EVERY season, there is at least one top manager who has his career evaluated over a period of weeks and months by his team’s latest result. The barometer swings from left to right, the narrative moves from “under pressure” to “reprieved” with each game. There is rarely stability in the modern game and contracts mean very little; how often does a manager keep his job for the full term? And what is the point of luring a coach to a club with a three-year deal when it is likely he won’t last two?

There is no such thing as a secure job in football management; the number of managerial changes each season indicates that long-term planning is a thing of the past and the stakeholders in the game continually call for instant gratification. Nine Premier League clubs started the 2026-27 season with new full-time managers and currently, Manchester United’s Michael Carrick looks like being the first casualty. It matters not to most managers who come out of that final meeting with their possessions in a black bin liner, for they get paid-off and after a little gardening leave invariably get another job. Some coaches have made a career out of being sacked on a regular basis and rarely do we hear anything after the axe has fallen – compensation is usually accompanied by a non-disclosure agreement.

So much nonsense is spoken around managers and their inevitable demise at a club. It is possible that clubs do not do their homework, for often they “let go” a manager because his style did not fit the club. Do they not do their due diligence, are they not aware of the approach, strategy and resource management of the man they are hiring? With data being used to determine transfer market targets, surely they do the math on the people they hire to run their teams?

The dilemma is essentially because no manager has the time to stamp his authority on a team. A period of less than two years is not enough but the clubs are simply lacking in patience because they have very short-term perspectives. Furthermore, clubs seem to be blind to what supporters and the game’s professional observers can see. Carrick is a good case because the situation is rapidly becoming Solskjaer all over again. Those that could take a subjective view on Manchester United know the club makes the same mistakes on a regular basis. Tottenham are arguably in the same bracket as United. A club constantly in a state of flux will find it very difficult to win on a regular basis if instability filters down from the very top. Others, such as Chelsea, seem self-destructive, continually disrupting their own model. Clubs that revolve around a dominant fIgure – Nottingham Forest spring to mind – often seem to sack and appoint at the whim of the man in charge.

The fans are largely equally as intolerant as owners and demand success, or at the very least avoidance of failure. How can we define that? In terms of league football, each season proves to be a success for around 20% of the 92, that’s a fairly attractive ratio. This includes 10 promoted clubs, the Premier title and another seven European places. Then there are the cups – FA, EFL and the opportunity to bid for a European trophy. In reality, the Premier League is something that only three or four clubs can win at present. Clubs need to be clear with their employees a bout their realistic objectives.

But in the modern game, the manager surely cannot take sole blame if the players in his squad fail to live up to expectations. How much influence do managers have when it comes to dealing in the transfer market? One gets the feeling a new sub-industry has been created in which data-influenced sporting directors identify targets and present their acquisitions to the coach: “Here’s your tools, gaffer”. Although nobody will want to admit this, managers have become the easiest people to dispose of when things are not going so well – at the top level, the days of Ferguson, Wenger and other long-serving tenants of the dugout are long gone. The manager is also the man on the front line and by sacking him, the club can show to the fans they are taking action to resolve a crisis or downturn in form. It is no coincidence that Arsenal have been successful after keeping faith with their coach after several trophyless campaigns.

There are also financial implications to consider when a manager departs with a lengthy term still outstanding. Chelsea, Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur have paid more than £ 250 million between them in recent years in compensaton to sacked managers. Not only is this a costly exercise, but the list of likely candidates seems to be diminishing by the year – football is waiting for the next generation of super coaches to emerge. There are good, up-and-coming managers out there, but fans also insist on big name appointments.

Michael Carrick’s future is uncertain, but anyone managing Manchester United is working within a troubled club that had become as complex as a Gordian Knot. The glories of the past weigh heavy on their shoulders and until they allow a coach to develop a long-term plan that changes the values of the club, they will continue to search in vain for the right man for the job. The obstacle is huge because the football industry is now built around immediate results. The problem is deeply embedded in football’s culture and has already started constructing revolving doors around every English football club.