 match results. For players arriving from calendar-year competitions, such as the NWSL, we use the full 2025 league season rather than an incomplete 2026 sample. Where a player had already changed clubs before this transfer window, we credit only their production at the club they are actually arriving from, even if that spell is shorter than a full season, rather than reaching back to an earlier, non-contiguous club. Market values are Soccerdonna estimates captured on 4 September.

📅 What’s Next

Part 3 closes the series with Brighton, Chelsea, London City Lionesses and Manchester City — four clubs whose windows range from targeted reinforcement to major squad reconstruction.

See you in Part 3.

This is the second edition of our WSL summer transfer analysis, a series that began last season and later returned for a full retrospective. That retrospective allowed us the chance to test our original judgments against what actually happened, showing where the reasoning held up and where the evidence needed to be stronger.

This year’s analysis is built on some of the lessons we learnt from that exercise. A long transfer list does not automatically mean a stronger squad, and a departure does not automatically create a meaningful on-pitch loss.

So we start by looking at each club’s previous-season performance, establishing a baseline; then the contribution that left; then the problems the summer business had to solve; and finally whether the arrivals addressed them. The result is two clear judgments: a window verdict on the quality of the business, and a squad impact verdict on whether the team is now stronger, weaker or broadly unchanged. This first part covers Arsenal, Liverpool, Crystal Palace, Tottenham Hotspur and Manchester United. The remaining clubs follow across two further parts.

🔴 Arsenal

The Baseline

Arsenal did not enter the summer needing to be rebuilt. They had lost only once in the league, conceded a division-low 14 goals and finished second on 51 points. But Manchester City finished on 55. The difference was not collapse; it was six draws, and the fine margin between being elite and being champions.

That is the baseline for Arsenal’s transfer window. They needed more than replacements for departing names. They needed to preserve the defensive level, replace the creativity and width leaving with Katie McCabe, Beth Mead and Victoria Pelova, and add enough attacking variety to convert more close matches into wins.

What Arsenal lost before they could improve

Arsenal’s permanent-departure list is long, but the replacement task is narrower. Beth Mead, Katie McCabe, Victoria Pelova and Laia Codina are the four players who contributed to Arsenal’s 2025–26 league baseline. Together, they supplied 3,895 league minutes, three goals and 12 assists.

McCabe is the biggest functional loss: 1,519 minutes, one goal, three assists and a dependable left-sided two-way presence. Mead added two goals and five assists in 1,015 minutes, alongside WSL experience and attacking relationships the numbers cannot fully measure. Pelova brought three assists as a midfield connector, while Codina supplied 641 minutes of centre-back depth.

The scoring loss is modest; the creative loss is not. Arsenal are losing 12 assists from players who helped turn possession into chances. Zinsberger’s zero-minute exit, plus the permanent sales of Kafaji and Nighswonger after loan seasons elsewhere, count in the business record but not as Arsenal performance losses. The requirement was therefore clear: replace McCabe’s function, recover Mead and Pelova’s creativity, and add more attacking variety to turn draws into wins.

Did Arsenal solve the problem?

The midfield and forward additions answer the need for more ways to win close matches. Georgia Stanway and Géraldine Reuteler bring 3,928 recent league minutes, 14 goals and 17 assists between them: workload, ball progression and the ability to create or finish from midfield. Selina Cerci and Lisa Baum add another 22 goals and 11 assists from wide and forward areas. Cerci is the clearest new scoring route after 16 goals for Hoffenheim, while Baum gives Arsenal another direct wide attacker rather than a like-for-like replacement for any one departure.

Ona Batlle is the most direct response to McCabe’s loss. Her two goals and two assists for Barcelona understate the case: Arsenal are buying a high-level full-back capable of carrying, creating and defending from the same side of the pitch. Misa Rodríguez and Élisa De Almeida then strengthen the goalkeeper and defensive groups. Neither is a repair for a broken defence — Arsenal already had the league’s best record — but both reduce the risk that departures and injuries weaken it.

The incoming group brings €3.825m in current market value, 12,694 recent league minutes, 38 goals and 34 assists—a +€2.375m squad-value differential against the material outgoings. That does not guarantee WSL translation, but it reinforces the role logic: Arsenal have added quality, workload and creative variety across midfield, wide attack, full-back, goalkeeping and defensive depth rather than replacing departures one for one.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Strongly positive
Squad impact: Strengthened

Arsenal have turned a four-point title miss into a stronger squad. Batlle is a credible functional successor to McCabe; Stanway, Reuteler, Cerci and Baum spread the lost creativity across more midfield and wide-attacking options; while Misa and De Almeida protect the league’s best defensive base. Mead and McCabe’s leadership and WSL familiarity cannot be replicated automatically, and the new group must translate its output quickly. But this was precise recruitment against identifiable needs, adding more workload, variety and depth to a side already close to champions.

🔴 Liverpool

The baseline

Liverpool entered the summer from a very difficult position. They finished 11th out of 12 on 17 points, only narrowly avoiding the relegation play-off, while scoring just 21 league goals and conceding 34. This was a team close to the wrong end of the table, not one looking for marginal improvement.

The priority was clear: Liverpool needed a more dangerous attack, more control and threat through midfield, and enough defensive stability to avoid another season being defined by survival. The window had to improve the level of the team, not simply replace departing players.

What Liverpool lost before they could improve

Liverpool’s outgoing group supplied 5,088 league minutes, but only three goals and three assists. That makes the task more complicated than simply replacing attacking output. The goals came from Martha Thomas and Leanne Kiernan, while Denise O’Sullivan added 651 minutes after arriving in January. Their departures reduce options around the attack and midfield, but they do not explain Liverpool’s 21-goal season on their own.

The larger loss is stability and experience. Gemma Bonner, Gemma Evans, Jennifer Falk and Risa Shimizu account for 3,423 of those minutes between the back line and goal. Bonner’s 620 minutes understate her leadership; Falk had become a regular after arriving in January; Shimizu brought senior international experience; and Evans supplied useful centre-back depth.

So Liverpool’s arrivals had to solve two problems at once. They needed to raise an attack that had scored only 21 league goals, while replacing a substantial amount of defensive and goalkeeping experience without making an 11th-place side even less stable.

Did Liverpool solve the problem?

Liverpool have attacked the scoring problem directly. Natalia Ramos, Mao Itamura and Vivien Endemann combined for 21 league goals and 15 assists in 2025–26 — the same number of league goals Liverpool scored as a whole last season. Ramos is the strongest immediate case after 2,664 minutes, 10 goals and five assists for Tenerife; Itamura adds eight goals and six assists at 19; while Endemann brings senior wide experience from Wolfsburg.

The defensive response is broader than one replacement. Sara Agrež arrives after 2,117 league minutes for Köln, Mari Ward after 1,826 minutes for Bristol City, and Khiara Keating provides a goalkeeper with WSL pedigree, even if her recent sample was only 360 league minutes. Alongside retained Grace Fisk and Jenna Clark, the arrivals give Liverpool new options in goal, at centre-back and at full-back rather than asking one player to replace every departure.

The incoming group brings €730k in current market value, alongside 9,671 recent league minutes, 24 goals and 17 assists. Those totals are not a promise that cross-league production will transfer directly to the WSL. But Liverpool have added attacking production, midfield threat and defensive cover; the remaining question is whether a group recruited from several leagues can become an immediate WSL improvement.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Positive — high upside, high translation risk
Squad impact: Likely strengthened — high adaptation risk

Liverpool have addressed the scale of their problem rather than disguising it. Ramos, Itamura and Endemann give an 11th-place attack far more production and variety, while Agrež, Ward and Keating rebuild options behind them. But most of the evidence comes from outside the WSL, and the departures remove significant defensive experience from a side that cannot afford a slow transition. The upside is real; so is the adaptation risk.

🔵Crystal Palace

The baseline

Crystal Palace enter the WSL with a different test from the other clubs in this article: survival. Promotion gives them momentum, but it does not answer whether the squad that succeeded in WSL2 can withstand a higher level of attacking quality, physicality and week-to-week pressure.

Their retained attacking core offers a platform. Ashleigh Weerden, Abbie Larkin, Annabel Blanchard and Molly-Mae Sharpe combined for 44 goal involvements in the promotion campaign. But that production must now translate, and survival cannot rest on it alone. Palace needed more proven top-flight goals, greater midfield control and a defence capable of coping with the step up.

What Crystal Palace lost before they could improve

Crystal Palace’s outgoing group supplied 1,453 prior-season league minutes, four goals and one assist. Almost all of that loss belongs to Elise Hughes: 1,106 minutes, four goals and one assist. For a promoted side, losing its most productive departing forward creates a clear replacement requirement before the season even begins.

The other departures are smaller in recent workload. Ruesha Littlejohn played 52 league minutes, Chloë Arthur 132 and Indiah-Paige Riley 163; together they produced no goals or assists. Their exits still reduce options, but they do not carry the same on-pitch replacement burden as Hughes.

Palace therefore needed to replace Hughes’s contribution, add goals that could survive the move into the WSL, and build more protection around a squad facing a much tougher level of opposition.

Did Crystal Palace solve the problem?

Palace have replaced Hughes’s output with far more attacking evidence than they lost. Bethany England brings seven WSL goals, Lexi Lloyd-Smith arrives after 11 goals for Bristol City, and Shannon O’Brien adds five from Leicester City. Together, they supply 23 prior-season league goals against the four leaving with Hughes. England gives Palace proven WSL finishing; Lloyd-Smith supplies the promotion-level scoring upside; and O’Brien offers another current top-flight option.

Sierra Enge strengthens the midfield argument with 1,874 league minutes for Strasbourg, 88 tackles and 30 interceptions, while Shanade Hopcroft adds creativity after 770 minutes, one goal and one assist for Birmingham. The less settled part of the rebuild is defence: Molly Bartrip brings WSL experience but only 374 recent league minutes; Teyah Goldie and Fuka Tsunoda add options after limited recent workload; and Pauline Peyraud-Magnin increases competition in goal.

Across the incoming group, Palace have added €480k in current market value, 7,556 recent league minutes, 26 goals and seven assists—a substantial increase on the departing group’s 1,453 minutes, four goals and one assist. Palace have clearly improved their attack and midfield; whether the defensive additions become a reliable WSL unit remains the unanswered question.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Positive for survival
Squad impact: Strengthened in attack and midfield; defence unresolved

Palace have given themselves a much stronger chance of surviving. They kept the core that won promotion, replaced Hughes’s output several times over and added England’s proven WSL goals, Lloyd-Smith’s WSL2 Golden Boot production, O’Brien’s top-flight scoring and Enge’s midfield workload. The defence still needs its new options to establish rhythm quickly, but Palace have addressed the most urgent survival questions with real quality and production.

