I think you made a painfully good point that the Thorns aren’t just poor as a squad, they’re ugly and boring to watch. Even as a fan, that was excruciating.
At this point what’s the downside of handing Norris a pink slip?
Part of me wonders if he goes to KK and asks to return to a position coach position. Acknowledge that it was a step up and move to another role. Doubtful, but it’s obviously not working
Yeah, two strikes on the last two coaches in a short time period, do we really want to give her a chance at strike three which could carry over into Sophia's "decision year"? Seems risky. Surely there's an unqualified Canadian coach who has caught her eye.
Eh, I think the team won in spite of her during a down period of the league. We were essentially a super team when there wasn't another super team and if memory serves, the top teams besides the Thorns all had some issues they were dealing with.
Not sure I agree. It was only two seasons ago, and I wouldn't say we quite had a super team. Wave and Reign were both very good that year, and Houston and KC were not far behind. I do think Wilkinson played a back three early in that season for far too long, causing us to drop points and therefore ultimately the Shield, but I don't fault her hugely for anything else.* Well, she did play Sinclair too much - that Canadian blind spot - but Sinclair had more to offer then than she did last year or this.
Well, I have a terrible memory so I probably shouldn't comment further, but I remember being very underwhelmed by RW and quite often annoyed at her nonsensical decisions. I'm not close to a knee-jerk blame the coach for everything guy, either. But it did seem like week after week of "what the hell is she doing?" Don't need to relitigate that, though. Anyway, ok, maybe RW wasn't a strike, but I still don't have faith in KK making a good coaching hire.
I think the faith is in the Bhathals more than KK, at least for me. I think there's a decent chance they'll be reasonably involved, at least with convincing prospective coaches that the project is one they should have interest in.
I wasn't a fan of RW, but she did win a title. I wouldn't call that a failure lol. Norris was also a transition coach who she didn't have the authority to replace until a few months ago. We haven't really seen her conduct a full coaching process with real backing.
KK wasn't a part of that process either, that was all the prior FO. KK got hired DURING Rhian's interview process. There's an interview where Rhian was talking about it....she actually said she thought for sure that she WOULDN'T get the job because KK was just hired.
Not a failure, but I don't think she's a great coach or anything. Great team that year. It happens in sports that teams win it all in spite of their coach.
Why didn't she have the authority to replace Norris at any time? Seems that's the very definition of a transition coach - imminently replaceable.
I thought RW struggled in the early season but I think by the end of the year she had a real handle on the team and their play improved. I actually would have liked to see how she did in her second year.
I agree that she wasn't a great coach, but she still won a title and that's not an easy thing to do in the NWSL. As we're seeing this year, talent only gets you so far.
Paulson wasn't going to support (or fund) going out and hiring a splashy new coaching name, just like he wasn't funding any new signings or putting any money into the club at all once he became a lame duck. She could have fired Norris, but we probably would have ended up with Rob Gale as interim for even longer....and Norris did almost win a shield and was minutes away from making a final even if we did all know he wasn't a particularly good coach.
I would think a splashy new coach would have possibly increased the purchase price to more than cover the cost of the coach. But you might be right about that.
And yeah, the fact that Norris almost won a shield and was minutes away from making a final is pretty much my point about teams winning in spite of the coach.
All signs point to Paulson just being out entirely after he was forced to sell. I don't think a new coach increases value in any way.
As I've said, I don't think RW was great or anything, but she was on an upwards trajectory (i.e she started poorly and got better) whereas Norris started well and has gotten steadily worse and worse to the point of crisis. I don't know that it's possible to win a title in spite of truly bad coach, though I agree that neither Norris or RW were of the caliber we want to see in Portland and the roster talent helped both of them look better than they were.
We only have 1 more roster spot. They gotta drop some of those other contracts if they want some roster flexibility before the next window reopens in the fall...they've got until the 22nd and then it's set. They outta: drop Mallie McKenzie and/or Marissa Sheva, as well as Kozal or Asman. Find a starting keeper so that Hogan can continue to develop as a #2. Find a high-level starting CB. I'd also prefer a better RB because I still don't think Reyna is a starter yet, but we don't need another FB without dropping one. And of course, first thing's first, say goodbye to Norris.
Reyes is much better playing on the left. I don't know if this is because of better centerback support or natural inclination. Müller can play either side it seems. Centerback is a higher priority with all three that played last night just not that good. I'm sorry to say that about Saurbrunn but she looks more and more washed to me.
