Women’s football in England is growing faster than ever. There’s a lot of discussion around the FA’s proposed changes to the Women’s National League structure for 2027/28. Some important questions need asking about what this means for clubs across the pyramid.
Firstly, it’s important to recognise that the FA are in an incredibly difficult position. They are trying to manage the expectations created by the Lionesses while overseeing a pyramid just two tiers below the WSL that contains a huge range of clubs with very different resources.
In the FA Women’s National League (FA WNL), you have full-time professional environments, semi-professional teams and volunteer-run clubs all competing in the same divisions. That diversity is one of the strengths of the pyramid, but it also makes structural change incredibly difficult to implement fairly.
The proposal introduces four Professional Game Academy teams into Tier 3. Even if limited to four, it creates a structural advantage for clubs already backed by the professional game. Over time, that risks concentrating opportunity rather than widening it.
The new league split, where the top four teams from North and South move into a national competition, has been presented as a way to increase competitiveness. On paper, that sounds exciting. But for many clubs, the practical realities are very different.
My club, Liverpool Feds, has been operating since 1990 and is part of the foundations of the women’s pyramid.
Clubs like Feds helped build the women’s football pyramid long before the Lionesses’ success brought the game into the national spotlight.
We spent more than 20 years working up the pyramid to reach this level. Yet development teams could effectively be parachuted into the league simply because of the badge they represent.
That raises real questions about sporting integrity. Football pyramids traditionally reward progress through results on the pitch. Introducing teams by licence rather than merit challenges one of the core principles the pyramid is built on.
There are also practical realities. Many WNL clubs simply are not in a position to operate on national travel budgets week in, week out. For clubs operating with tight finances and volunteer support, those costs are significant.
Another important consideration is where development funding is being directed. Much of the investment in the proposal flows towards clubs already backed by professional men’s teams and established infrastructure. But what about the independent clubs that are largely self-funded?
These are the clubs often fighting just to keep facilities running and the lights on, despite being at the forefront of the women’s game long before men’s clubs invested. They have been sustaining the pyramid for decades and should not be overlooked as the game grows.
Another key point is player development. Young players learn a huge amount from playing in adult environments where results matter, points matter, and relegation has real consequences. That pressure is part of the learning process.
I played Tier 3 football at 16. But there is no way the Tier 3 level today is the same as it was then. The game is faster, more physical and far more demanding than it was even a decade ago. So it is fair to ask:
How would an 18-player squad, largely made up of 16- to 20-year-olds, realistically cope with the physical, mental and logistical demands of Tier 3 football? Putting predominantly teenage squads into that environment raises legitimate questions around welfare.
There is also the impact on competitive balance. If development teams prioritise minutes and rotation over results, what effect does that have on promotion races or relegation battles across the league?
Independent clubs across the WNL have been providing these competitive environments for years. They are also where many academy players continue their careers after release. They are a vital part of the player pathway.
If the aim is truly to develop more England players, there may also be other levers worth considering. For example, increasing home-grown player requirements in WSL and WSL2 squads.
Encouraging top-tier clubs to develop and use more domestic players could strengthen the pathway without disrupting the competitive balance further down the pyramid.
The women’s game absolutely needs investment and stronger development pathways. But the future of the game should be built with the clubs who sustained it for decades, not around them.