⚪ Tottenham Hotspur

The baseline

Tottenham finished fifth on 36 points in 2025–26, four points behind fourth place. That was a credible season, but not yet the step into the league’s leading group. They scored 35 goals, showing a capable attack, but conceded 38 — too many for a side trying to turn top-half competitiveness into a sustained top-four challenge.

Their summer requirement was therefore not a wholesale rescue. Spurs needed to preserve their attacking threat, improve defensive reliability and add enough quality to close the gap above them. The complication was that they had to do it while losing a captain, experienced defenders and several long-serving figures who had helped define the group.

What Tottenham lost before they could improve

Tottenham’s departure list is long, but the material on-pitch loss is concentrated. The outgoing group supplied 3,277 league minutes, nine goals and two assists. Bethany England alone accounts for 1,329 minutes, seven goals and one assist — making her both the clearest attacking loss and the hardest leadership role to replace.

Maika Hamano returned to Chelsea after 470 minutes, one goal and one assist, while Martha Thomas added 288 minutes and one goal before her permanent move. Behind them, Josefine Rybrink, Molly Bartrip and Charlotte Grant remove 1,132 minutes of defensive depth. Those are usable minutes, but not an irreplaceable settled back line.

The numbers still understate the challenge. England was captain and Tottenham’s all-time leading WSL scorer; Bartrip and Amy James-Turner were important senior voices; and Kit Graham represented a long connection to the club’s rise. Spurs therefore needed to replace England’s production, improve their defensive workload and establish a new leadership group at the same time.

Did Tottenham solve the problem?

Spurs have replaced England’s scoring collectively, rather than asking one player to become a new captain and a new number nine at once. Kirsty Hanson and Shekiera Martinez scored 18 WSL goals between them in 2025–26, double the nine Tottenham lost through England, Hamano and Thomas. Martinez is the cleaner direct successor after six goals for West Ham, while Hanson’s 12-goal Aston Villa season adds pace, flexibility and a far larger attacking ceiling.

The defensive exchange is equally persuasive on recent workload. Dijkstra and Sombath bring 2,418 league minutes between them, more than twice the 1,132 minutes lost through Rybrink, Bartrip and Grant. Victoria Pelova then restores creative connection from midfield with 720 Arsenal minutes and three assists, while Selma Panengstuen adds strong recent goalkeeper workload behind the ever-present Lize Kop.

Across the incoming group, Tottenham add €1.29m in current market value, 8,784 recent league minutes, 19 goals and five assists. Hanson’s 12 goals came from 6.70 expected goals, meaning she finished around five goals above what the quality of her chances would normally predict; that may not repeat. Dijkstra and Sombath also need to show that their Bundesliga and French-league workload can translate to the WSL. Even so, the recruitment clearly answers Tottenham’s needs: more scoring, more defensive availability and more quality through the spine.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Positive
Squad impact: Strengthened in playing quality; leadership weakened

Tottenham have converted a major exit list into a stronger footballing squad. Martinez replaces England at striker, Hanson adds goals from wide areas, Pelova raises creativity, and Dijkstra plus Sombath increase defensive workload. But England’s captaincy and the senior voices leaving with her make this a positive window rather than an unequivocally strong one.

🔴 Manchester United

The baseline

Manchester United finished fourth on 40 points in 2025–26. Their defence gave them a credible platform, conceding only 22 league goals, but 38 scored was not enough to close the gap to the teams above them or secure a Champions League place.

The summer task was clear: add more reliable attacking output without weakening a strong defensive base. United also needed enough depth through midfield and the back line to ensure that a fourth-place team did not become more fragile after its departures.

What Manchester United lost before they could improve

United’s material outgoing group supplied 3,563 league minutes, 10 goals and five assists. Melvine Malard is the defining loss: 1,520 minutes, six goals and three assists. Her combination of availability and attacking output was too substantial to be covered simply by expecting more from the players already in the squad.

Lisa Naalsund is the other major concern. Her 824 minutes and three goals came from midfield, where United needed more than another defensive body. Millie Turner, Gabby George and Hannah Blundell then remove 990 minutes of defensive depth, while Leah Galton’s injury-affected season still included 138 minutes and one assist.

United therefore needed to replace Malard’s attacking contribution, protect the defensive platform that had delivered fourth place, and stop Naalsund’s midfield departure from leaving the squad thinner in the area that connects both tasks.

Did Manchester United solve the problem?

Monica Jusu Bah gives United a credible answer to Malard’s departure, but not a confirmed replacement. Malard left 1,520 WSL minutes, six goals and three assists; Jusu Bah arrives with 1,823 minutes, 10 goals and four assists for BK Häcken. But Jusu Bah’s current €175k valuation remains well below Malard’s €450k, reflecting the difference between proven WSL standing and potential that still has to translate from Sweden.

The other additions improve the range of options without clearly resolving every loss. Andrea Medina has 1,415 Liga F minutes and the versatility to cover several left-sided defensive roles, while Rebeca Bernal brings 2,021 minutes of senior experience from Washington Spirit. Janina Leitzig adds competition in goal, but joins a position already occupied by an established first choice. Each signing is credible; none automatically turns United’s departures into a clear upgrade.

Across the whole exchange, United have added more recent league minutes and goals, but the incoming group carries €640k in market value against €1.245m leaving. That does not mean the window has failed; it explains why it feels more like a transition than a clear upgrade.

Verdict

➡️ Window verdict: Qualified positive
Squad impact: No clear net change — credible cover added, midfield thinner

Jusu Bah prevents Malard’s exit from defining United’s window, while Medina and Bernal add useful cover. But Naalsund’s midfield contribution is not directly replaced, Leitzig improves competition rather than the first XI, and the major arrivals must translate quickly. United have avoided a clear weakening.

Data sources

Transfers were reconciled from club announcements, destination-club confirmations and reputable football reporting. Previous-season league minutes, goals and assists were compiled from provider and competition records; league tables and team baselines come from completed 2025–26 match results. For players arriving from calendar-year competitions, such as the NWSL, we use the full 2025 league season rather than an incomplete 2026 sample. Market values are Soccerdonna estimates captured on 4 September.

📅 What’s Next

We turn to West Ham United, Aston Villa, Everton, Birmingham City and Charlton Athletic—five clubs facing very different summer tests. We will use the same framework—baseline, departures and arrivals framework, to assess which teams have genuinely improved their position and where the biggest questions remain.

See you in Part 2.

🌍 Weekend Landscape

The 2026–27 Barclays Women’s Super League returns with a new champion and a new format. Manchester City ended a ten-year wait for the title—and Chelsea’s six-season reign—while the league has expanded from 12 to 14 clubs for the first time. Birmingham City, Crystal Palace and Charlton Athletic have joined a competition that will now feature 26 matchweeks and 182 fixtures. There is also greater jeopardy at the bottom: 14th place means automatic relegation, while the team finishing 13th must defend its place in a play-off.

The season opens under the Friday-night lights with London City Lionesses against Manchester United. London City were the talk of last summer’s transfer market before setting a new points record for a promoted club and finishing sixth in their first WSL campaign. They have since added Kadidiatou Diani, Mapi León, Rosa Kafaji and Alexia Putellas—a two-time Ballon d’Or winner who left Barcelona after 14 years, 232 goals and 38 trophies. United, meanwhile, begin a new era after replacing Marc Skinner with Eva Olid, who led Hearts to their first Scottish league title.

The excitement is already visible beyond the pitch. London City have sold out their full-season-ticket allocation, Chelsea will play all 13 league matches at Stamford Bridge for the first time, and Arsenal will again play their full campaign at the Emirates. The WSL attracted 902,981 spectators last season, so the expanded fixture list should take it beyond one million. But the headline number is not the real test: what matters is whether average crowds grow, seats are consistently filled and the opening-week excitement lasts until May.

The headline match

London City Lionesses v Manchester United

Fri 04 Sep, 19:00 · CopperJax Community Stadium

Model: London City 44% · Draw 28% · Manchester United 28%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (11.9%) · 1–0 (10.1%) · 2–1 (9.2%)

London City’s first WSL home meeting with Manchester United ended in a bruising 5–1 defeat. Five months later, they led at Leigh and pushed United until Millie Turner’s 79th-minute header completed a narrow 2–1 comeback. Now, after an ambitious summer, London City will believe the gap between the teams has closed too.

Despite United winning both meetings last season, 7–2 on aggregate, our model makes London City slight favourites this time, giving them a 44% win probability. Home advantage helps, but the biggest change is personnel: Alexia Putellas and Kadidiatou Diani bring greater invention and finishing, while Mapi León strengthens the defence. London City may now have the quality to turn last season’s encouraging performance into a different result.

STAT TO WATCH
10–5 shots · 22–21 box touches
London City led both measures in February. If their new attacking quality turns that pressure into better chances, the result could finally swing their way.

Chelsea v Aston Villa

Sat 05 Sep, 12:30 · Stamford Bridge

Model: Chelsea 60% · Draw 22% · Aston Villa 18%
Most likely scorelines: 2–1 (9.8%) · 1–1 (8.9%) · 2–0 (8.6%)

Chelsea have won all 12 of their WSL meetings with Aston Villa, but the contest became considerably less comfortable last season. After winning 3–1 at Villa Park, Chelsea needed Sjoeke Nüsken’s late goal to survive a seven-goal thriller at Kingsmeadow. Villa scored three times and remained level until the 82nd minute in a 4–3 defeat.

That reminder of Villa’s threat makes Chelsea’s short turnaround worth watching. They come into the season opener after securing their place in the Champions League league phase, beating Real Sociedad 1–0 in Spain to seal a 6–2 aggregate win. It is a positive start, but the midweek trip adds an early test of freshness and rotation before Villa arrive at Stamford Bridge.

Our model still makes Chelsea clear favourites, giving them a 60% win probability. Their territorial dominance and home advantage provide a powerful foundation, but this is also the beginning of a new chapter: Chelsea start their attempt to reclaim the title at Stamford Bridge, now their permanent league home, following significant summer turnover. Villa’s performance in March showed that the historical record does not guarantee another routine afternoon.

STAT TO WATCH
38.3–20.4 opposition-box touches per match
Chelsea reached the opposition box almost twice as frequently as Villa last season. Villa may not get the same volume of attacks, so making their best openings count—as they did in March—will be essential.

Brighton v Arsenal

Sun 06 Sep, 12:00 · Broadfield Stadium

Model: Brighton 11% · Draw 22% · Arsenal 67%
Most likely scorelines: 0–2 (13.2%) · 0–1 (13.0%) · 1–2 (9.5%)

Arsenal won the first league meeting between these sides last season, but Brighton turned the rivalry around in the spring. They knocked the Gunners out of the FA Cup with a 2–0 win at Meadow Park, then held them 1–1 at Broadfield—a result that ended Arsenal’s title challenge. Returning to the same ground only four months later, Brighton know they can frustrate them again.

