It isn’t the incessant managerial changes or the sharp divide between the top clubs and the bottom half that should worry us most, but rather the Premier League has become locked into a negative cycle that is being reinforced with each new iteration. The endpoint of the new order, triggered by TV millions creating a financial chasm between the Premier League and the Championship, could be even shorter life-spans for managers, more chaotic relegation battles, more matches defined simply by attacking team versus defensive team, and greater distances between the big clubs and the rest.
All four of these pressing concerns in English football are inextricably linked, oxygenating each other to create a situation that will only worsen on all fronts. But although the cycle was created by the Premier League’s increasing wealth – and the corporatisation of clubs this created – it has only served to destabilise those hovering on the edge of the division. Rampant short-termism has taken over at boardroom level despite long-term planning - and a clear project - being the only means of escaping the cycle of relegation battles and new manager bumps. With just seven points separating 9th from 19th, many clubs have already become trapped: unable to risk gambling on a new, progressive project but drowning because of it.
Of increasing concern to fans has been the number games defined by one team relentlessly attacking the other, the most obvious symptom of the widening gap between rich and poor clubs; between those afforded the luxury of project-building and those endlessly putting out fires only for new ones ignite.
But there is a cure – and that’s because all of these issues intersect with how clubs choose their managers. If brave and loyal then the cycle can be broken, as Sean Dyche at Burnley and Eddie Howe at Bournemouth have proven. Sadly, the ineptitude in Premier League boardrooms suggests the lifespan of the Premier League manager isn’t going to get longer any time soon – quite the opposite.
This week both David Moyes and Sam Allardyce have been in the spotlight for their respective shortcoming as managers of West Ham United and Everton respectively, which is hardly surprising given both are on poor runs in the Premier League and neither manager is particularly respected by the fan base. But what obviously complicates the situation is that both have were parachuted in during the 2017/18 campaign, their arrivals signalling a dramatic shift towards panic-induced defensive football that would save West Ham and Everton from the ignominy of relegation. And now, post-November mini bump, their positions are already under scrutiny.
The lasting impression is one of managed decline, of a gradual slide punctuated by little hits of tonic as a new boss comes in with fresh ideas but no time to implement them. The longer such a system continues, the more likely it is that we are approaching the first Premier League season in which a club appoints three different managers in the same year; if Allardyce or Moyes go before May it’ll happen in 2017/18.
And the longer the current situation develops the bigger that divide between the top six and the rest will become. If nobody is truly showing patience or believing strongly in a philosophy to build a team around a manager’s ideas, then sackings will become ever more frequent as lopsided squads struggle to motivate themselves as soon as their new head coach loses a couple on the bounce. This in turn will consolidate our 10-team relegation battles, making reactive fire-fighter appointments all the more alluring and accelerating the cycle.
The Premier League is threatening to spiral out of control. Eight managers have already lost their jobs over the course of six months, but as rumours of another change at Everton and West Ham mount this might be just the beginning of the managerial merry-go-round rather than the endpoint.
