German tabloid BILD has been the loudest voice on Erik ten Hag’s crash landing at Bayer Leverkusen. Beyond reporting the dismissal itself, BILD pieces and roundups of its reporting claim that long-serving employees at the club privately debated the worst coach of the past 15 to 20 years, with Ten Hag ranking near the top as an overall package. That framing caught fire on social media and fan forums and is now shaping the conversation. It is a stark claim, and it comes alongside BILD’s detailed criticism of his brief tenure, from a poor friendly in Brazil to a lack of spark in team talks.
The official line from Leverkusen’s hierarchy gives the spine of the story. Sporting director Simon Rolfes told BILD that the team lacked clarity in roles and direction, that the club felt the process was moving the wrong way, and that an early break was fairer than letting the situation drift. The dismissal was communicated on Monday at the BayArena, after only three competitive games under Ten Hag.
The sacking was confirmed across major outlets after only two Bundesliga matches. Ten Hag’s side lost the opener to Hoffenheim and then threw away a two-goal and man advantage at Werder Bremen in a 3 to 3 draw. That collapse, with a late equaliser conceded, crystallised doubts about structure and in-game control. Reputable reporting in England characterised the exit as a brutal, historically short tenure that exposed a fractured team dynamic. The picture was of a coach who could not stamp a plan on a reshaped squad.
The raw timeline matters. Ten Hag took over in the wake of seismic change, replacing Xabi Alonso, and did so amid heavy turnover in the squad. The early football was panned as disjointed. German analysis flagged non-existent pressing patterns and muddled opponent preparation. The consequence was that performances did not buy patience, which is a cruel reality at a club that expects a top-four return to the Champions League.
BILD’s post-mortem lays out the internal issues as club leaders saw them. It says Ten Hag kept distance from the hierarchy at key moments, publicly pushed to keep Granit Xhaka after an internal agreement that a sale could happen under the right conditions, and failed to deliver a fiery opening address before Hoffenheim.
More damaging in the daily work, the staff felt the coach and his rebuilt backroom team did not project unity, while players left meetings unsure of tasks on the pitch. Rolfes’ public comments about missing clarity and orientation echo that assessment.
Reporting in the English press added texture. The leadership issues showed up in penalty taker squabbles, early criticism from dressing room leaders, and a wider sense that Ten Hag arrived without the authority to reset standards after Alonso’s era.
Put simply, when your predecessor is adored and your first weeks bring mixed messaging and flat football, your margin for error is thin. It could be a case of unfair judgment here, having lost almost 4-5 first-team players like Frimpong, Jonathan Tah, Florian Wirtz, Granit Xhaka, and Boniface, and getting sacked within two games might be very harsh on the German.
The “worst in 20 years” line is inflammatory, and it is smart to treat it for what it is, a summary of what some long-time staff allegedly told BILD reporters, then amplified online. It reads like a morale verdict rather than a formal club statement. What is on record is that Leverkusen’s decision makers blamed a lack of clarity, that results were alarming, and that they believed ending the experiment early was the lesser error. The claim sits in the grey space where insider gripes, paywalled reporting, and internet echo chambers meet. It captures a mood, not a measurable ranking.
What is undeniable is the historic brevity of the spell. Ten Hag was dismissed barely two months after his appointment and after two league games played. That makes this one of the shortest top-flight appointments in recent Bundesliga memory, and it will follow him for years, no matter how much the context gets debated.
So, how should the episode be read in football terms? Leverkusen bet on a coach with a defined method to navigate upheaval. That method requires time and stable backing. The club lost patience almost instantly, citing a lack of structure and leadership. Whether the coach failed to light the spark or the club pulled the plug before any spark could catch, the marriage never had a chance to become workable.
Ten Hag leaves with a bruised reputation on the continent. Fair or not, perception is currency, and perception now says that his communication, game model, and authority did not travel well from Ajax to Manchester and now to Leverkusen. The counterpoint is that the job he walked into was uniquely turbulent. Replacing a beloved title-winning coach after a massive player exodus tends to break even strong managers if the first weeks do not generate quick wins.
For Leverkusen, the optics are mixed. Swift decisions can be framed as decisive leadership. They can also read as instability. Rolfes all but admitted the hire was the wrong fit, which is a rare and candid admission in elite football. The club must now land a coach who can give simple roles to a remixed squad and stitch together a results-first plan through autumn. Anything less will make this rupture look like a symptom of a wider planning problem rather than a coach-specific failure.
The lesson for everyone is simple. Fit is everything. A clear idea is vital, yet it must be felt in the dressing room and seen on the grass within weeks in modern football. When that does not happen, even big names do not get grace. That reality, more than any tabloid superlative, explains why this ended so fast and why the debate around Ten Hag will remain loud as he seeks the next landing spot.
More must-reads:
Get the latest news and rumors, customized to your favorite sports and teams. Emailed daily. Always free!