The test now comes amid a sudden managerial change. Brighton announced Dario Vidošić’s departure little more than a week before the season opener, ending a spell in which he had helped turn the Seagulls into a side capable of troubling the league’s elite. The club moved quickly to appoint Arturo Ruiz, but Arsenal will be the first test of how smoothly that transition can land.

Our model nevertheless makes Arsenal strong favourites, giving them a 67% win probability. That reflects the season-long difference in attacking pressure, while the summer arrivals add even greater control and progression to an already dominant midfield. Brighton’s recent success makes this more dangerous than an ordinary top-versus-mid-table fixture, but Arsenal possess the quality to turn territorial control into a much better result this time.

STAT TO WATCH
40.8–25.1 opposition-box touches per match
Arsenal reached the opposition box far more frequently than Brighton last season. The Seagulls have already shown that they can absorb that pressure; doing it again will be the foundation of any opening-weekend surprise.

Tottenham Hotspur v West Ham United

Sun 06 Sep, 12:00 · Brisbane Road

Model: Tottenham Hotspur 43% · Draw 26% · West Ham United 31%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (10.8%) · 2–1 (9.1%) · 1–0 (7.7%)

Tottenham completed a derby double over West Ham last season, but neither victory came easily. Bethany England’s 86th-minute penalty settled the opener 1–0 before Spurs came from behind to win the return 2–1. The player who gave West Ham the lead that afternoon, Shekiera Martinez, has since crossed London to join Tottenham—adding another edge to an already competitive rivalry.

Our model makes Spurs slight favourites with a 43% win probability, but West Ham remain close behind on 31%—the narrowest gap between the two leading outcomes on opening weekend. Home advantage and Tottenham’s fifth-place finish give them the edge, while the arrivals of Martinez and Kirsty Hanson have refreshed their attack. However, last season’s two one-goal contests suggest this derby could again be decided by a single moment.

STAT TO WATCH
12 league goals · 22 appearances
Hanson produced those numbers for Aston Villa last season and has already scored for Spurs in preseason. Alongside former Hammer Martinez, she gives Tottenham considerably more pace, movement and finishing in attack.

Charlton Athletic v Liverpool

Sun 06 Sep, 14:00 · The Valley

Model: Charlton Athletic 23% · Draw 30% · Liverpool 47%
Most likely scorelines: 0–1 (13.9%) · 1–1 (12.6%) · 0–0 (9.9%)

Charlton’s first BWSL match takes them back to the ground where promotion was secured in unforgettable fashion. Their play-off against Leicester finished goalless after extra time before Sophie Whitehouse saved four penalties to send the Addicks up. Now the division’s newest side must test that defensive resilience against established top-flight opposition.

Our model makes Liverpool favourites with a 47% win probability, but this is far from a comfortable away call. The Reds finished 11th last season but arrive with renewed momentum after winning all five preseason matches, including a 2–1 victory over Manchester United. Charlton’s organisation and home support explain the weekend-high 30% draw probability—and could make Liverpool work considerably harder than the difference in divisions suggests.

STAT TO WATCH
21 goals conceded · eight clean sheets
Charlton had the best defensive record in WSL2 last season and shared the division lead for clean sheets. If Whitehouse and the defence carry that resistance into the top flight, the Addicks have a genuine route to an opening-day result.

Crystal Palace v Everton

Sun 06 Sep, 14:00 · VBS Community Stadium

Model: Crystal Palace 29% · Draw 29% · Everton 42%
Most likely scorelines: 1–1 (12.4%) · 0–1 (10.7%) · 1–2 (8.9%)

When Palace last competed in the BWSL, they held Everton 1–1 at Sutton before losing the return match 3–0 on Merseyside. Relegation followed, but the Eagles responded immediately: Jo Potter’s side secured promotion at the first attempt and now begin their return against familiar opposition.

Our model makes Everton favourites with a 42% win probability, reflecting their established top-flight level and eighth-place finish last season. Palace’s home-win and draw probabilities are identical at 29%, however, showing how unsettled the contest remains. Their promotion momentum—and the arrival of proven BWSL goalscorer Bethany England—gives the Eagles considerably more reason for optimism than they carried into their previous top-flight campaign.

STAT TO WATCH
One defeat in 14 matches · 12 wins
Palace produced that remarkable run to secure promotion on 44 points. Everton represent a significant step up, but maintaining the confidence and resilience behind that run could make the Eagles difficult to beat on their return.

Manchester City v Birmingham City

Sun 06 Sep, 14:30 · Joie Stadium

Model: Manchester City 83% · Draw 12% · Birmingham City 5%
Most likely scorelines: 3–0 (10.1%) · 2–0 (9.5%) · 3–1 (8.0%)

This is champions versus champions: Manchester City begin their WSL title defence against a Birmingham side returning to the top flight after winning WSL2. The teams met as recently as April, when Bunny Shaw’s eighth-minute goal was all that separated them in a hard-fought 1–0 FA Cup quarter-final. Birmingham therefore arrive with more reason for belief than the probabilities suggest.

Our model nevertheless makes City the weekend’s strongest favourites, giving them an 83% win probability. The champions retain an attack led by Shaw, while Birmingham face a significant step up despite adding proven top-flight experience such as Millie Turner. The likely winner may appear clear; the more interesting question is how City reshape their attack following Kerolin’s move to Barcelona.

STAT TO WATCH
Who replaces Kerolin’s output?
14 league goal involvements · one every 64 minutes
Kerolin supplied nine goals and five assists last season. City still possess exceptional attacking depth, but this match offers the first competitive evidence of how those minutes and chances will be redistributed.

Arsenal lead the title race, while London City and Chelsea are almost inseparable in the race for a top-three finish.

Arsenal enter the 2026–27 season as the clear favourites in our model, winning the league in 74.7% of 10,000 simulated seasons. Manchester City are the only serious title challenger at 19.6%, with every other club below 3%.

The race for the top three is much closer. London City Lionesses have a 45.5% chance of finishing there, only 0.6 percentage points ahead of Chelsea at 44.9%. At the other end of the table, Birmingham City face the greatest danger, with a 39.3% chance of automatic relegation and a 63.9% chance of finishing in the bottom two.

Arsenal and Manchester City form the leading pair, while London City and Chelsea are separated by just 0.2 projected points. The relegation picture remains far less settled.

The title race

Arsenal have finished second in each of the past two seasons, but the gap to the champions has been narrowing. They ended the 2024–25 campaign 12 points behind an unbeaten Chelsea side; last season, they finished only four points behind Manchester City. That progress gives Arsenal a strong base from which to challenge again.

They have also strengthened that base during the summer. Georgia Stanway, Ona Batlle, Selina Cerci and Géraldine Reuteler bring quality in several areas of the pitch, adding greater control, creativity and depth to an already balanced squad. Our model consequently makes Arsenal the clear favourites, giving them a 74.7% chance of winning the title.

Manchester City cannot be discounted. They are the defending champions and retain one of the strongest squads in the league. Their summer business, however, has not improved their position as decisively as Arsenal’s. The loss of Kerolin Nicoli—who contributed nine goals and five assists in the league last season—is particularly significant. City remain the only serious challenger at 19.6%, but the model believes Arsenal begin the season in the stronger position.

The race for the top three

Arsenal and Manchester City are likely to take two of the top-three places, leaving London City and Chelsea in a remarkably close contest for the likely remaining spot. London City finish in the top three in 45.5% of our simulations, only narrowly ahead of Chelsea at 44.9%.

London City have transformed their squad this summer. Alexia Putellas and Kadidiatou Diani give them greater quality in attack, while María León and Mary Earps strengthen the team defensively. Nicole Anyomi and Rosa Kafaji add further first-team options.

Chelsea still have plenty of quality, and Giulia Dragoni is an exciting addition. But the departures of Millie Bright, Guro Reiten, Sam Kerr, Johanna Rytting Kaneryd and Niamh Charles leave significant gaps in experience and leadership. That uncertainty is why the model finds so little between Chelsea and London City.

Arsenal and City are strongly placed. London City and Chelsea are separated by only 0.6 percentage points, while United and Brighton lead the outside chase.

Looking beyond the headline probabilities shows two distinct groups among the leading four. Arsenal and Manchester City dominate the first two positions, although Arsenal are much more likely to finish first. Behind them, London City and Chelsea have almost identical finishing profiles, with both most commonly finishing third or fourth.

Arsenal and Manchester City are concentrated around first and second. London City and Chelsea share almost identical distributions centred on third and fourth.

The fight to stay up

The three promoted clubs begin the season at the centre of the relegation fight, with Birmingham facing the greatest danger. They finish bottom in 39.3% of our simulations and occupy the play-off place in a further 24.6%. That gives them a 63.9% chance of ending the season in the bottom two.

Charlton and Crystal Palace are much harder to separate. Charlton have a 24.0% chance of automatic relegation, compared with 22.6% for Palace, and their chances of entering the play-off are almost identical. Everton are the next most exposed club, but the model places a considerable gap between them and the three promoted sides.

None of those teams are doomed before a ball is kicked. Birmingham have added players with top-flight experience, while Charlton and Palace have also strengthened during the summer. The challenge for all three will be adapting quickly enough to the higher level.

Birmingham face the greatest danger, while Charlton and Crystal Palace are almost inseparable. Everton are the most exposed of the established WSL clubs.

How does the model work?

Our projections begin with each club’s attacking and defensive strength from the prior season. Promoted clubs are treated separately because performances in the WSL2 cannot be compared directly with performances against WSL opposition.

We then adjusted each team’s starting strength to account for material summer arrivals and departures.

For every fixture, the model estimates the goals each team might score, while accounting for home advantage. It then generates a possible result and repeats the complete 182-match season 10,000 times.

The percentages in this article represent how frequently each league outcome occurred across those simulated seasons.

All prediction data is based on WSLAnalytics simulations run on 25 August 2026. Transfers and other material model inputs were checked through the same cutoff.

This is the final instalment of our three-part retrospective on the 2025 summer transfer window. Across the series, we have returned to the judgments we made before the season and tested them against what actually followed.

In Part 1, we revisited Arsenal, Brighton, Aston Villa and Leicester City. Part 2 examined Chelsea, Manchester United, Tottenham Hotspur and West Ham United. In this final part, the focus shifts to Everton, Liverpool, London City Lionesses and Manchester City.

The same questions remain: did the arrivals strengthen the first team, replace what departed and address the club’s most important needs?