CB has been and is definitely THEE priority for sure. That has been obvious for like 2 seasons honestly. Reyes, even on the left, has just never looked quite comfortable to me. Everytime she has the ball I wince because I'm waiting for a poor pass, touch, or turnover. She doesn't look confident and isn't fast or technically good with the ball. Her positioning is poor. And she's not really good getting forward either....her and Morgan don't work well together yet. Morgan even said in a post game presser recently that things are so much easier with Kling, for her. Not that I'm advocating for playing Kling a full 90....but maybe we should try a few games with her starting (maybe until half) and see if that doesn't help with us bleeding goals early every single game. Reyna has had some bright spots defensively and with good tackles, but she isn't a starter yet to me....
Thing is, though, is that EVERYONE looks bad, so I'm willing to cut some slack...I wanna see them all with a coach who knows what they're doing. But for now, we'd be better off if KK hadn't mistakenly lost Kuikka with no backup plan. Kuikka and Muller would be a much better duo imo.
When you say Reyes is slow it brings up a chronic problem which is team speed. This is especially true in the defense. They are painfully slow. The midfield is also slow except for perhaps Sugita. Coffey is smart and determined but not fast. When they play her as a single pivot she can be beat without any make up speed around her. The coach sucks but there are serious team construction problems too.
I think it CAN be an issue if the mids and defs are collectively slow and the opposing coach knows this and has a team to exploit it. I think it's a legit concern, especially if you are playing a high line. Losing foot races over the top and exposing your goalie gets old after a while.
From my perspective, cutting Asman or Kozal shouldn’t preclude them from making a move for a goalie. Late round picks don’t often make good teams. The roster slot shouldn’t be an issue unless they are against the cap.
I agree another CB would be useful and I probably swap Reyes and Mueller at this point.
I'm hopefully believing Lowdon must have passed on the Interim HC job. If it wasn't offered to her, and instead LeBlanc turned the club over to another coach with Canadian Youth experience, that would be a (yet another) demonstration of Canada-bias incompetence from someone who shouldn't be the GM.
Owners passed the first test (Smith contract, talking about facilities, expanded staff off the field) but they are failing this test. It's obvious this coach is done.
I don't necessarily think it's fair to say they're failing this test at this point. They had to let Norris try.
His team earned a second place finish in the regular season and a loss in the semi final to the eventual national champion. And our star was out with injury. And he was well-liked.
I mean, I don't have any confidence in Norris at this point, but if I were an owner, I wouldn't be eager to make that change without a reason like this.
At this point, I hope those conversations are happening in the FO. But I wouldn't say it's a failure just yet.
No, I get that. But the underlying metrics have been poor for quite some time. I don’t think it was unreasonable, especially given that they got control of the team late, to keep him. But you needed a quick hook in case this happened.
I'm sure the last thing they wanted to do, 4 matches into their ownership, having paid a record-high price for the franchise, is see their team laying flat on their backs at least 2 points behind every other team and possibly 11 points out of 1st by day's end.
I would assume Karina and ownership will be having a difficult conversation. Ownership could delegate operations power to President/GM, who would consult with ownership before firing a head coach. Or, ownership could tell President/GM they want the change to be made.
OTOH seeing a half-filled Providence for June's Courage rematch puts a whole other spin on "How are you liking your investment?"
Best to act through your manager--we all observe pro teams with overly "pro"active owners--but it's time to be specific and on-message: "we find the team's performance to be inadequate, fix this."
I'm wondering how much input KK has here. Do GM's have the authority to fire the coach? Is that her job, or does she essentially wait until management say to do something? If she does have authority there, she should be getting the heat and pressure.
I would think the Bthals and LeBlanc are telling each other “we got one coming up we should win and that will end all this Norris out talk”. If they play decently and lose, say by a fluke goal, like an own goal, Norris is around another week. If they show again like a couple of days ago, and lose, in front of the home crowd, he’s done. They can’t not react to these woeful performances and retain their own credibility.
Some (most) GMs do have that authority because it's their job to have that authority, but some don't if ownership either doesn't trust them or wants to make their own decisions. My guess is that the KK doesn't have full authority, but that's just me speculating. "Management" IS the GM, in theory, but sometimes ownership likes getting involved.....usually for the worse.
