From the limited amount that I know, If a football manager is on an open-ended contract, all it really means is that thereās no fixed expiry date. It runs until one side ends it.
The label itself doesnāt tell you much, I don't think. What matters is how the exit is drafted.
Everything turns on the notice period, how termination is defined, and what compensation is triggered. If the deal says six monthsā notice, then that is effectively the clubās exposure. If it allows pay in lieu, the club can end it immediately and settle the notice amount. If there are enhanced protections, minimum guarantees, or specific bonus treatments written in, that changes the equation. If thereās a mitigation clause, any new job the manager takes may reduce what heās owed. That is where the substance sits I reckon.
In football, most of the financial reality is likely driven by those mechanics, not whether the contract is open-ended or fixed-term. A three-year deal can offer far more security than an open-ended one if the payout on dismissal is stronger. Equally, an open-ended contract can still contain meaningful protections if negotiated properly. The drafting is everything.
The same applies if the manager is doing well, such as Jens is now, and another club comes in for him. Open-ended does not mean he can just walk out the door from what I can tell. He is still under contract. If he resigns, he is bound by the notice provisions. In practice, mid-season departures rarely work like that. The interested club approaches the current club, permission is sought to speak, and compensation is negotiated. If there is a release clause or a clearly defined buyout mechanism, the process is cleaner. If not, the current club holds the leverage and can demand a fee or simply refuse to engage.
So, for me, the distinction between fixed-term and open-ended is secondary. What actually determines power, protection, and financial exposure is how the exit terms are structured. That is where the leverage always sits.