The results reinforce the distinction at the heart of this series. Useful recruitment does not automatically produce a better season, while a strong retained core, a new coach or a different competitive environment can transform a team beyond the contribution of its summer arrivals. Equally, an ambitious window can give a promoted club the quality to compete immediately.

Part 3 at a glance

Everton — useful recruitment, unchanged season

• Our original verdict: Weakened in the short term

• Retrospective grade: Partly confirmed

• Window score: 3.8/5

Our argument at the time was that Everton had lost considerable WSL experience and leadership without replacing it with enough proven league production. Yuka Momiki represented the clearest immediate contributor, while the wider group carried significant adaptation risk. We felt the squad looked weaker in the short term, even if several arrivals possessed longer-term potential.

One season later, the recruitment worked better than the team did.

Everton finished eighth again, although they collected one fewer point and conceded five more goals. Brian Sørensen was also let go in February after three wins from 14 league matches. Overall, the campaign did not deliver the progress expected after the move to Goodison Park and an ambitious summer.

The arrivals, however, were not passengers. Martina Fernández and Ruby Mace became the central defensive pairing. Ornella Vignola started 21 matches and scored four goals, including a hat-trick on her WSL debut at Anfield, while Momiki contributed three goals and one assist. Altogether, the nine arrivals produced 11,249 minutes, 128 starts, 11 goals and nine assists.

Everton’s new core took responsibility—but did not raise the level

Our original verdict treated adaptation risk as the primary problem. In reality, several overseas arrivals adapted quickly enough to become regulars. But Everton had already removed much of the previous first-choice group, so those players had to assume responsibility immediately. Regular selection most likely reflected necessity rather than successful adaptation.

The final test was whether the new core could match or improve upon the players it replaced. It did not, because Everton collected one fewer point, scored only one additional goal and conceded five more. The attack still lacked a dominant scorer, while the managerial change further disrupted the campaign.

Our final verdict:

Everton’s summer arrivals formed a credible new first-team core, but they did not raise the team’s collective level. The short-term warning was justified, even if the individual players performed better than we expected.

Liverpool — one successful striker, weaker team

• Our original verdict: Weakened

• Retrospective grade: Confirmed

• Window score: 3.0/5

Our argument at the time was that Liverpool had lost too much proven attacking quality and senior leadership. Olivia Smith, Taylor Hinds and several established players had departed. The squad looked younger, but also less authoritative especially in the areas that decide matches.

At the time of publication, Beata Olsson, Risa Shimizu, Alejandra Bernabé and Emilia Szymczak had not yet joined, so they were not included in our original analysis. Because this retrospective assesses the completed window and its overall impact, all four are included in the evaluation.

One season later, Liverpool were weaker despite finding a successful striker.

Olsson was the clear success. She scored six goals in 16 appearances, supplied two assists and accounted for almost 29% of Liverpool’s league goals. However, she was the only summer arrival to score in the WSL. Altogether, the eight arrivals produced 5,653 minutes, 64 starts, six goals and four assists.

That was not enough to replace everything Liverpool had lost. They fell from seventh to 11th, collected eight fewer points and scored one fewer goal. The defence conceded three fewer, but the completed window did not restore the creativity, progression or leadership removed from the team.

Our final verdict:

Liverpool found a successful striker in Olsson, but the completed window did not replace enough of the creativity, progression and leadership that departed. Their fall from seventh to 11th confirmed our original warning.

London City Lionesses — ambitious recruitment, immediate impact

• Our original verdict: Strengthened decisively

• Retrospective grade: Confirmed decisively

• Window score: 4.6/5

Our argument at the time was that London City had produced the clearest improvement of the summer. The promoted club added proven WSL production, Champions League experience, international leadership and younger players with significant upside, while losing little top-flight output.

The completed window eventually included 17 senior additions, giving London City genuine first-team options across every line.

One season later, the ambition translated immediately.

London City won eight matches, collected 27 points and finished sixth in their first WSL campaign, above six established top-flight clubs. Their summer recruitment formed the spine of the side.

Elene Lete played every league minute, Jana Fernández started 21 matches and Elena Linari started 15. Grace Geyoro started 16 times, but her overall influence and return of one goal and no assists fell short of the expectations surrounding such a high-profile signing. Nikita Parris contributed seven goal involvements, while Freya Godfrey produced six goals and four assists. The eight principal contributors shown below combined for 10,412 minutes, 119 starts, 15 goals and nine assists.

The summer window built the platform

Not every high-profile arrival met expectations, but the class collectively gave London City enough quality and depth to compete immediately in the WSL.

London City were already sixth when the coaching change was made, with little jeopardy surrounding their position. The change therefore cannot be credited with producing the top-half finish, and the subsequent results did not establish a clear immediate upgrade. It appeared to be a decision made with the club’s next stage in mind. The core of the team that finished sixth had already been assembled during the summer.

Our final verdict:

London City’s summer recruitment worked: it built the core of a promoted side that finished sixth in its first WSL season. Not every high-profile arrival met expectations, but the defensive foundation, depth and attacking output confirmed our verdict that the squad had been strengthened decisively.

Manchester City — limited transfer impact, title-winning season

• Our original verdict: Weakened

• Retrospective grade: Overturned decisively

• Window score: 4.0/5

Our argument at the time was that Manchester City had exchanged proven, prime-age WSL performers for younger players with less certain immediate output. Chloe Kelly, Jill Roord and Laia Aleixandri had departed, leaving the squad with significant experience and production to replace.

At the time of publication, the deadline-day exchange involving Jess Park and Grace Clinton had not yet happened, so it was not included in our original analysis. Because this retrospective assesses the completed window, both moves are considered here.

One season later, the team improved far more than the transfer class did.

City rose from fourth to first, collected 12 more points, scored 13 more goals and conceded nine fewer. They finished on 55 points, ended Chelsea’s six-year title run and equalled their highest WSL points total.

Jade Rose was the standout arrival, starting 19 matches and scoring once in a title-winning defence. Iman Beney contributed two goals and two assists from a rotation role, but the remaining four additions made only four league starts between them. Altogether, the six arrivals produced 2,868 minutes, 28 starts, four goals and four assists.

City’s improvement extended beyond the transfer window

Our original framework placed too much weight on the exchange of summer arrivals and departures without giving enough consideration to the quality that remained.

Andrée Jeglertz changed the team’s style and restored consistency. City also had no Champions League schedule, while Bunny Shaw and the retained core supplied most of the title-winning output. The team became less possession-heavy, more direct and considerably more efficient.

The title therefore overturns our judgment that City had become weaker, but it does not mean every concern about the window disappeared. The Park–Clinton exchange delivered far more immediate league output to Manchester United, while most of City’s other additions played limited roles.

Our final verdict:

Manchester City became champions, decisively overturning our verdict that the squad had weakened. Rose was an excellent first-team addition, but the largest improvement came from the coach, the retained core and a lighter schedule rather than widespread impact from the summer arrivals.

The overall verdict on Part 3

Two original judgments survived, one was only partly right and one was overturned.

Liverpool lost the attacking authority we feared they would miss. London City’s ambition translated into an immediate top-half finish. Everton stood still, but their arrivals were considerably better than our original warning implied. Manchester City became champions after we called their window weaker.

The lesson is not that transfer analysis is futile. It is that a window must be judged alongside the quality already in the squad, the role available to each signing, the coach and the schedule the team will face.

Our next transfer analysis will still make direct judgments. But it will distinguish more clearly between a club’s recruitment, the total strength of its squad and the conditions in which that squad must perform.

Catch up on the series

If you missed the earlier instalments:

• Part 1 revisited our judgments that Arsenal had strengthened, Brighton had gambled, Aston Villa were transitioning and Leicester City had weakened.

• Part 2 examined Chelsea’s re-tooling, Manchester United’s limited strengthening and our warnings that Tottenham Hotspur and West Ham United had weakened.

If you enjoyed this retrospective, please consider subscribing to WSL Analytics and sharing the series with other women’s football supporters.

From next week, we will begin publishing our 2026–27 season predictions. Once the transfer window closes, we will follow them with our new summer transfer analysis, using the lessons from this retrospective to make sharper, better-supported judgments about every club.

This is the second instalment of our three-part retrospective on the 2025 summer transfer window. Across the series, we are returning to the judgments we made before the season and testing them against what actually followed.

In Part 1, we revisited Arsenal, Brighton, Aston Villa and Leicester City. This time, the focus shifts to Chelsea, Manchester United, Tottenham Hotspur and West Ham United.

The same questions remain: did the arrivals strengthen the first team, replace what departed and address the club’s most important needs?

The results also reinforce an important distinction. A club can recruit good players and still have a weaker season. Equally, a small transfer class can prove transformative when those players are given the right roles, resources and tactical environment.

Part 2 at a glance

Chelsea — good recruitment, weaker season

• Our original verdict: Re-tooling

• Retrospective grade: Mostly confirmed

• Window score: 4.1/5

Our argument at the time was that Chelsea had lost experience and some depth without requiring a complete rebuild. Ellie Carpenter represented the major first-team addition and appeared capable of replacing Ashley Lawrence on the right. Livia Peng, Mara Alber and Rebecca Spencer added different forms of depth, although the overall squad looked slightly slimmer than usual.

At the time of publication, Alyssa Thompson’s deadline-day signing had not yet been announced, so she was not factored into our original analysis or verdict. However, because this retrospective assesses the completed window and its overall impact, Thompson is included in the evaluation.

One season later, the recruitment worked better than the team did.

Carpenter became a first-choice player as expected, while deadline-day signing Alyssa Thompson transformed the completed window. Thompson scored seven league goals, supplied three assists and finished with more WSL goal involvements than any other Chelsea player. Peng provided usable goalkeeping cover, but Alber and Spencer did not play in the league. Altogether, the five arrivals produced 3,412 minutes, 38 starts, nine goals and five assists.

Chelsea re-tooled successfully—but lost their title

The new arrivals were not the main reason Chelsea’s results worsened. Carpenter and Thompson were among the team’s strongest performers, while Carpenter effectively replaced Lawrence at right-back. However, their contributions were not enough to prevent a broader decline, as Chelsea finished with 11 fewer points, scored 12 fewer goals and conceded seven more than in the previous season. Their run of six consecutive WSL titles ended as they dropped from first to third.

Our final verdict:

Chelsea’s summer recruitment worked: Carpenter and Thompson strengthened the first team, but those successful additions did not preserve the club’s title-winning standard.

Manchester United — the signings delivered, but the squad still fell short

• Our original verdict: Strengthened on paper

• Retrospective grade: Mostly confirmed

• Window score: 4/5

Our verdict at the time was based on the experience and quality of Julia Zigiotti Olme and Fridolina Rolfö. Both had played at Champions League level and appeared capable of raising United’s ceiling immediately. The primary concern was whether such a small incoming group provided enough depth for a team entering the Champions League proper for the first time.

