Manager Contracts: What Next?

Almost two months ago, all manager contracts were terminated, and replaced by a new system whereby only managers finishing in the bottom four of their divisions will have their position up for review by the “secret panel” (bottom four, unless they won a contract-free season last season). The activity proposals were scrapped (for the time being, at least).

This caused a LOT of discussion in the WhatsApp group. Here’s a summary of the main points (with some AI help).

Contracts

Here are some of the pros and cons of the contract system:

Pros:

• It ensures that managers are held accountable for their performance.
• It encourages managers to be active and to participate in the game.
• It helps to create a sense of competition and excitement.
• It helps to create new job opportunities and to reward managers who have been successful.
• Manager turnover helps keep the transfer market active.
• It makes Top 100 more realistic.

Cons:

• Contracts were too easy on the big teams, and too hard on the lower division sides?
• Some managers want to stay at a team long term and build (or rebuild).
• Manager turnover at some clubs can be disruptive to the club’s long term health.

Proposed changes

There is a lot of disagreement about the proposed changes to the contract system ((bear in mind that the activity proposals haven’t been implemented).

• Some people believe that the changes are too subjective and will lead to more controversy, while others believe that they are necessary to improve the system.
• Some people are in favour of keeping the system as it is, while others are in favour of making changes.

The contract system (as was) is not perfect, and it could be improved.

What’s important?

The most important thing is to have a system that is transparent and that is communicated clearly to all managers. This will help to ensure that everyone is treated fairly and that there is no confusion about the rules.

It is important to have a system that:

• is fair and objective, that does not lead to favouritism or discrimination, and that encourages managers to perform well.
• ensures that managers are held accountable for their performance.
• is flexible enough to adapt to changes in the game. The football world, and Top 100, is constantly evolving, and so the contract system should be able to evolve with it.

The best way to find a solution that is fair, objective, and flexible is to have a open and honest discussion about the issue. Together, we can find a solution that works for everyone.

Suggested improvements

The best way to address the cons of the current system is to make changes that will make it more fair and that will encourage more managers to participate. Some possible changes include:

1. Remove free seasons altogether. This would make it more difficult for managers to coast and would force them to perform well in order to keep their jobs.
2. Only give free seasons to teams that win trophies or finish in the top four. This would reward good performance and would help to keep the competition competitive.
3. Have simple, clear and objective expectations for performance and participation.
4. Give managers more time to succeed. Introduce a system of warnings and penalties for managers who fail to meet expectations. This would give managers a chance to improve their performance before they are sacked.
5. Provide more opportunities for managers to improve their teams (e.g., changes to squad cap rules, new rules on requirements to sell players who develop concerns).
6. Make it easier for managers to get back into the game after they have been sacked (maybe this happens already, but, for example, an offer of a club in Top 120).

These suggested improvements are designed to address some of the problems that have been identified with the current system.

For example, the current system does not do enough to encourage managers to be active and to participate in the game. The proposed changes would address this by requiring managers to meet certain participation requirements in order to retain their jobs.

These suggestions are also designed to address the problem of free seasons. The current system allows managers to get free seasons for completing certain tasks, such as winning a cup or finishing in a certain position in the league. This has led to some managers being able to build up a large number of free seasons, which gives them an unfair advantage over other managers. The proposed changes would limit the number of free seasons that managers can get, which would make the game more competitive.

These improvements would make the contract system more fair and would encourage more managers to participate in the game.

All of these proposals have merit, and it would be interesting and useful to keep this conversation going, and think about how these ideas could work in practice.

Please remember, these are not my thoughts, but a summary of the thoughts of several managers in the WhatsApp group who responded to the Admin post linked above in the opening sentence.

Please feel free to share your ideas in the comments below, or better still, write your own blog post.