I’ve been critical of Gale in the past, but there’s no argument with their results this year. So, yeah, this is a surprise and must be driven by non-soccer reasons. #BAONPDX

I also don’t think the cupboard is bare, either. I think we’ve seen enough from a number of players to see that there’s an *it* in there.

But I don’t think the Timbers have a coach who has shown capability to bring out those *its* consistently in a way that fosters stable success. #RCTID

Ha, okay. Thank goodness. Ever since people started center-aligning press statements I’ve lost all faith in humanity’s ability to release a statement in a manner suitable for human consumption.

Is that issued in the Notes App?

I’m afraid it would be a pretty boring podcast right now. My principal take would be that a coach who has led two different clubs and various iterations of rosters to the following seasons probably isn’t great:

2021: 1.21 PPG
2022: 1.41 PPG
2023: 1.00 PPG (15 games)
2024: 1.38 PPG
2025: 1.29 PPG

People weren’t wrong to not expect much from the Thorns this year. They were clearly undergoing a generational transition and had a tsunami of injuries and absences.

But at some point you just have to give them credit for overcoming that, right? #BAONPDX

I think it stopped working with Gio in Portland. Which happens — it’s rare for even a good coach to stay at one club for much longer than that.

But unsuccessful coaches like Neville don’t usually stay at the same level for as long as he has.

Gio Savarese got into his sixth season in MLS before he was let go.

Neville will enter his sixth MLS season next year.

Savarese went to two MLS Cups and won a secondary trophy. Neville has never finished above 1.41 PPG. #RCTID

There has to be a book to be written about how the rash of billionaires losing their minds is caused by them becoming increasingly isolated from society, pickling their brains online, and having everybody around them treat them like this.

My not at all hot take is that before MLS was really playing in the int’l transfer market, the risk-benefit calculation here was obvious. Now that they are, it’s a much closer call.

Plus: International alignment; better playoffs timing

Risks: Turning some signs of softening attendance into a slide

So, in this most charitable formulation, Neville didn’t change much for Game 3. He made their structure more obvious on the team sheet and doubled down on creating a problem that San Diego had solved by the half hour of Game 2. And the result was the same as the middle 30 mins of Game 2. #RCTID

The best defense I could make of Neville here is that they played in a de facto 3 in Game 2 with Mosquera as a right wingback.

But SD solved that problem after the half hour in Game 2, and the Game 3 press was markedly more aggressive and less organized. #RCTID

I suppose I’m a little puzzled at how to reconcile those two statements. But, yeah, that’s probably only the second most puzzling thing about that statement.