At the time we published our original analysis, the deadline-day swap involving Jess Park and Grace Clinton had not yet taken place, so neither move informed our verdict. Because this retrospective assesses the completed window, Park’s arrival and Clinton’s departure are included below.

One season later, all three summer arrivals proved to be meaningful contributors.

Zigiotti Olme established herself in midfield, while Rolfö supplied experience, versatility and four league goal involvements. The decisive arrival was Park. She scored six goals, provided five assists, earned a Player of the Season nomination and was selected in the WSL Team of the Year. Together, the three arrivals produced 4,076 minutes, 47 starts, 11 goals and eight assists.

United strengthened, but Champions League football stretched the squad

Park immediately replaced Clinton’s attacking output, while Zigiotti Olme and Rolfö adapted quickly. Collectively, however, United fell from third to fourth, scored three fewer goals and conceded six more. The arrivals strengthened the team, but the wider squad was not equipped for the additional demands of Champions League football. United performed impressively in Europe, reaching the quarter-finals in their first appearance in the competition proper, while also reaching the League Cup final. The demands of the expanded schedule eventually told: they ended the campaign with only one victory from their final ten matches in all competitions.

Our final verdict:

Manchester United recruited three strong first-team players, but the small summer class did not provide enough depth to maintain their previous league position alongside European competition.

Tottenham Hotspur — our original verdict was decisively wrong

• Our original verdict: Weakened

• Retrospective grade: Overturned decisively

• Window score: 4.5/5

Our assessment at the time was that Tottenham had sacrificed experience for very limited proven potential. Toko Koga was the only arrival recorded at publication, while Rosella Ayane and Rebecca Spencer had departed. With no previous WSL minutes, Koga was treated as a talented but uncertain development signing. We concluded that Spurs would be weaker unless she adapted quickly or further business followed.

At the time of publication, Cathinka Tandberg’s deadline-day signing had not yet been announced, so she was not included in our original analysis or verdict. However, that omission alone does not explain why we were wrong. Under our grading criteria, Tandberg would probably have been placed in the same category as Koga: a talented player without WSL experience whose immediate impact remained uncertain. Even if her signing had been announced, our verdict would likely have remained unchanged.

One season later, Koga and Tandberg decisively overturned both our verdict and the assumptions behind it.

Koga became a first-choice centre-back, started 19 league matches and was selected in the WSL Team of the Season. She also won Tottenham’s Adults Supporters’ Player of the Season award. Tandberg provided the attacking reinforcement that had appeared to be missing, scoring six goals and supplying two assists. Together, the two arrivals produced 2,864 minutes, 32 starts, eight goals and three assists.

Tottenham strengthened at both ends

Spurs rose six places, added 16 points and improved their goal difference by 15. They set a new club WSL record with 36 points and finished fifth, equalling their best finish in the competition. Koga provided defensive stability, while Tandberg gave the attack a reliable central threat. Martin Ho’s appointment and five January arrivals were also important, so the improvement cannot be credited solely to the two summer signings. Even so, both were unambiguous first-season successes.

Our final verdict:

Tottenham’s summer recruitment was outstanding: Koga became one of the league’s best defenders and Tandberg supplied the goals the publication-time squad appeared to lack.

West Ham United — the warning held, but the reasoning was too blunt

• Our original verdict: Weakened

• Retrospective grade: Mostly confirmed

• Window score: 2.8/5

Our argument at the time was that West Ham had lost too much WSL experience and replaced it with younger, less proven players. The departures of Kirsty Smith, Dagný Brynjarsdóttir, Emma Harries and Shannon Cooke reduced the squad’s senior depth, while the incoming group appeared unlikely to replace that experience immediately.

One season later, West Ham were weaker—but the arrivals were more useful than we anticipated.

Ffion Morgan and Yu Endo became regular contributors, while Leila Wandeler earned a rotational role and was named Young Hammer of the Year. Sarah Brasero remained a development player, and Anna Csiki’s deadline-day loan ended in January. The five summer arrivals produced 2,922 minutes and 31 starts, but only two goals and three assists. They replaced much of the departed players’ playing time, but not their leadership or influence.

West Ham’s attacking decline confirmed the short-term risk

West Ham fell only one place, but the decline behind that movement was severe. They collected four fewer points, conceded four more goals and scored 16 fewer. Rehanne Skinner departed after the team managed one victory and five points from its opening 11 matches. Rita Guarino and five January additions helped West Ham recover, but the need for such substantial mid-season intervention supported our original warning that the summer squad was too vulnerable.

Our final verdict:

West Ham’s window produced two useful regulars and some longer-term potential, but it did not add enough immediate quality to prevent a significant first-team decline.

The overall verdict on Part 2

Three of our four original judgments broadly survived.

Chelsea re-tooled successfully, Manchester United added quality without solving their depth problem, and West Ham were weakened in the short term. Tottenham were the clear exception.

Once again, the review exposed the limits of our original framework. Previous WSL minutes alone could not capture experience gained in other strong leagues, while first-choice signings, rotation players, academy recruits and goalkeepers required different expectations.

Coming in Part 3

Part 3 will complete the retrospective by revisiting four more clubs:

• Everton: Did their recruitment provide the improvement the squad required?

• Liverpool: Did their transfer business leave them stronger or expose deeper problems?

• London City Lionesses: Did an ambitious first WSL window produce enough immediate quality?

• Manchester City: Did their additions build a title-winning squad?

One season after the 2025 summer transfer window closed, it is time to revisit the judgments we made.

In August last year, we published a club-by-club assessment of every Women’s Super League transfer window. The aim was never to rank signings or hand out grades in isolation. We assessed whether each club had genuinely strengthened, weakened or entered the new season facing greater uncertainty.

The verdicts generated agreement, criticism and considerable debate, as they should have. What we did commit to was that once the season was over, we would return and test those conclusions against what actually happened. And that is what we are doing in this series.

OUR ORIGINAL FRAMEWORK

The original analysis was produced within clear data constraints. At the time, our framework relied on a relatively limited set of indicators: minutes played, squad value where available, goals and assists. The balance between the arrivals and departures then informed whether we judged a team to have strengthened or weakened.

We also counted only WSL minutes, which created an obvious limitation for players arriving from overseas. A high-quality international signing could therefore receive little or no numerical credit simply because she had not previously played in the league. Where we had sufficient knowledge of the competition, particularly leagues such as Liga F, we introduced qualitative adjustments, but those judgments could not be applied consistently across every market.

The assessments were analytical judgments made from the best evidence available to us at the time. The criticism helped expose where the first version of the framework was too narrow, where it undervalued performance outside the WSL and where simple production metrics could not fully capture a player’s quality, role or likely fit.

WHAT TO EXPECT IN THIS SERIES

This review is not an exercise in proving ourselves right or wrong. Forecasting is valuable only if it is tested against reality.

Some verdicts may have been right for the wrong reasons. Some individual signings may have exceeded expectations even if the overall window of the team disappointed. Injuries, tactical changes and squad development can all reshape a season in ways that no pre-season analysis can fully anticipate.

The objective is therefore twofold:

1. Was our original club-level verdict right?

2. What did the outcome teach us about improving the evaluation framework?

Reviewing every club in sufficient depth would make for an article that is difficult to read and even harder to do justice. As a result, we divided the retrospective into three parts, allowing each club's transfer window to be examined in the detail it deserves.

Part 1 will cover:

• Arsenal

• Brighton

• Aston Villa

• Leicester City

Part 2:

• Chelsea

• Manchester United

• Tottenham Hotspur

• West Ham United

Part 3:

• Manchester City

• Liverpool

• Everton

• London City Lionesses

PART 1: ARSENAL, BRIGHTON, ASTON VILLA & LEICESTER CITY

We begin with four clubs whose transfer windows illustrate very different outcomes: one title challenger that strengthened as expected, one ambitious project that accepted significant short-term risk, one club navigating a transitional summer, and one whose squad regression proved even more damaging than anticipated.

Part 1 at a glance

Arsenal — strengthened, but still came second

• Our original verdict: Strengthened

• Retrospective grade: Confirmed

• Window score: 4.0/5

Our argument then was that Arsenal had exchanged fringe players for proven contributors. Olivia Smith, the first £1 million signing in women’s football, and Chloe Kelly, whose loan move from Manchester City had been made permanent, were expected to raise the attacking level. Taylor Hinds, who joined from Liverpool, added experienced full-back cover, while Anneke Borbe strengthened the goalkeeping group. The outgoing players, however talented, had contributed only a small fraction of Arsenal’s previous league minutes.

One season later, that verdict held.

The four arrivals produced 3,012 WSL minutes, 33 starts, 10 goals and seven assists. Smith established herself as a first-choice player. Kelly endured a stop-start, injury-disrupted season but delivered whenever available, scoring five goals in only 470 minutes. Hinds provided experienced full-back rotation, making six starts and 10 substitute appearances. Borbe, who was initially expected to simply strengthen Arsenal’s goalkeeping options, assumed a much greater role as Daphne van Domselaar struggled with injuries. She started eight league matches, kept six clean sheets and performed outstandingly when Arsenal needed her.

Arsenal did strengthen. But fell short again.

A transfer window can improve a squad without solving every reason a team falls short. Arsenal collected three more points, lost only once and conceded 12 fewer goals than in the previous season. They became the league’s strongest defensive side, conceding the fewest goals, while also finishing as its second-highest scorers behind Manchester City. Ultimately, they still finished four points behind City.

Our final verdict:

Arsenal’s 2025–26 summer recruitment worked: it raised the level of the first team and strengthened the rotation, but the deeper squad still did not convert enough league matches into victories.

Brighton — the defence worked, but the attacking replacement did not

• Our original verdict: A gamble — weakened short-term, with genuine long-term upside

• Retrospective grade: Mostly confirmed

• Window score: 3.5/5

Our argument at the time was that Brighton had replaced more than 8,900 minutes of established WSL experience with a younger group composed largely of overseas arrivals and two Arsenal loanees. Nikita Parris, Poppy Pattinson and Guro Bergsvand were among the big-name departures, while much of the incoming talent had no previous WSL experience. The squad offered greater long-term value, but its immediate competitiveness depended on the new players adapting quickly and the attack replacing Parris’s seven goals and five assists. Given the demands of the WSL, we were not convinced that the young overseas arrivals could adjust immediately or shoulder such a significant responsibility.

One year later, the direction of that verdict held, but not for the reason we expected.

