Revealed: The best month to change your manager – and why sackings always work

Chelsea's decision to sack Thomas Tuchel may have been a shock but statistically, there is logic to it

Revealed: The best month to change your manager - and why sackings always work
Thomas Tuchel was sacked by Chelsea just seven games into the season Credit: GETTY IMAGES

The Premier League season is less than five weeks old but already there have been two managerial sackings, with Chelsea’s Thomas Tuchel following Bournemouth’s Scott Parker into that strange hinterland inhabited by out-of-work coaches.–

For two managers to lose their jobs so early in the campaign is yet another indication of the ruthlessness of elite football, even if the issues affecting both clubs run far deeper than early-season performances on the pitch. 

Premier League executives and chairmen are often criticised for their trigger-happy approach to firing coaches, and it has been no different this week. But why are we so obsessed with the concept of managerial stability, and what does the evidence say?

An analysis by Telegraph Sport today reveals that in the overwhelming majority of cases, a mid-season change actually has a beneficial effect on the team.

Does sacking your manager work?

In the short-term, absolutely. Over the past four completed Premier League campaigns, there have been 27 mid-season managerial sackings. Of those 27, only four have resulted in a team finishing in a worse position in the league table than they were in when the manager was fired. 

It is worth noting that three of those four regressions came at just one club: Watford. The decisions to fire Nigel Pearson (July 2020), Xisco Munoz (October 2021) and Claudio Ranieri (January 2022) all led to the club falling further down the league table than they were in at the time of the sacking.

Since August 2018, the only other example of a team moving lower in the league table after replacing their manager during the campaign was at Leeds United last season. Leeds were 16th at the time of Marcelo Bielsa’s dismissal, and ultimately finished 17th under Jesse Marsch. Even in this example, though, it could reasonably be argued that Leeds would have slipped even further down the table if Bielsa had remained.

Leeds managed to stay in the Premier League after sacking Marcelo Bielsa Credit: GETTY IMAGES

On the other end of the scale, mid-season managerial changes have delivered impressive results at clubs across the division. Everton moved up six places in the league table after swapping Marco Silva for Carlo Ancelotti in December 2019, while Newcastle United moved up eight places last season after replacing Steve Bruce with Eddie Howe in October.

Another example is the dismissal of Mauricio Pochettino at Tottenham Hotspur, and the subsequent appointment of Jose Mourinho. It did not work out in the long-term for Mourinho in north London but it should be remembered that Spurs were 14th when he took over in November 2019. That season, they ultimately finished in sixth. 

When is the best time to sack your manager?

In the past five years, November has been the cruellest month for struggling Premier League coaches. Seven managers have been axed in November since the start of the 2017/18 campaign, with December (six sackings) the next most dangerous month.

Our analysis shows that November is also the most effective time to make a change in the dugout. In the past four completed seasons, a change of manager in November has led to an average positive impact of 2.4 places on the league table (seven sackings). Next is December, with six sackings, which leads to an average positive impact of 1.7 places.

Why is a pre-Christmas dismissal more effective? The obvious answer is that it allows a manager to fully assess his squad before going into the January transfer market. The perfect example of this would be Antonio Conte’s appointment in November last year, at the expense of Nuno Espirito Santo. 

Conte had enough time to examine his options and identify the areas that needed strengthening in January. He went on to sign Dejan Kulusevski and Rodrigo Bentancur, who both played key roles as Spurs finished in the top four last season. When Conte took over, Spurs were eighth.

The evidence shows it is far less effective to fire a manager in the spring, when there can be no changing the squad and, in many cases, the damage has already been done. The last three Premier League managerial sackings in March and April have brought no positive impact on league table position. 

How real is the ‘new manager bounce’?

The concept of the ‘new manager bounce’ — an immediate uplift in results following the appointment of a new coach — has become a cliche in English football. But is it actually real?

In many ways, the answer depends on your expectations, and those vary depending on the context of the season and the team which has made a change. Overall, though, it is safe to say that, while a mid-season change has largely worked in recent seasons, it would be wrong to think the instant ‘bounce’ applies in the majority of cases.

Of the last 27 Premier League managerial sackings in the midst of a season, only nine freshly-appointed coaches have gone on to win at least three of their first five games. 

The standout performers in this regard are Ole Gunnar Solskjaer (Manchester United, five wins in first five games), Brendan Rodgers (Leicester City, four wins), Jose Mourinho (Tottenham Hotspur, four wins) and Thomas Tuchel (Chelsea, four wins).

Ole Gunnar Solskjaer enjoyed an excellent start as Man Utd manager in 2019 Credit: GETTY IMAGES

On the other hand, there have been 11 examples of a new manager winning only one, or indeed none, of their first five matches. Parker lost five in a row after replacing Ranieri at Fulham, and Sam Allardyce failed to claim a victory in his first five matches at West Bromwich Albion. 

The likes of Roy Hodgson (Watford) and Dean Smith (Norwich City) won only once in their first five games, and struggled to build momentum. Others, however, have started slowly but soon got going, such as Howe at Newcastle last season and Ancelotti at Everton. Both managers won only once in their first five games, but soon found their feet. 

Others have “bounced” but then faded: Steven Gerrard won four of his first six matches at Aston Villa but then won only one of his next eight. The “bounce” is not as common as many observers might think, and it can also be hugely deceptive.

Youthful promise or seasoned experience?

Chelsea’s interest in appointing Graham Potter is evidence of the perceived importance of a long-term project, or philosophy, in the modern game. Clubs now want so much more than short-term results and the shift towards younger, more progressive coaches has been obvious in recent seasons.

Of the past 27 managers that have been sacked in mid-season in the Premier League, only 12 have been replaced by older coaches. Chairmen and executives are largely turning towards younger options, with big ideas and plenty of potential. Arsenal’s decision to replace Unai Emery with Mikel Arteta is one example, as is the move by Newcastle to ditch Steve Bruce for Eddie Howe.

It will also not have escaped the attention of clubs, especially those in battles against relegation, that the “firefighters” of old are no longer as effective in the modern game. 

Allardyce came into West Brom in December 2020, and soon suffered the first relegation of his managerial career. Hodgson was tasked with saving Watford last season, and took them from 18th to 19th. Ranieri was supposed to provide a similar level of seasoned know-how at Fulham and Watford, but failed on both occasions.

The average age of all the Premier League managers who took control of teams in the 2018/19 season was 51, and three of them were over the age of 60. Currently, the average of all Premier League managers is 47, and none of them are older than 59. 

Management is increasingly a game for younger men, with clubs showing more willingness to invest in potential, rather than previous results. Chelsea’s targeting of Potter, a manager with huge promise but no experience with an elite club, is proof that they too have been consumed by these modern demands.