(In our case, ownership getting involved might be for the best in the short term, but you really want a GM ownership has the confidence in to do their job without interference)
One thing to add cause I've been stewing on this for a few weeks- Norris DOES have a "style" he wants to play. It's the same shape, same stuff, same issues week after week. There IS direction of some sort going to players.
The problem is that it's REALLY BAD direction. It's a tactic that just doesn't work. It's worse than having some sort of complex system that the players aren't adapting to because I can watch and re-watch the game tape and write the Thorns section of my NWSL column every week and identify exactly what they're trying to do and why it doesn't work. Norris or the players saying "we need to work on some things, we know how we're supposed to play and we're just not executing" isn't reassuring! I can see Sam Coffey sitting alone in a sea of opposition jerseys with no options week in week out, and I can that the midfielders are playing so high and flat that the there's no passing angles. It's easy to see the shape, which is why it's also easy to see that he doesn't understand what his players are good at and how to design a system that maximizes the talent.
It seems like we are clogging our own midfield. There is not a ton of wide play, especially with Reyes who comes central all the time - Kling at least stays wide. Was there a single cross into the box from open play? If there was, it must have been a poor one that I promptly forgot.
Also, our set piece play was terrible on both sides of the ball. At one stretch we had something like 5 corners/free kicks in succession on which it seems like we had zero touches. How is that even possible? Coffey's delivery was not bad.
I don't really see it as clogging because there's really nobody home in the midfield- It's nearly vacant because of how high the two eights are sitting. It probably gives off the appearance of being clogged because of how dysfunctional it is and how easy it is *for other teams* to clog it up.
So...enlighten me. What the fuck IS he trying to do? How does this 'system" work when it DOES work? All I see is a mass of bodies pushing up and Coffey and the defenders playing long balls out of the back to them.
I agree that the mess results in no "triangles"; there's never anyone running into space for a forward or diagonal pass. It's just a long entry ball and then people running laterally or passing backwards out of pressure.
That's my point. The system doesn't have a way of working because (imo) it's a simple-to-defend, objectively bad system. I *think* the intent is to overload the attacking areas and get Smith in space, but who knows. I'm not seeing anything you're not.
I could be completely wrong, of course- I'm just a random guy watching the games with a particular interest in the tactics. But I'm seeing the same players in the same spots week after week, which tells me that they're being told to be in those positions. I'd love to to hear him try to articulate how he wants the team to play, and particularly what he thinks the midfield should be doing so that I can compare that to what I see when I'm watching. He may earnestly think that he can still have his team play pretty soccer through the midfield despite how he sets them up....which is an even bigger issue if true because it shows he legitimately doesn't understand the basics.
But...that's...it's not rocket science. That's literally U-8 level tactics-level stuff, I don't expect Barcelona, but...how the hell does he expect his "system" to work even if his players can do it like he wants them to, if that's what he wants them to do?
It might just be as simple as he isn't capable of designing a tactic and communicating it to his team. I was willing to give him a chance because I thought that as a professional soccer coach (GK or not), he must be able to reach the ground floor of competency....but that doesn't seem to be the case.
That's what made tonight's matchup, though expected, so jarring for me: You watch the Courage play and the contrast is WILD. Nahas has total buy-in and even when they make bad mistakes --like they did a few times today-- they keep playing the same way because that's the way they're drilled and they trust the system because it works for them. The Thorns players look like they know where to stand, but not why they're standing there.
Said it in the game thread, but the simple fact is that every single player on the team is probably playing the worst soccer of their career right now. That's about as clear a sign of a severe coaching issue as you can get.
Over to you, Bhathals! You got Soph to sign, time to show your hand! Eight teams make the playoffs and there's still plenty of time (hell, we're somehow only three points back of 8th) but the clock's a- tickin'
I tried to manage expectations for this year after last, but this is so much worse than I thought it could be. Last year, at least we had some ups to provide a little hope after the downs. Ugh.
I don’t think he warrants main character status. He’s probably one of the guys at Chotskies. I’m just hoping Gale isn’t the annoying guy who prides himself on his flare
“We actually have somebody (Norris) who’s probably more ideal for this (technical director) position, because if you look at him, he’s a processor. He’ll be up in the stands. One of his strengths is to analyze and process, then come down to communicate what needs to happen.”
