Discussions about modernising football have often revolved around the rules of the game, technology, or player transfers, yet there is a crucial aspect that often goes overlooked: the movement of football managers. In this third instalment of our series on ‘Modernising Football’, we explore a groundbreaking idea — the implementation of a managerial transfer window.
Managers are the architects of a team’s destiny. Yet, unlike players, managers can be hired and fired at any time during the season, often leading to abrupt changes in leadership, destabilising club environments, and creating a sense of uncertainty amongst fans, players, and staff alike. In the 2022/23 season, all 16 managers in the Tunisian top division were fired. 90% of managers in the Bosnian and North Macedonian leagues suffered the same fate.
It could be interesting to introduce a managerial transfer window, a concept that borrows a page from the player transfer system, with designated periods during which clubs can hire, fire, or negotiate with managers. It is an idea that might seem radical at first glance but holds the promise of bringing more stability, fairness, and accountability to the world of football management.
The case for a managerial transfer window is not about limiting clubs’ autonomy but rather about creating a structured environment that encourages thoughtful decision-making, fosters long-term planning, and ensures that managers are given the necessary time to implement their vision.
Advantages:
Stability and Continuity: One of the primary benefits is the increased stability it can bring to clubs. Managers will have a defined tenure, reducing the constant turnover of leadership. This continuity can lead to better team cohesion and long-term planning. Just think about Chelsea who have seen ten permanent managers pass through in the last fourteen years. The lack of stability has left Chelsea in a dire position and whilst they have enjoyed success at various points in the last decade, the Blues are currently lacking identity and direction.
Fairness: A transfer window for managers ensures that all clubs have equal opportunities to change their leadership. Last year, not to overuse the Chelsea examples, the Blues poached Graham Potter from Brighton mid-season, leaving Brighton temporarily without a manager. As it turns out, Roberto de Zerbi has outperformed Potter and has taken Brighton to an entirely new level, but the point still stands. Teams shouldn’t be able to hire managers from other teams mid-season. A managerial transfer window could allow for better planning and reduced disruption.
In the current system, managerial changes can disrupt a team’s momentum and performance. A transfer window would limit these disruptions to designated periods, minimizing their impact.
Fan Engagement: A transfer window would also ensure that managerial changes are anticipated and discussed, keeping fans engaged and reducing surprise and disappointment.
Better Teams: Teams that stick with their managers through bad periods and allow the manager to implement their strategies often reap the rewards. Most clubs would have fired Mikel Arteta after two consecutive seasons of finishing 8th and some horrendous performances. Yet, Arteta was afforded time and patience and he managed to forge his footballing identity on the squad. Now, Arsenal are one of the best teams in Europe.
Similarly, Pep Guardiola and Jurgen Klopp suffered difficult starts at Manchester City and Liverpool respectively. You all know what has happened since!
By being forced to stick with a manager, at least until a certain window, teams will improve as they grow under a manager’s leadership and guidance.
Disadvantages:
Rigidity: A managerial transfer window could be perceived as inflexible. In certain situations, a club might urgently need to replace a manager due to poor performance or other unforeseen circumstances.
It restricts clubs’ autonomy to hire and fire managers when they see fit, potentially limiting their ability to respond quickly to challenges or opportunities.
Potential for Unwanted Managers: Clubs might be stuck with a manager they no longer have confidence in until the next transfer window, which could harm their performance and financial prospects.
Chelsea fired André Villas-Boas mid-season in 2012 and his replacement, Roberto Di Matteo, immediately brought success to the club with an FA Cup and a Champions League. If Chelsea had been forced to stick with AVB, they never would’ve had that opportunity for success and would have continued spiraling under an unwanted manager.
Player Discontent: Players may also be affected by managerial changes, and a transfer window might not align with the needs and preferences of the playing staff.
By Nicky Helfgott / @NickyH3lfgott on Twitter (X)
