3 hours ago
1
Gabriele MarcottiJan 14, 2026, 11:56 AM ET
... and Xabi Alonso makes three! In the space of 12 days, three clubs -- ranked first, fourth and 10th in the world by revenue -- dispatched their incumbent coaches, each of whom had been in charge 18 months or less and each of whom was regarded as a hot up-and-comer at the time of his appointment. Seismic doesn't half begin to describe it.
It may or may not be unprecedented and each story -- Enzo Maresca at Chelsea, Ruben Amorim at Manchester United and Xabi Alonso at Real Madrid -- is slightly different, but there are common threads that can't be ignored.
It's not just the fact that all three are former playmaking midfielders in their 40s, with lived experience outside their native shores, that gave them a worldly, cosmopolitan sheen. Rather that, while results and expectations may have played a role in their departure, it was only part of the story.
The real lesson here is fundamentally one of culture clash. Rightly or wrongly, these clubs felt they didn't mesh with their DNA or their brands -- or, to engage in gratuitous corporate speak, they began to wonder whether they had the same North Star. And that, increasingly, matters at the very top.
- Olley: What happened to make Enzo Maresca quit Chelsea?
- Dawson: Inside Man United's decision to fire Ruben Amorim
- Kirkland, Rodra, Faez: Where did it go wrong for Xabi Alonso, Real Madrid?
The old trope by which results keep you in a job has gone out the window. You can argue whether each of the three maximized the club's resources, but you can't really argue that results are what got them the boot.
Maresca took Chelsea from sixth to fourth in his first season, won the UEFA Europa Conference League and FIFA Club World Cup and had the Blues fifth in the Premier League when he was let go. Amorim took over a Man United side that was 13th in November 2024, slipped to 15th by the end of the season (but reached the Europa League final along the way), and was sixth when he left. Xabi Alonso, meanwhile, took over a Real Madrid side that finished second the year before, took them to the Club World Cup semifinal in July, and exited seven months later with Real Madrid still second in LaLiga.
It's not A-caliber work, maybe not even a strong B, but definitely a passing grade. Until very recently you would have thought that for each of them, this would have been more than enough to stick around, at least until the summer -- not least because axing your coaches mid-season can be messy and expensive. You not only have to pay up their contracts, but you then have to find a new boss at a time when most of the best ones are already coaching elsewhere. Which, in turn, means paying a fortune in compensation and enduring weeks of speculation and distraction in the middle of your campaign.
Not any more, evidently or, rather, it is messy and expensive, which is why in each case the clubs went for a cheap and cheerful solution.
1:52
How Carrick's 'hands-on coaching' could succeed at Man United
Craig Burley discusses Michael Carrick's upcoming games managing Manchester United and why he got the role.
Manchester United have brought back club legend Michael Carrick, who has three top flight games under his belt as a manager. Real Madrid promoted Alvaro Arbeloa, who has a grand total of six months (and 19 league games) coaching adults, from the Real Madrid B-team. Chelsea moved along similar lines, bringing in Liam Rosenior from Strasbourg. He did well there, only losing out on a Champions League spot on the final day of the Ligue 1 season, but it's not lost on anyone that Strasbourg belong to the same ownership group as Chelsea (BlueCo) and are essentially their B-team.
Without knocking any of the three appointments, it's pretty evident that these guys are somewhere between placeholders or low-risk moon shots. If they surpass expectations, they might stick around; if not, they'll be thanked for their service.
So why make the change? In each case, you suspect, the club felt there was a personal disconnect between them and the coach.
Maresca had talked about "not being supported" at Chelsea and after his departure, stories emerged -- presumably directly from the club -- that spoke of a deteriorating relationship with the owners, the club's five directors of football (that's right: there are FIVE of them) and the medical department. Chelsea's model (for better or worse) is about acquiring young talent, developing it and, where appropriate, monetising it by moving it on for a transfer fee, all the while getting results. Maresca embraced it initially, but equally found it hard to do both at the same time, while also keeping a smile on his face.
When he was appointed as Man United's head coach a little over a year ago, Amorim was a massive departure for the club when it came to tactics -- witness the endless discussion of his 3-4-2-1 system -- and maybe the pressure of the job, which comes replete with a phalanx of ex-United players turned pundits scrutinising your every move, got to him. Suffice to say, when he came out with statements that appeared to criticise the club and were wantonly untrue -- "I came here to be the manager, not the coach" even though his job title suggested otherwise -- there was only going to be one outcome. You can't call into question the entire structure of a club and get away with it, not when you have no silverware or signs of evident progress to show for it.
The odds are that Amorim would not have been back next year anyway, meaning his actions only accelerated the process and laid bare a simple truth. Beyond the cliches of the "United Way," his teams simply didn't feel like Manchester United teams. Hence the Old Trafford commentariat talking about the club's DNA: difficult to define, but you know it when you see it. Or, rather, when you feel it.
As for Xabi Alonso, the cardinal sin was that Real Madrid appointed a "system" coach when, in the past 15 years, they've really only thrived with "man-managers" like Zinedine Zidane, Carlo Ancelotti or Jose Mourinho. It's not that these guys don't know their tactics or patterns of play; it's more that they understood that at a club stacked with superstars, you need a different approach, some kind of "Galactico whisperer" vibe. Because, ultimately, at any one time you'll have half a dozen human cheat codes in your team and whatever sophisticated scheme you dream up will likely be worse than what they can conjure extemporaneously on their own.
1:21
How Enzo Maresca's position at Chelsea became 'untenable'
James Olley explains the situations that led to Enzo Maresca leaving Chelsea.
Alonso was a club mainstay for five years during the peak Galactico era and no doubt understood this, but equally, he knew that what got him the job was the system he successfully implemented in his previous gig, at Bayer Leverkusen. And so he tried to thread the needle, making tweaks rather than wholesale changes. The result was a team that, according to critics, "lacked identity."
Would they have cared if, say, Real Madrid had beaten Barcelona on Sunday night in the Spanish Supercopa final? We'll never know. Ancelotti once told me that Real Madrid is the club "where you can be 4-0 up and they'll still boo if they don't like the way you play," but the complaints, the dissatisfaction, the feeling that the club you love isn't quite right were very real.
Fit matters. Vibe matters. The master plan matters. All of this matters to elite clubs who are, ultimately, selling a product. It's not enough for a manager to hit his minimum targets on the pitch; he has to match the model and the brand, and he has to make both owners and fans feel good about where he's taking their team.
Rightly or wrongly, they felt they smelled the stench of negativity and pessimism around their clubs. And they acted. That's sports entertainment in 2026.