KK may very well be correct in terms of Norris being more suited to an upstairs role, but this is an objectively hilarious way to frame it given *he very clearly failed to communicate what needs to happen to his players* to the point where he got fired.
There was so much bad with his analysis in almost every conceivable aspect, that I think the Peter Principle with a splash of Canadian bias is at play here. I'd say he tops out as GK coach. No shame in that, though. And he seems like a good guy and the players seem to like him.
You may be right. It's also very possible, like KK said, that his skillset is better suited for a behind the scenes analysis role. I guess we'll find out. Adjustments, player management, and tactics is an entirely different skillset than scouting.
I do like the (rather obscure) players the Thorns brought in, and it sounds like he had a role to play in the scouting there. I don't know what the chance is that he'll be a good technical director, but I don't want to assume he won't be good at it just because he wasn't a good coach. Whether he *deserved a promotion* is a different story lol.
Yeah, scouting I can see. I didn't think his new role meant "scouting," though. I thought it meant more of a bird's eye view of the team and players, which is where it seemed his "analysis" of player usage, tactics, etc. seemed pretty poor.
It sounds like it's a little bit of both. If he's in charge of the tactical direction of the club, that would suck...but I don't realllly think that what he'll be doing. I think it's reasonable that he could be good at influencing roster choices but suck at coaching, which seems to be what KK thinks.
Right, and I think she's probably right. Still a funny way to say it given everyone's been making fun of him for watching the first part of games from the stands lol
I'd have preferred Lowdon too, but Gale does have head coaching experience as well and has been here longer. The fact that it's unlikely to be for more than a few months makes me less concerned overall.
We are missing the obvious - all of this is due to the new kit. This is what you get when you stray from your roots.
The Doritos Curse! Club that goes crunch!
Lol I need that on a shirt also
Diehard fan here …and I turned the game off before it finished. It was truly painful and boring. Breaks my heart 💔
I think you made a painfully good point that the Thorns aren’t just poor as a squad, they’re ugly and boring to watch. Even as a fan, that was excruciating.
At this point what’s the downside of handing Norris a pink slip?
Part of me wonders if he goes to KK and asks to return to a position coach position. Acknowledge that it was a step up and move to another role. Doubtful, but it’s obviously not working
Karina LeBlanc, you're on the clock!
Yeah, two strikes on the last two coaches in a short time period, do we really want to give her a chance at strike three which could carry over into Sophia's "decision year"? Seems risky. Surely there's an unqualified Canadian coach who has caught her eye.
Ummm. Wilkinson was a good hire who made a horrendous judgment and Norris was an interim who she should have moved on from.
Eh, I think the team won in spite of her during a down period of the league. We were essentially a super team when there wasn't another super team and if memory serves, the top teams besides the Thorns all had some issues they were dealing with.
Not sure I agree. It was only two seasons ago, and I wouldn't say we quite had a super team. Wave and Reign were both very good that year, and Houston and KC were not far behind. I do think Wilkinson played a back three early in that season for far too long, causing us to drop points and therefore ultimately the Shield, but I don't fault her hugely for anything else.* Well, she did play Sinclair too much - that Canadian blind spot - but Sinclair had more to offer then than she did last year or this.
---------------------------
* At least not on the field.
Well, I have a terrible memory so I probably shouldn't comment further, but I remember being very underwhelmed by RW and quite often annoyed at her nonsensical decisions. I'm not close to a knee-jerk blame the coach for everything guy, either. But it did seem like week after week of "what the hell is she doing?" Don't need to relitigate that, though. Anyway, ok, maybe RW wasn't a strike, but I still don't have faith in KK making a good coaching hire.
I think the faith is in the Bhathals more than KK, at least for me. I think there's a decent chance they'll be reasonably involved, at least with convincing prospective coaches that the project is one they should have interest in.
I wasn't a fan of RW, but she did win a title. I wouldn't call that a failure lol. Norris was also a transition coach who she didn't have the authority to replace until a few months ago. We haven't really seen her conduct a full coaching process with real backing.
KK wasn't a part of that process either, that was all the prior FO. KK got hired DURING Rhian's interview process. There's an interview where Rhian was talking about it....she actually said she thought for sure that she WOULDN'T get the job because KK was just hired.
That's right, I forgot about that! So I guess KK hasn't really had an actual head coach hiring cycle at all lol
Yep! That was all MP/GW
Honestly, it's all been Sinclair-influenced. This is the first major soccer ops hire in a long time that won't be strongly influenced by Sinclair.
