A Transfer Window for Managers?

[Dave]

What's your thoughts on this much discussed topic where nothing ever seems to happen?

[True Blue]

Nahhh we would have too much fun

[Stan]

Don't agree with this. A manager has more control over the way a football club is run (differs across clubs, granted) than players do.

A manager could be utter shite (De Boer at Palace last season?) - would Palace fans be happy that nothing was going right but not be able to change something that isn't working, having to wait til a certain time to make a change? With players there's more depth already within the squad - chopping and changing is almost regular and pretty much expected. It's not possible to do that with managers.

I'm struggling to think of any positives for a managerial transfer window to be honest!

[Smiley Culture]

Absolutely not. 

It doesn’t make any logical sense. Players can be dropped to the bench or the stands because teams are made up of twenty plus players, whereas there is only one manager and an underperforming manager shouldn’t be kept on. 

It’s not really a solution to the “problem” of managers being given very little time. 

[Mel81x+]

In a realistic sense, a club can change its manager as many times as it wishes during a season as long as said manager is not living up to the contractual obligations set forth by the club. After all he/she is hired by the club based on a lot of research (we hope) to get players going. Having a transfer window makes no sense here because this isn't a player but that does beg the question about why we even have transfer windows for players? If a club is willing to pay the price and get the player over they should just go. I've always found the transfer window to be some kind of faux fair play machination that really makes zero sense.

I'll give an example why. Imagine a club with a new manager who gets a player in the summer transfer window based on the scouts at the club. Now, this player has an injury which hampers the club's ability to compete due to either financial resources or because there isn't enough depth on the bench to compete. Should the club get punished for this? I don't think they should if they have the resources to go out and get a player from any other club. Furthermore, that manager's ability to perform the duties in their contract are now hinged on the player who is injured so is it then fair to sack the manager anytime the club wants but not give the manager the ability to rectify the situation with a purchase at any time which could change the club's position in their campaign? And i don't mean just going for players who are in the open market I am talking competing with any club and any player. 

[Danny]

It's ridiculous and no club would vote for it for the simple fact that if they do it'll mean they could miss out on Premier League/Champions League money because they couldn't sack a manager sooner.

[Smiley Culture]

There’s the much maligned “Moneyball” philosophy that was used in Baseball and Brentford are particularly famous in the UK for their use of stats and data when it comes to signing players, so surely if clubs are using data to sign an Iceland 17 year-old left-back, they’re using data to appoint a new manager? 

I have no idea if clubs do this but surely the use of data, and not just data like how many games did Candidate A win, lose or draw and how many goals did his teams scored, would be hugely beneficial to the recruitment process. 

I imagine it’s not too common in the lower leagues due to accessibility to such data but there’s an argument that Football Clubs need to modernise the way in which they appoint a manager. 

You’d say that David Wagner (Huddersfield) and Daniel Farke (Norwich) are probably pretty good examples of looking elsewhere for a manager and not pulling a fairly common name from the merry-go-Round of Football Managers but I don’t know if these clubs used data to look into these managers or there was an element of luck involved.