Burnley fired their manager yesterday. Today Sheffield Wednesday's Henrik Pedersen left, 11 games into League One, with the club 8th. A manager change is symbolic, the first domino, and the dominoes rarely reach the real problem: financial discipline and how the squad is built. On 1 May, Arise, a group led by David Storch, bought the club and the stadium. I think owning the ground under the club is the big prize now. The old company and its debts, however, remained in administration. So what did a clean start actually buy Sheffield Wednesday? The old company's last accounts (to July 2024) showed £61.2m owed to its owner and net liabilities of £81.9m. It went into administration in October 2025. Since 1 May, Arise has put about £10.6m of new share capital into the new club company. (Companies House) The club's own statement today points at the scale of change. Sporting director Simon Wilson: "We knew the start of this season would be difficult due to the scale of change across the club." How big was that change? Turnstile's 2025-26 Championship data (as of October 25) shows Wednesday used 40 players, most in the league, and ranked 24th of 24 for team Production Value. Players still here played 45% of last season's minutes. I linked up with @bethlimb to show this season's picture. Wednesday is 8th in League One, 4th for xG, and 3rd for possession. But their xG has dropped from about 3 a game in August to about 1.4 now (five-match average), and their xG against is over 2. They've also lost their last two matches. The most-used XI leans on players in their 30s: Bannan (36), Cooper (35), Lowe (32), James (32) and Lumley (31). More on that later. So with new owners, new money, new players, and a new manager, is it working? By May 2028, every club must stress-test losing its owner's money (IFR, p. 37). In League One, 90% of club debt is owed to owners (IFR, p. 23). The old company's last accounts said owner support "is not a legal liability." I believe the fix for Sheffield Wednesday and other clubs in this position is tighter financial discipline and sharper player evaluation built on measurable data that considers all aspects of valuation. I wonder if there is a discrepancy between how the new owners see the club and how English football works. What's the root issue here?

I love a good U-22 list, but being on the list doesn’t always mean you’re actually the most productive. I ran the numbers on MLS’s 2026 22 Under 22 list. Four of the top 10 under-22 players at MLS clubs on Production Value (PV), the money value of a player’s production on the pitch, are not on it. Young producers also fetch big fees. Three of the age group’s top 14 on PV left MLS this summer for reported fees of $8.5 million to $17 million. But bigger than that, IMO knowing what these players produce on the pitch is the cleanest way to get a tight squad valuation when you’re looking at investment.