Not a failure, but I don't think she's a great coach or anything. Great team that year. It happens in sports that teams win it all in spite of their coach.
Why didn't she have the authority to replace Norris at any time? Seems that's the very definition of a transition coach - imminently replaceable.
I thought RW struggled in the early season but I think by the end of the year she had a real handle on the team and their play improved. I actually would have liked to see how she did in her second year.
Folks went apeshit with some of her formation experiments, like the 7-1-1-1.
Peaked at the right time, the '22 squad. My only beef was not taking the shield seriously.
Remember when Norris thought we were allowed to have 12 players on the pitch, and Sinclair wears #12?
How awesome, and Freudian, was that?
I agree that she wasn't a great coach, but she still won a title and that's not an easy thing to do in the NWSL. As we're seeing this year, talent only gets you so far.
Paulson wasn't going to support (or fund) going out and hiring a splashy new coaching name, just like he wasn't funding any new signings or putting any money into the club at all once he became a lame duck. She could have fired Norris, but we probably would have ended up with Rob Gale as interim for even longer....and Norris did almost win a shield and was minutes away from making a final even if we did all know he wasn't a particularly good coach.
I would think a splashy new coach would have possibly increased the purchase price to more than cover the cost of the coach. But you might be right about that.
And yeah, the fact that Norris almost won a shield and was minutes away from making a final is pretty much my point about teams winning in spite of the coach.
All signs point to Paulson just being out entirely after he was forced to sell. I don't think a new coach increases value in any way.
As I've said, I don't think RW was great or anything, but she was on an upwards trajectory (i.e she started poorly and got better) whereas Norris started well and has gotten steadily worse and worse to the point of crisis. I don't know that it's possible to win a title in spite of truly bad coach, though I agree that neither Norris or RW were of the caliber we want to see in Portland and the roster talent helped both of them look better than they were.
Instant Reaction:
Coach gotta go.
Hire external consultant to review the Soccer Ops.
Consider the possibility that some trades need to be made to find better mesh of talent.
Go sign another keeper - not necessarily a starter, but not not either.
We only have 1 more roster spot. They gotta drop some of those other contracts if they want some roster flexibility before the next window reopens in the fall...they've got until the 22nd and then it's set. They outta: drop Mallie McKenzie and/or Marissa Sheva, as well as Kozal or Asman. Find a starting keeper so that Hogan can continue to develop as a #2. Find a high-level starting CB. I'd also prefer a better RB because I still don't think Reyna is a starter yet, but we don't need another FB without dropping one. And of course, first thing's first, say goodbye to Norris.
Reyes is much better playing on the left. I don't know if this is because of better centerback support or natural inclination. Müller can play either side it seems. Centerback is a higher priority with all three that played last night just not that good. I'm sorry to say that about Saurbrunn but she looks more and more washed to me.
CB has been and is definitely THEE priority for sure. That has been obvious for like 2 seasons honestly. Reyes, even on the left, has just never looked quite comfortable to me. Everytime she has the ball I wince because I'm waiting for a poor pass, touch, or turnover. She doesn't look confident and isn't fast or technically good with the ball. Her positioning is poor. And she's not really good getting forward either....her and Morgan don't work well together yet. Morgan even said in a post game presser recently that things are so much easier with Kling, for her. Not that I'm advocating for playing Kling a full 90....but maybe we should try a few games with her starting (maybe until half) and see if that doesn't help with us bleeding goals early every single game. Reyna has had some bright spots defensively and with good tackles, but she isn't a starter yet to me....
Thing is, though, is that EVERYONE looks bad, so I'm willing to cut some slack...I wanna see them all with a coach who knows what they're doing. But for now, we'd be better off if KK hadn't mistakenly lost Kuikka with no backup plan. Kuikka and Muller would be a much better duo imo.
When you say Reyes is slow it brings up a chronic problem which is team speed. This is especially true in the defense. They are painfully slow. The midfield is also slow except for perhaps Sugita. Coffey is smart and determined but not fast. When they play her as a single pivot she can be beat without any make up speed around her. The coach sucks but there are serious team construction problems too.
Midfield pace is really not a big issue tbh. The best number 6 in the world is Keira Walsh and she’s not a speed demon.
