After the ousting of Real Madrid C. F from Copa De La Rey, we found a strong argument to why coaches should be sacked after two years, yes, Zidane inclusive.
This is a strong argument, Sir Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger might disagree with this reasoning, but you as a fan should consider this argument: coaches should be sacked after two years, no matter what.
Here is why
In this time of modern football, say business day football, results are more important than anything, if it is not about making top four in England, it is about winning trophies in Spain, if it is not about the Champions League in France then it is just about top-four positions in Germany and Italy; the trophies determines the fan-base and the fan base determines the television rights that determines the yearly income of a Football Club. Then, it should be said that any coach, whosoever fails to deliver any tangible credential required by a top club in two years should be sacked.
Read: If You Were A Footballer
- The statistics of football: In two years’ time, there is every tendency that a coach’s style has been analyzed and out-thought after the course of a successful season. If as a coach you are successful now, the stats will expose you: your key players, action regions: number of crosses, headed goals, first and second half performances of your players will be justified by the ever monitoring computers. Hence, there is little chance that your style will not be exposed after a successful campaign with any of the top clubs. Leicester’s Ranieri won the Premier League in their first season of return from relegation, it was awesome and historical, the world was amazed… A complete underdog took the title away from the big sharks. However, the Joy lasted that year. Ranieri couldn’t make his players replicate such feat or keep up with their new reputation. It was hard to keep key players but he did manage to keep Jamie Vardy but not Kante. Stats don’t lie as Cristiano says, Riyadh Mahrez might have won the PFA player of the year, but the role of Kante cannot be undermined. As such, Leicester couldn’t hold on to their place, a tooth-less performance over and over again, it was not the players’ fault, the board realized, the method needs an update, hence, a new coach was needed, Ranieri had to be sacked because his method needs refreshing.
- New ideas are needed: Modern day game is different, a coach needs to tinker and tinker every season to keep winning. However, most coaches are rigid and wouldn’t consider a change of their styles or beliefs, rather a change of players while maintaining their core players is their practice. Conte is in his second season and the only title(s) they could win is one or both of FA cup or Champions League. The chances of qualifying in the Champions League is slim as their next round opponent, Barcelona, are yet to be beaten in the Champions League and La Liga, even Espanyol hopes of an upset didn’t last long. Just. In. Conte’s. Second. Year. Things are really changing. More-so, in Ancelloti’s second season at Bayern, bad things happened until Jupp Heynkes came in to reshape the Bavarians to their best. Ancelloti insisted on not changing his style even while his style is not well received by his players, anymore; he was adamant until the board stepped in. There is every tendency that after a year or two, a Coach cannot outmaneuver his opposing coaches after two years: new ideas are needed by the players, hence, such an under-performing staff should be sacked.
This takes us to the third reason.
- All team members are subject to replacement: Yes. A coach is also a member of the team, hence should not be given more time than the players to keep his performance. Good coaches are getting rarer. And the top teams seem to be exchanging their coaches just to exercise the point above of trying new ideas. A coach shouldn’t be given the luxury of underperforming for a month, talk less of two years, that might sound too harsh, but it is the truth. Why? Simple, coaches unlike players have the power to get new players, remove or add a player, change a team to his style, amidst other powers – when you consider the extremism of Guardiola and Mourinho. A coach that couldn’t deliver wins after wins should not be pardoned by the press and the board, the game expects results, and hence such a coach should be sacked. Mourinho couldn’t deliver a top trophy after his second year in Madrid, Guardiola could not deliver the much craved Champions League to Bayern Munich, and even his style is less effective as to that of his Barcelona days. Three years for a coach at a big club is a luxury that clubs should not pay a detrimental price for.
The point is this: while small clubs can manage their constant spots (regions) on tables and be happy with their trophy-less years, big clubs cannot, due to their own competition for markets and global reach. So, coaches like players should be changed after two years. If clubs do really want to satisfy their fans and remain relevant in all spheres, coaches should not be spared for their blunders, irrespective of their past affiliation with the club(s). The game cannot afford such patience any longer.
Valverde is in his first season, he could win all trophies. Heynkes just resumed, he could win all too, Guardiola could win all in his second season, Emery could win all in his second season, Allegri could win all. But same cannot be said of Zinedine Zidane, Arsene Wenger, Mauricio Pochettino, Diego Simeone, Jurgen Klopp and more coaches who have exceeded the two-year limit.
Exposed: Logos And Not Badges
Even if Zidane’s Madrid win the champions league, which is not a sure bet for now, judging by their recent performance, he should still be sacked. Not because he is a bad coach but because the team and the club (Real Madrid C.F) need it.
Top Clubs should sign top coaches only on a two year contract to avoid a disastrous third season like that of the present Real Madrid.