Brighton’s eight arrivals produced 6,701 WSL minutes, 75 starts, eight goals and five assists. Chiamaka Nnadozie and Moeka Minami became immediate first-choice players and were central to a defence that conceded 13 fewer goals. Manuela Vanegas provided another regular defensive option, while Rosa Kafaji contributed two goals and three assists. As we had anticipated, however, the loss of Parris was clearly reflected in the attacking returns: the eight new arrivals combined for only one more goal than Parris had scored single-handedly the previous season. Michelle Agyemang began promisingly before suffering a season-ending ACL injury, an unfortunate setback beyond Brighton’s control, and the story might have been different had she remained fit. Carla Camacho, Maëlys Mpomé and Fuka Tsunoda, meanwhile, remained developing players rather than dependable replacements for Parris. Brighton’s recruitment therefore produced genuine value, but the goals lost during the summer were never fully recovered.

Brighton improved defensively, but lost their attacking edge

Brighton fell from fifth to seventh and collected two fewer points, but this was not a straightforward decline. Their defensive record improved substantially: goals conceded fell from 41 to 28, and their goal difference improved from minus six to minus one. The problem was at the opposite end. Brighton scored eight fewer goals, and the stronger defence could not compensate for the loss of attacking production. They won only one fewer league match and reached the Women’s FA Cup final, but the absence of a reliable replacement for Parris ultimately limited what the rebuild could achieve.

Our final verdict:

Brighton’s summer recruitment produced a younger squad and a significantly better defence, but it did not replace the attacking reliability that departed with Parris. The gamble worked to an extent, with several of the new arrivals adapting far better than we had originally anticipated.

Aston Villa — the transition was real, but so were the successes

• Our original verdict: Transitioning

• Retrospective grade: Confirmed, with some qualification

• Window score: 3.3/5

Our argument at the time was that Villa had exchanged established WSL experience and leadership for a younger group of players assembled mainly from Germany, France, Spain, Japan and the Championship. Jordan Nobbs, Danielle Turner, Maz Pacheco and Rachel Corsie were among the significant departures. The squad in our view had long-term potential, but we were concerned that its immediate competitiveness could decline while the new arrivals assumed responsibilities left by the veteran departures. Our original analysis also omitted Maya Hijikata, despite Villa announcing her three days before publication.

One season later, the transition was real, but several of the new players succeeded immediately.

Villa’s six arrivals produced 6,087 WSL minutes, 69 starts, two goals and eight assists. Lynn Wilms was the outstanding signing, starting 17 matches and finishing joint-top of the league’s assist chart with seven. Lucia Kendall moved directly from the Championship into Villa’s starting midfield and earned a Rising Star nomination, while Océane Deslandes made 16 starts in defence. Hijikata also started ten matches, and Ellie Roebuck provided competition rather than becoming the undisputed first-choice goalkeeper. Jill Baijings, whose loan spell from Bayern Munich the previous season had been converted into a permanent move, ruptured her ACL after starting the opening three league matches. Villa therefore replaced the departing minutes, but the new group produced limited attacking output and could not immediately restore the stability and leadership that had been lost.

Villa found building blocks, but the team went backwards

Villa fell from sixth to ninth, collected five fewer points, scored four fewer goals and conceded four more. Wilms, Kendall and Deslandes established themselves, but their individual success did not produce a balanced team. The six arrivals scored only two league goals, both through Wilms, while Kirsty Hanson supplied 12 of Villa’s 28 goals by herself. Baijings’ injury removed an important source of midfield continuity, the goalkeeper position remained shared and the defence continued to concede heavily. Villa finished with several promising long-term pieces, but the first season of the rebuild left them weaker at both ends of the pitch.

Our final verdict:

Villa’s transition produced genuine individual successes, particularly Wilms and Kendall, but the younger squad did not replace the balance, leadership or attacking support that departed. Our warning about a short-term decline was correct, even though several arrivals adapted better than the original analysis anticipated.

Leicester City — not only weakened, but relegated

• Our original verdict: Weakened

• Retrospective grade: Confirmed decisively

• Window score: 2.0/5

Our argument at the time was that Leicester had lost too much established WSL quality, creativity and depth without adequately replacing it. Heather Payne added experience, but she could not offset the wider departures alone. The original assessment was incomplete, though. After publication, Leicester signed Emily van Egmond, Olivia McLoughlin, Rosella Ayane and Cecily Wellesley-Smith, while Ruby Mace subsequently left in a club-record sale. Those late changes improved the midfield, but they did not correct the overall imbalance of the squad.

One year later, our warning was confirmed more decisively than expected.

Leicester’s seven arrivals produced 3,987 WSL minutes, 42 starts, one goal and one assist. McLoughlin and Van Egmond were the two meaningful successes, accounting for 70% of the group’s minutes and 32 of its 42 starts. They became credible first-choice midfielders, with Van Egmond supplying the arrivals’ only goal and assist. The remaining additions offered little impact. Payne made only three starts, while Ayane, Keane and Wellesley-Smith barely featured. Celeste Boureille had begun to establish herself before suffering an unforeseeable ACL injury in December.

Leicester lost every margin they previously gained

Leicester fell from a club-record 20 points to nine, scored ten fewer goals and conceded 15 more. Their goal difference deteriorated by 25, while the summer arrivals contributed only two direct goal involvements. A managerial change before the season added further instability, but the underlying squad problems were unmistakable. Leicester lost their final 11 league matches, scoring four goals and conceding 32 during that sequence, before losing to Charlton on penalties in the relegation play-off. The play-off delivered the final blow; the shortage of attacking threat, defensive resilience and first-team depth had developed across the entire season.

Our final verdict:

Leicester’s late midfield additions provided useful minutes, but the completed window did not replace the creativity, attacking output or established depth that departed. Our “weakened” verdict was decisively confirmed: the squad lost too much quality and entered the season without enough margin to survive.

The overall verdict on Part 1

We were right on the broad direction of all four clubs.

Arsenal strengthened. Brighton accepted a genuine short-term gamble. Aston Villa entered a transition that reduced their immediate competitiveness. Leicester were weakened, and the consequences were even more severe than we anticipated.

But this review also shows where our original framework was too blunt.

It overvalued previous WSL minutes, undervalued experience from other elite leagues and did not distinguish clearly enough between first-choice signings, rotation options, development players and goalkeepers.

Our next transfer analysis will still make direct judgments. But this time we will make them using more and better evidence.

That is the purpose of returning to the original work: not to rewrite what we said, but to understand why each verdict succeeded, failed or reached the right conclusion.

Coming in Part 2

Part 2 will revisit four more of our original transfer verdicts:

• Chelsea: Did their re-tooling preserve the quality required to remain title contenders?

• Manchester United: Did a squad that looked stronger on paper deliver meaningful improvement?

• Tottenham Hotspur: Was our warning that the squad had become weaker justified?

• West Ham United: Did their younger and less WSL-proven recruitment produce enough immediate quality?

If you enjoyed this retrospective and want more independent, data-led analysis of WSL transfers and squad building, consider subscribing to WSLAnalytics.

And if you know another supporter who would enjoy the series, please share this article with them. Every subscription and share helps this work reach more readers.

The 2026–27 fixture release was the first clear indication of how WSL Football responded to last season’s attendance and broadcast experiment.

The response is visible immediately. Sunday still remains the league’s dominant day, but that awkward noon kickoff no longer controls the calendar. The new schedule is now built around 14:00. The use of larger stadiums is also becoming standard. Six clubs have all 13 home fixtures at a main stadium, another six use a hybrid model and 92 of the league’s 182 matches are currently assigned to a main or larger ground.

That is a meaningful change in strategy. It gives clubs better conditions in which to attract supporters. It does not guarantee that they will.

The clearest change is the clock

Last season, the WSL deliberately concentrated matches around Sunday midday. The stated objective was to create a recognisable appointment-to-view and give every matchweek a consistent shape.

The outcome of that was mixed. Our early-season attendance study found that 32 of the first 52 league matches—61.5%—started at 12:00. Another five began at either 11:55 or 12:15. In total, 37 of the 52 fixtures were scheduled within 15 minutes of noon.

It is true that kickoff time was not the only cause of weak crowds. Things like club demand, fixture quality and venue mattered even more. But timing amplified those conditions. A major match could overcome an inconvenient time slot; a less prominent one often could not.

The new calendar changes that centre of gravity. Of the 175 fixtures with a published time, 109—62.3%—are scheduled for 14:00. Only seven are currently at 12:00, with none at 11:55 or 12:15. Sunday still accounts for 136 of the 175 timed fixtures, so the league has not abandoned its principal matchday. It simply moved it later.

For supporters, 14:00 is a more usable time. It allows more time for travel, reduces the pressure on families and creates a larger pre-match hospitality window. Later broadcast selections could still alter the schedule, but the league has corrected the most obvious weakness in last season’s calendar.

The comparison uses the first 52 matches from our 2025–26 timing study and all 175 currently timed fixtures in the 2026–27 release.

Big-stadium football is becoming the operating model

The second change is even larger.

Arsenal, Aston Villa, Birmingham City, Charlton Athletic, Chelsea and Everton currently have all 13 home league fixtures at a main stadium. Brighton, Liverpool, Tottenham Hotspur, Manchester City, Crystal Palace and Manchester United use a hybrid model that places selected matches at a larger venue.

Across the league, 92 of 182 fixtures—50.5%—are assigned to a main or larger stadium. The big grounds are no longer being treated only as a showcase. They are becoming the operating model.

Arsenal demonstrated the opportunity last season. Their 11 Emirates league matches generated 371,886 spectators, 41.2% of the league’s total attendance. Everton’s use of Goodison Park created another permanent step up. Chelsea are taking the same bet by scheduling all 13 home matches at Stamford Bridge.

It is important to note that capacity is not demand. A club that opens a major stadium every week must create repeat behaviour through season tickets, local partnerships, group sales, transport planning and a recognisable matchday identity. The test is no longer whether a club can stage one large event. It is whether it can sustain a large home crowd across an entire season.

“Main or larger stadium” is a venue classification, not an attendance forecast. London City Lionesses and West Ham remain at their established home grounds in the current release.

One million spectators is now a weak benchmark

Another important feature of the expanded league is that it changes our headline benchmark. The WSL drew 902,981 spectators across 132 matches in 2025–26, an average of 6,841 and a median of 3,236. With 182 matches this season, one million spectators would require an average of only 5,495—19.7% below last year’s figure. If the previous average were simply maintained, total attendance would reach about 1.245 million.

One million would be marketable. It would not, on its own, prove growth. Average attendance, median attendance, stadium utilisation and improvement beyond Arsenal will tell us far more.

The “if average holds” figure is a mechanical scenario, not a forecast.

The broadcast structure is clearer. The reach question remains.

