Back to Blog Hub
Underlying Stats 2026-02-02

GW25 Underlying-Stats Radar: ICT Monsters, Quiet Conductors & The Next Haul Candidates

FPL Admin

FPL Elite Analyst

Introduction

Gameweek 25 is where underlying numbers can save you from chasing yesterday’s points. Using the Top ICT performers (normalized by minutes) list, this piece zooms in on ICT Index (and its components: Influence + Creativity) to identify the players controlling matches—even when the recent “haul” hasn’t arrived.

Key idea for GW25: Minutes-normalized ICT leaders tend to be involved in decisive moments per 90, even if variance has muted their FPL returns.

1) The True ICT Heavyweights (Elite control + elite output)

These are the names combining massive ICT with strong xGI and reliable points production.

Bruno Fernandes (Man Utd)

  • •ICT Index: 207.4 (top of the list)
  • •xGI: 13.37 (xG 7.44 + xA 5.93)
  • •Points: 131 | PPG: 6.2 | Bonus: 23
  • •Form: 6.4 | Selected by: 30.1%

GW25 read: Bruno is the most complete “control” profile here: high xG and high xA paired with a league-leading ICT footprint. The 23 bonus reinforces that his involvement isn’t just theoretical—he’s converting dominance into FPL-friendly contributions.

Erling Haaland (Man City)

  • •ICT Index: 206.0
  • •xGI: 20.22 (xG 18.89, xA 1.33)
  • •Points: 171 | PPG: 7.1 | Bonus: 31
  • •Selected by: 71.1%

GW25 read: The profile screams inevitability. Haaland’s “control” is less about creativity and more about gravitational Influence in the box—his xG dwarfs the field. Even if you’re hunting differentials, this is the benchmark captaincy-output engine.

2) The “Quiet Controllers” (High ICT, strong xGI… but the FPL noise is muted)

These are the players who look like they’re driving phases of play and piling up threat/creation signals—yet their current narrative may be “underwhelming.”

Bukayo Saka (Arsenal)

  • •ICT Index: 161.4
  • •xGI: 10.69 (xG 5.58, xA 5.11)
  • •Points: 101 | PPG: 4.8
  • •Form: 1.5 | Status: d | Transfers out: 174,348

GW25 read: Saka’s minutes-normalized ICT plus balanced xG/xA mix is exactly what you want from a “game controller” asset—he’s contributing to both finishing and creation. The huge transfers out suggests sentiment is turning, but the underlying profile still looks like a premium hub.

Phil Foden (Man City)

  • •ICT Index: 150.0
  • •xGI: 8.48 (xG 4.95, xA 3.53)
  • •Points: 103 | PPG: 4.7
  • •Form: 1.4 | Transfers out: 143,882

GW25 read: A classic control-and-threat hybrid. The ICT 150 with near-9 xGI indicates consistent involvement. Heavy selling plus low form often creates the exact price-of-entry moment where you’re buying before the variance flips.

Mohamed Salah (Liverpool)

  • •ICT Index: 138.0
  • •xGI: 8.53 (xG 5.43, xA 3.10)
  • •Points: 74 | PPG: 4.6 | Bonus: 5

GW25 read: Even without a dominant bonus count here, Salah’s underlying involvement is still premium-adjacent. If you’re targeting control + direct goal threat, he remains a credible GW25 bet on process.

Rayan Cherki (Man City)

  • •ICT Index: 124.4
  • •xGI: 7.79 (xG 2.03, xA 5.76)
  • •Points: 87 | PPG: 4.6 | Bonus: 11
  • •Cost: 6.6 | Selected by: 10.2% | Status: d

GW25 read: Cherki’s calling card is Creativity-driven control—xA 5.76 is enormous relative to price. Even if goals aren’t flowing (xG 2.03), the creation profile suggests assist potential can spike fast with the right finishing variance.

3) Pure Chance-Creation Profiles (When Creativity is the story)

If your GW25 strategy is to find assist upside through underlying creation, these stand out.

Jérémy Doku (Man City)

  • •ICT Index: 123.8
  • •xGI: 6.06 (xG 1.81, xA 4.25)
  • •Points: 72 | PPG: 3.6 | Bonus: 9
  • •Status: i

GW25 read: The mix points to a player who tilts games via ball progression and chance creation (xA 4.25). If/when available, Doku profiles as a high-volatility creator whose returns can cluster.

David Brooks (Bournemouth)

  • •ICT Index: 85.4
  • •xGI: 7.20 (xG 4.41, xA 2.79)
  • •Points: 43 | PPG: 2.3 | Form: 1.0 | Status: d

GW25 read: This is the archetypal “process over points” case. xGI 7.20 on just 43 points implies under-conversion (either personal finishing variance or team finishing). If fit, he’s a textbook ‘control-to-returns’ bounce candidate.

4) Value Picks with Real Control Signals (Budget enablers that aren’t empty)

These are cheaper players who still flash meaningful involvement metrics.

Junior Kroupi (Bournemouth) — the budget threat signal

  • •Cost: 4.7
  • •ICT Index: 72.5
  • •xGI: 4.14 (xG 3.73, xA 0.41)
  • •Points: 64 | Form: 4.2 | Bonus: 7
  • •Selected by: 5.9% | Transfers in: 47,125

GW25 read: Kroupi’s “control” is more Influence via goal threat than Creativity—xG dominates his xGI. At 4.7, you’re not buying perfection; you’re buying repeatable penalty-box presence and an increasing market signal (transfers in).

Estêvão (Chelsea) — balanced budget involvement

  • •Cost: 6.4
  • •ICT Index: 64.7
  • •xGI: 4.86 (xG 2.76, xA 2.10)
  • •Points: 52 | Form: 2.8

GW25 read: A steadier split between threat and creation than some similarly priced punts. Not explosive on current totals, but the xGI composition suggests he can return via multiple routes.

5) “Looks good on ICT… but mind the current output”

These aren’t automatic fades—just profiles where the control metrics need to translate more convincingly into points soon.

Samuel Chukwueze (Fulham)

  • •ICT Index: 54.2 | xGI: 3.49
  • •Points: 43 | PPG: 3.9 | Selected by: 0.1%

GW25 read: Ultra-low ownership creates differential appeal, but the overall underlying volume (ICT and xGI) is more modest than the names above.

Omar Marmoush (Man City)

  • •ICT Index: 26.0 | xGI: 2.04
  • •Cost: 8.3 | PPG: 2.2

GW25 read: Price and current underlying involvement don’t align here. If you’re chasing “control” signals, the dataset points elsewhere.

GW25 Takeaways (Actionable shortlist)

If you want players controlling games rather than chasing last week’s points:

  • •Elite core: Bruno Fernandes (ICT 207.4, xGI 13.37), Haaland (ICT 206.0, xGI 20.22)
  • •Bounce candidates with strong control footprints: Saka (ICT 161.4, xGI 10.69), Foden (ICT 150.0, xGI 8.48)
  • •Creativity-led upside: Cherki (xA 5.76), Doku (xA 4.25)
  • •Budget structure with real threat: Kroupi (4.7, xG 3.73)

Conclusion

GW25 is a good week to re-anchor your decisions in minutes-normalized ICT and xGI. The headline is clear: Bruno and Haaland are the standard-bearers for match control translating into FPL output. But the edge often lives one tier below—Saka, Foden, and Cherki carry the kind of control-and-involvement profiles that can explode once variance turns. In a game built on small margins, backing the strongest processes is how you buy returns before they become obvious.