I think it CAN be an issue if the mids and defs are collectively slow and the opposing coach knows this and has a team to exploit it. I think it's a legit concern, especially if you are playing a high line. Losing foot races over the top and exposing your goalie gets old after a while.
From my perspective, cutting Asman or Kozal shouldn’t preclude them from making a move for a goalie. Late round picks don’t often make good teams. The roster slot shouldn’t be an issue unless they are against the cap.
I agree another CB would be useful and I probably swap Reyes and Mueller at this point.
I'm hopefully believing Lowdon must have passed on the Interim HC job. If it wasn't offered to her, and instead LeBlanc turned the club over to another coach with Canadian Youth experience, that would be a (yet another) demonstration of Canada-bias incompetence from someone who shouldn't be the GM.
Gale has more pro head coaching experience than Lowdon does, just FYI.
(I too would have preferred Lowdon, but it's a short term interim head coach. I don't really care ultimately)
They might have gone with the coach who has been here longer because it's a process they're looking to end by the end of May
Plausible. Take job with obvious offramp or keep one with greater longevity with the organization?
Related, we KNOW they reached out to Kilgore.
Yes? Source?
Just that it would be mismanagement to have not. Question is did she take the call?
Norris can finally watch the whole game from the media box
I lol'd. He can get as technical as he wants now *over there*
Owners passed the first test (Smith contract, talking about facilities, expanded staff off the field) but they are failing this test. It's obvious this coach is done.
I don't necessarily think it's fair to say they're failing this test at this point. They had to let Norris try.
His team earned a second place finish in the regular season and a loss in the semi final to the eventual national champion. And our star was out with injury. And he was well-liked.
I mean, I don't have any confidence in Norris at this point, but if I were an owner, I wouldn't be eager to make that change without a reason like this.
At this point, I hope those conversations are happening in the FO. But I wouldn't say it's a failure just yet.
No, I get that. But the underlying metrics have been poor for quite some time. I don’t think it was unreasonable, especially given that they got control of the team late, to keep him. But you needed a quick hook in case this happened.
I'm sure the last thing they wanted to do, 4 matches into their ownership, having paid a record-high price for the franchise, is see their team laying flat on their backs at least 2 points behind every other team and possibly 11 points out of 1st by day's end.
I would assume Karina and ownership will be having a difficult conversation. Ownership could delegate operations power to President/GM, who would consult with ownership before firing a head coach. Or, ownership could tell President/GM they want the change to be made.
OTOH seeing a half-filled Providence for June's Courage rematch puts a whole other spin on "How are you liking your investment?"
Best to act through your manager--we all observe pro teams with overly "pro"active owners--but it's time to be specific and on-message: "we find the team's performance to be inadequate, fix this."
Yep, because if you're not making the move through the Prez/GM, you're also telling the Prez/GM to freshen up the ol' resume.
Unfortunately, I could see them giving him until the Olympic break to turn it around. By then this thing could be done and dusted
I'm wondering how much input KK has here. Do GM's have the authority to fire the coach? Is that her job, or does she essentially wait until management say to do something? If she does have authority there, she should be getting the heat and pressure.
I would think the Bthals and LeBlanc are telling each other “we got one coming up we should win and that will end all this Norris out talk”. If they play decently and lose, say by a fluke goal, like an own goal, Norris is around another week. If they show again like a couple of days ago, and lose, in front of the home crowd, he’s done. They can’t not react to these woeful performances and retain their own credibility.
Some (most) GMs do have that authority because it's their job to have that authority, but some don't if ownership either doesn't trust them or wants to make their own decisions. My guess is that the KK doesn't have full authority, but that's just me speculating. "Management" IS the GM, in theory, but sometimes ownership likes getting involved.....usually for the worse.
(In our case, ownership getting involved might be for the best in the short term, but you really want a GM ownership has the confidence in to do their job without interference)
One thing to add cause I've been stewing on this for a few weeks- Norris DOES have a "style" he wants to play. It's the same shape, same stuff, same issues week after week. There IS direction of some sort going to players.