The new fixture plan improves when matches are played, but it does not yet expand who can watch them without a Sky subscription. That is the unresolved part of the WSL’s audience strategy.

The opening four matchweeks contain 28 fixtures. Sky will show 25 of them, while three will appear on the BBC. Within Sky’s allocation, 14 matches are on Sky Sports+ and 11 receive a dedicated Sky Sports slot. This gives existing supporters comprehensive access and creates clearer television windows. However, it leaves free-to-air exposure largely unchanged.

This is important because last season demonstrated the difference between availability and discovery. Domestic coverage increased by 76% to 697 hours, yet measured reach fell by 10% to 11.06 million and total viewing hours slipped by 1%. Also all of the ten largest live audiences came on the BBC last season. So while Sky showed more football, the BBC delivered the season’s largest individual audiences.

This is not an argument against Sky’s position as the WSL’s principal broadcast partner. Sky provides the volume, production and consistent destination required by the five-year agreement. The issue is how the smaller BBC allocation is used. Those matches are the league’s strongest opportunity to reach people who do not already follow the competition.

Most of the season remains unassigned, so this is not a final verdict. The remaining 154 fixtures could still produce a stronger BBC schedule. For now, the WSL has improved the structure of its coverage; whether it has improved its reach remains unanswered.

The chart covers Matchweeks 1–4 only. It does not assume the later unassigned fixtures will remain in their current slots.

What success now looks like

The WSL has improved the conditions around attendance in three clear ways: the dominant kickoff has moved from noon to 14:00, clubs have committed far more inventory to major stadiums and premium matches can be separated from the central Sunday block.

The risks are equally clear. Larger grounds can expose empty seats. Growth can remain too dependent on Arsenal. A crowded 14:00 block can reproduce the same fragmentation as noon. And a schedule concentrated on paid platforms can serve existing supporters without widening the audience.

The league should therefore be judged against four tests: whether average and median attendance rise; whether growth extends across more clubs; whether larger stadiums achieve credible utilisation; and whether later broadcast selections preserve the better timing in the released calendar.

Verdict: a better plan, not problem solved

The WSL has corrected two clear weaknesses from last season. It has moved the centre of the calendar from noon to 14:00 and committed half of its fixtures to main or larger stadiums. That gives supporters more convenient kickoff times and gives clubs substantially more room to grow their crowds.

But better conditions do not automatically create greater demand. Larger stadiums still have to be filled, attendance growth must extend beyond Arsenal and the league must reach people who are not already committed supporters. The opening broadcast allocation does not yet show a significant expansion of that reach.

So, has the WSL fixed its audience problem? No—not yet. It has removed some of the obstacles that made growth more difficult.

The 2026–27 fixture list provides a much stronger platform for attendance growth than last season’s calendar. Whether that platform produces a genuinely larger audience will now depend on club-level ticketing, promotion, stadium utilisation and the quality of the remaining broadcast selections.

Arsenal did not need another headline name. They needed a midfielder who raises the level of the team, carries responsibility across a full season and gives Renée Slegers better options when the schedule tightens. Georgia Stanway does all three.

A signing built for a title race

On 3 July 2026, Arsenal announced the signing of 27-year-old Georgia Stanway on a free transfer following the expiry of her Bayern Munich contract. She will wear number 4 and returns to the Women’s Super League four years after leaving Manchester City, not as the same utility midfielder, but as a four-time Bundesliga champion shaped by central responsibility at Bayern.

This is not your typical speculative signing or a bet on potential. Arsenal have recruited a player in her prime with extensive WSL experience, 128 Bayern appearances, four consecutive Bundesliga titles and two European Championships with England. She has played in title races, major knockout matches and demanding international tournaments. She knows the league and arrives with a broader midfield education from Germany.

The timing is also key. Arsenal finished four points behind Manchester City last season. They had an elite squad that was good enough to challenge for the title, but they spent too much of the season recovering from an uneven start and too much of the run-in carrying a heavier schedule than their main rival.

Stanway does not solve every problem behind that four-point gap. She does, however, address one of the biggest: Arsenal needed more high-level midfield capacity without sacrificing intensity, experience or attacking contribution. They did not have it last season. When either Mariona Caldentey or Kim Little was removed from central midfield, Arsenal’s alternatives could not reproduce the same control. That drop-off was not title-winning depth.

Arsenal lost ground before the run-in

Arsenal finished second on 51 points with a +39 goal difference. Manchester City won the title with 55. The final table made the race look close, but in reality Arsenal spent much of the season chasing.

They won their opening two league matches and then took only two points from the next three. By Christmas, after 11 games, they were eight points behind. Arsenal recovered strongly, but a title-winning side cannot allow that deficit to develop in the first place, or spend half a season repairing avoidable damage.

The schedule made that task even harder. Arsenal competed across five competitions. Before their final league match, their players had averaged 481 more minutes than Manchester City’s, and Arsenal had played ten more games. During the final stretch, Arsenal played six times in 18 days while City played twice.

That workload exposed the difference between having talented midfielders and having enough midfield power for an entire campaign. Arsenal needed to rotate without losing control. They needed experienced players ready to enter major matches without the structure changing around them. They needed more than one route through midfield.

Stanway gives them that.

Arsenal recovered from an eight-point Christmas deficit to finish four points behind Manchester City, while carrying six matches across all competitions in 18 days during the run-in.

Stanway returns at the peak of her career

Stanway left Manchester City in 2022 after seven seasons, 186 appearances and 67 goals. She moved to Bayern, won the Bundesliga in each of her four seasons and added two German Cups and two German Super Cups. Her Bayern spell produced 128 appearances and 32 goals.

The medals matter, but the development behind them matters more. At Manchester City, Stanway’s versatility sometimes pulled her between central, advanced and wider roles. Bayern made her a central figure. She became responsible for progressing possession, competing through midfield, arriving around the penalty area and setting the tempo of the team.

The passing data makes that development explicit. Since the start of 2022–23, Stanway completed 2,919 passes in the opposition half in the Bundesliga, 754 more than any other player, and 1,495 passes that ended in the final third, 418 clear of the next player. In the Champions League over the same period, she ranked fifth for completed passes in the opposition half and sixth for passes into the final third.

Those are not the numbers of a midfielder who only arrives to finish attacks. They show a player who can start from the base, take responsibility for circulation and move Arsenal into advanced territory.

Her 2025–26 season shows the level at which she returns. Stanway played 1,841 Bundesliga minutes across 25 appearances, her second-highest league total at Bayern and just 22 minutes below her 2023–24 peak. Across the Bundesliga, Champions League, German Cup and Supercup, she played 2,997 minutes.

Stanway also delivered in the final third. She scored seven Bundesliga goals and registered 11 assists in 2025–26, the second-highest assist total in the league according to the DFB. That gave her 18 direct goal contributions. That is an elite attacking production from central midfield.

This is the player Arsenal have signed, not simply the familiar England international who used to play for Manchester City, but a midfielder returning from four years of increased responsibility.

Stanway returned from the 2024–25 knee injury to play 1,841 Bundesliga minutes, just 22 short of her Bayern high.

Stanway can control Arsenal’s midfield from the base or as an eight

Stanway is not a passive holding midfielder. Bayern used her from the base, but her value there was progressive: she received early, played through pressure and repeatedly moved possession into the opposition half and final third.

This gives Arsenal two credible starting points. She can operate as the deeper controller in a midfield with enough mobility and defensive discipline around her, or as the aggressive eight beside a more positionally fixed holder. In both roles, the purpose is the same: move the team forward without surrendering control when possession changes.

Her presence also changes the demands placed on Arsenal’s other midfielders, particularly Mariona Caldentey. Caldentey no longer has to solve every progression problem from central areas. Arsenal can push her higher without stripping the midfield of experience, or use her deeper without making that the team’s only route through pressure.

Géraldine Reuteler’s arrival widens those choices further. She has played at the base, as an eight, in advanced midfield and across the front line. Arsenal have added two players capable of changing both the shape and distribution of responsibility in the central third. Slegers can now select combinations to suit the opponent instead of allowing fatigue or injury to dictate them.

In a nutshell, there are three practical uses for Stanway:

1. Use her as a progressive base midfielder who takes responsibility for moving Arsenal up the pitch.

2. Start her as the two-way eight in a pairing with a more positionally conservative midfielder.

3. Rotate her across central roles during congested periods without lowering the level of the midfield.

Those are not three competing identities. They are the point of the signing. Arsenal have bought one player who strengthens the first-choice team and the rotation behind it.

Stanway can progress Arsenal from the base, play as a two-way eight or preserve the midfield’s level through rotation. These are WSLAnalytics tactical pathways, not confirmed Arsenal formations.

Stanway gives Arsenal more control, not just more output

Seven goals and eleven assists make an easy headline, but Stanway’s larger value is structural.

Arsenal’s challenge is not simply to add more final actions. It is to maintain the same authority across different game states and different weeks of the season. A title-winning midfield has to control open matches, break down compact opponents, survive transitions and keep functioning when the calendar removes recovery time.

Stanway improves that structure because she can contribute without the team being built around one narrow skill. She can receive deeper, play through pressure, attack space and compete when the ball turns over. She gives Arsenal another midfielder who expects responsibility rather than protection.

That should make rotation more credible. Resting one senior midfielder no longer has to mean changing the personality of the team. Moving Mariona forward no longer has to remove proven progression from central areas. Chasing a goal no longer has to mean replacing midfield control with another attacker.

This is how a free transfer can alter a title race without being framed as a saviour. Stanway expands the number of strong decisions available to Slegers.

What can previous WSL transfers tell us?

Keira Walsh’s move from Barcelona to Chelsea is the obvious recent comparison: an established England midfielder returning from an elite continental club to join an immediate WSL contender. The roles are different though, Walsh is a distribution-led holding midfielder, while Stanway offers more running and final-third involvement, but both transfers reduce adaptation risk and add proven authority to the centre of the pitch.

Mariona’s move from Barcelona to Arsenal offers the more useful internal lesson. Arsenal did not preserve one fixed role for her; they used her intelligence in different areas according to the team’s needs. Stanway gives Slegers the same kind of flexibility from a different midfield profile.

The lesson is not that either player predicts Stanway’s numbers. It is that elite experience becomes most valuable when the manager uses it to solve several problems, not just to fill one position on a team sheet.

What Arsenal must get right

The transfer is excellent. The implementation still matters.

First, Arsenal must define the protection around Stanway. Playing from the base does not make her a one-player defensive platform, and using her as an eight creates space behind her advances. Pairing her with another aggressive midfielder without clear positional discipline would create the same transition problems the signing is supposed to reduce.

Second, Slegers must use the depth. Stanway’s arrival loses part of its value if Arsenal simply replace one overworked midfielder with another. Her minutes should allow the team to rotate earlier, not merely survive later.

Third, Arsenal must define the hierarchy without limiting the flexibility. Stanway is good enough to start major matches, but the midfield should not depend on one fixed partnership. The advantage lies in having several strong combinations for different opponents and different stages of the season.

Finally, the team must start faster. Yes, faster. Stanway strengthens the conditions around the title challenge, but Arsenal still have to turn early control into wins. Four points separated them from Manchester City; the decisive damage was the eight-point deficit they had already allowed to develop by Christmas.

Verdict

Georgia Stanway is exactly the type of midfielder Arsenal needed.

She arrives on a free transfer, in her prime, after returning to a near-career-high league workload at Bayern. She brings WSL knowledge, four years of title-winning experience in Germany, recent attacking output and the ability to take responsibility in several phases of the game.

Most importantly, she strengthens Arsenal twice: she improves the first-choice midfield and raises the standard of the rotation behind it.

The best version of this signing is not Stanway carrying Arsenal to the title by herself. It is Arsenal remaining a title-level team when the opponent changes, when the game opens up, when Mariona moves forward and when six matches arrive in 18 days.

Manchester City finished four points ahead because they produced the stronger league season. Arsenal’s response is to build a squad capable of sustaining its best football for longer. Stanway is a decisive part of that response.

Questions we’ll revisit in May 2027

1. Did Stanway establish herself at the base of Arsenal’s midfield, as a two-way eight or in both roles?

2. Did Arsenal distribute central-midfield minutes more effectively during congested periods?

3. Did the team avoid the early draws that damaged the 2025–26 title challenge?

4. Did Stanway’s influence extend beyond goals and assists into progression, pressing and midfield control?

5. Did her arrival allow Arsenal to use Mariona and the rest of the midfield more effectively?

1. Introduction

London City Lionesses are only seven years old. Alexia Putellas has spent almost twice that long in Barcelona’s first team.

That contrast is the starting point for understanding this transfer. One side is still defining what it wants to become at the highest level of English football. The other is a player whose career has already helped define an era: more than 500 Barcelona appearances, four European Cups, two Ballons d’Or and a place at the centre of Spain’s rise to world champions.

This move is more interesting as a football decision than as a meeting of a young club and a famous name. London City finished sixth in their first WSL season. They were competitive, ambitious and capable of troubling stronger opponents, but they were not consistent in possession or chance creation. Putellas arrives with the specific qualities to improve how those parts connect.

Whether that connection works will tell us much more about London City’s project than the announcement itself.

2. The transfer

London City officially confirmed Putellas on 8 July 2026 and gave her the No. 11 shirt. She joins after leaving Barcelona at the end of a 14-season first-team career, with her previous contract having expired. The deal is reported to run until 2029.

What London City have unquestionably acquired is a left-footed creative midfielder who can play centrally, from the left or, when required, as a false nine. They have also acquired a captain, a proven scorer from midfield and a player who was named the 2025–26 UEFA Women’s Champions League Player of the Season.

3. Why this matters

Putellas did not merely collect trophies at Barcelona. She was present as the team developed from a domestic power into one of Europe’s defining sides, becoming their regular captain and club-record women’s scorer along the way. She left Barcelona with 38 trophies, including four Champions Leagues and ten league titles.

She becomes the first Ballon d’Or Féminin winner to play in the WSL. That gives the move a clear place in the competition’s history and makes her arguably one of the highest-profile arrivals the league has seen, without considering transfer fees.

The destination is what makes the move unusual. Putellas has not left one established European superpower for another. London City are entering only their second WSL campaign and did not qualify for Europe. They are the competition’s first fully independent club, without the institutional shelter of a men’s football operation, and their football identity is still under construction.

For London City, the signing compresses years of reputation-building into a single moment. A player of Putellas’s standing choosing the club gives their ambition credibility. But credibility is not the same as achievement. The more important test is whether the organisation can build a side in which her qualities remain decisive.

4. What problem is London City trying to solve?

London City’s first WSL season was successful in the basic sense that a promoted team established itself in mid-table. They finished sixth with 27 points from 22 matches, scoring 28 goals and conceding 35. Eight wins demonstrated that they belonged at the level, while the 22-point gap to third place showed how far they remained from Champions League qualification.

Their football under Eder Maestre contained promising ideas but not yet a settled expression. They used 4-2-3-1 and 4-4-2 structures and often looked to combine possession with vertical attacks and assertive pressing. Across the full season, they recorded 487 touches in the opposition box, the seventh-highest total in the WSL, equivalent to just over 22 per match. That placed them comfortably above the league’s lowest-volume attacks, but still well behind Arsenal, Manchester City and Chelsea, who averaged almost 40 opposition-box touches per match between them.

These observations should not be treated as permanent traits. Maestre arrived only in January, inheriting a heavily rebuilt squad during its first top-flight campaign.

London City need a player who can connect controlled possession to the final action. They need someone comfortable receiving between lines, deciding whether to retain or accelerate the ball, and supplying runners before the defence is set. Putellas can do all of those things. She also gives them another goal threat arriving from behind the forward line.

She does not solve the entire attacking problem herself. Creativity depends on the movement around the ball, while a secure attack depends on the structure left behind it. But the recruitment logic is clear: London City are adding an elite central reference to a team that too often struggled to turn territorial ambition into consistent chances. The next question is whether Putellas still has the workload and production to provide that influence consistently.

5. Alexia’s football journey

Putellas’s recent career cannot be described by a simple age curve. Her peak 2021–22 season brought 34 goals in all competitions and a second consecutive Ballon d’Or. Then, on the eve of the 2022 European Championship, she tore the anterior cruciate ligament in her left knee.

The effect on her playing time was stark. She went from 3,118 minutes in all competitions in 2021–22 to 114 the following season. Her return continued in 2023–24, although she underwent arthroscopy on her left knee in December 2023. That season ended with 1,411 minutes and 11 goals in all competitions: meaningful production, but not yet her old workload.

The next two campaigns changed the picture. Putellas played 2,797 minutes and scored 22 times in 2024–25, then reached 2,926 minutes and 20 goals in 2025–26. Her domestic league return eased from 16 goals and 11 assists to nine and seven, but her European contribution moved in the other direction. She recorded seven goals and seven assists in 11 Champions League appearances and was named the competition’s player of the season.

This contrast is important. It prevents an easy claim that she is either back to her absolute peak or in straightforward decline. Her 2021–22 scoring season remains unmatched, and age broadens the uncertainty around future workload. At the same time, her latest European performances were those of an elite footballer influencing the highest level.

This is therefore not a retirement move as many might claim. Putellas leaves Barcelona after a season in which she played almost 3,000 minutes, won another Champions League and led the competition for combined goals and assists. London City are signing a historic player, but they are not signing history alone.

6. What can previous WSL transfers tell us?

Transfer projection is difficult because a player’s first season depends on more than their previous output. Timing, injuries, tactical role, squad competition, destination-club strength and the number of available league matches can all affect the outcome. Two apparently similar arrivals may therefore receive very different opportunities. To provide some context, we looked at recent players who moved from Liga F to the WSL.

Oroz is the closest positional comparison. She moved from Real Madrid to a Tottenham side in the same broad destination-strength band, but was six years younger and arrived after substantially fewer minutes and attacking contributions.

Caldentey offers the strongest football-environment comparison. Like Putellas, she left Barcelona for England after a productive Liga F season, and her prior minutes, goals and assists were strikingly similar. The comparison breaks down because Caldentey was four years younger and joined an established top-three Arsenal side. She subsequently recorded 1,775 WSL minutes, nine goals and five assists.

Rolfö provides the closest age and club-origin precedent. She was 31 when she left Barcelona for Manchester United, but was classified as a forward and joined a club coming off a third-place finish. Her first WSL campaign brought 1,062 minutes, three goals and one assist.

Nunes and Payne are looser comparisons. Both came from Liga F and help represent different destination contexts, but both were forwards with different workloads and functions. Nunes produced 727 minutes, two goals and one assist for Aston Villa; Payne recorded 1,372 minutes, one goal and five assists for Everton.

The reasonable lesson is not that Putellas should finish somewhere between those outcomes. It is that even a relatively narrow route—Liga F to the WSL—can produce very different results. Four of the five players are classified as forwards, which also highlights the limits of broad positional comparisons. These examples provide useful context, but they do not tell us exactly what will happen next.

7. What could go wrong?

The first uncertainty is physical. Putellas is 32 and has a history of an ACL injury, a later arthroscopy on the same knee and a shorter calf injury. Her 2025–26 workload is encouraging, but previous availability cannot guarantee future availability. Sensible rotation would be management, not evidence of failure.

The second is adaptation. This will be her first senior club season outside Spain. London City cannot assume that Barcelona’s territorial control, close passing options and volume of final-third possession will follow her to England.

The third is squad balance. London City have accumulated several players who prefer central or creative roles. If Maestre cannot establish a clear hierarchy and complementary movement, Putellas could spend too much time receiving deep or facing a crowded attack.

Finally, there is the danger of asking one player to represent the entire project. London City conceded 35 league goals as well as scoring only 28. Putellas can improve their attacking connections; she cannot by herself organise the press, protect transitions and close a 22-point gap to third place.

8. Verdict

Is this a sensible transfer? Yes, with conditions.

London City have recruited a type of player they genuinely need: a central creator who can control possession, produce the final action and add goals from midfield. Her latest season offers strong evidence that the football level remains high. Her experience also fits a club trying to establish standards quickly.

The conditions are structural. She needs runners around her, protection behind her and a workload plan that respects age and injury history without treating her as a ceremonial player. London City also need to resist the idea that accumulating talent is the same as building a team.

The signing makes football sense because Putellas can improve how London City play. Whether it succeeds will depend on whether London City improve the environment in which she plays.

9. Looking ahead

Questions we’ll revisit in May 2027

Did Putellas become London City’s primary creative influence?
We will examine her playing time, goals, assists and involvement in London City’s attacking play, rather than judging her contribution through goals alone.

Did London City become a more effective attacking team?
They scored 28 league goals and recorded 487 touches in the opposition box last season. We will assess whether they improved those figures and converted their attacking possession into more consistent chances.

How well did Putellas adapt to the WSL?
We will compare her first season with the recent Liga F arrivals discussed in this article, while accounting for differences in age, role, opportunity and destination-club strength.

Was her workload managed successfully?
We will look at her minutes, starts, availability and level of production across the season. Rotation should be assessed in context rather than automatically treated as evidence of decline.

Did her arrival move London City closer to the league’s leading clubs?
Putellas cannot close the gap alone, but we will assess whether London City improved on sixth place, reduced the 22-point gap to third and became more competitive against the WSL’s strongest teams.