The problem is that it's REALLY BAD direction. It's a tactic that just doesn't work. It's worse than having some sort of complex system that the players aren't adapting to because I can watch and re-watch the game tape and write the Thorns section of my NWSL column every week and identify exactly what they're trying to do and why it doesn't work. Norris or the players saying "we need to work on some things, we know how we're supposed to play and we're just not executing" isn't reassuring! I can see Sam Coffey sitting alone in a sea of opposition jerseys with no options week in week out, and I can that the midfielders are playing so high and flat that the there's no passing angles. It's easy to see the shape, which is why it's also easy to see that he doesn't understand what his players are good at and how to design a system that maximizes the talent.
It seems like we are clogging our own midfield. There is not a ton of wide play, especially with Reyes who comes central all the time - Kling at least stays wide. Was there a single cross into the box from open play? If there was, it must have been a poor one that I promptly forgot.
Also, our set piece play was terrible on both sides of the ball. At one stretch we had something like 5 corners/free kicks in succession on which it seems like we had zero touches. How is that even possible? Coffey's delivery was not bad.
I don't really see it as clogging because there's really nobody home in the midfield- It's nearly vacant because of how high the two eights are sitting. It probably gives off the appearance of being clogged because of how dysfunctional it is and how easy it is *for other teams* to clog it up.
So, is it the outside backs who are clogging our midfield? Is it our mids who are clogging our midfield?
So...enlighten me. What the fuck IS he trying to do? How does this 'system" work when it DOES work? All I see is a mass of bodies pushing up and Coffey and the defenders playing long balls out of the back to them.
I agree that the mess results in no "triangles"; there's never anyone running into space for a forward or diagonal pass. It's just a long entry ball and then people running laterally or passing backwards out of pressure.
How the fuck does that actually work?
That's my point. The system doesn't have a way of working because (imo) it's a simple-to-defend, objectively bad system. I *think* the intent is to overload the attacking areas and get Smith in space, but who knows. I'm not seeing anything you're not.
I could be completely wrong, of course- I'm just a random guy watching the games with a particular interest in the tactics. But I'm seeing the same players in the same spots week after week, which tells me that they're being told to be in those positions. I'd love to to hear him try to articulate how he wants the team to play, and particularly what he thinks the midfield should be doing so that I can compare that to what I see when I'm watching. He may earnestly think that he can still have his team play pretty soccer through the midfield despite how he sets them up....which is an even bigger issue if true because it shows he legitimately doesn't understand the basics.
But...that's...it's not rocket science. That's literally U-8 level tactics-level stuff, I don't expect Barcelona, but...how the hell does he expect his "system" to work even if his players can do it like he wants them to, if that's what he wants them to do?
It might just be as simple as he isn't capable of designing a tactic and communicating it to his team. I was willing to give him a chance because I thought that as a professional soccer coach (GK or not), he must be able to reach the ground floor of competency....but that doesn't seem to be the case.
That's what made tonight's matchup, though expected, so jarring for me: You watch the Courage play and the contrast is WILD. Nahas has total buy-in and even when they make bad mistakes --like they did a few times today-- they keep playing the same way because that's the way they're drilled and they trust the system because it works for them. The Thorns players look like they know where to stand, but not why they're standing there.
We returned from a memorial in the Napa Valley in time to watch, after what proved the eventual winning score had been tallied.
I felt like I was at the second memorial of the day, but without champagne.
Do something, folks, because at this point it's a slow-motion slaying of a once-vibrant squad and you're the ones doing the strangling.
Set my Thornies free.
Was it a memorial for the Oakland A's?
Won't willingly go hang with a bunch of angry people, even with unlimited champagne.
Yet you're still here....
Hopefully our anger is only temporary.
Said it in the game thread, but the simple fact is that every single player on the team is probably playing the worst soccer of their career right now. That's about as clear a sign of a severe coaching issue as you can get.
Over to you, Bhathals! You got Soph to sign, time to show your hand! Eight teams make the playoffs and there's still plenty of time (hell, we're somehow only three points back of 8th) but the clock's a- tickin'
I'll be disappointed if we don't hear that he's gone on Monday, honestly.
Tough to turn this around if it goes much longer. Better to rip off the bandaid now.
I tried to manage expectations for this year after last, but this is so much worse than I thought it could be. Last year, at least we had some ups to provide a little hope after the downs. Ugh.
Same. I thought the sale will stifle our ability to attract top talent and we would regress, but this is ridiculous.
Ditto. I kinda expected the Timbers to suck this year, but at least the Thorns would bring some joy. Nope.
Now we're in last place, the only team with just 1 point.
Leblanc translation: The guy has a contract we have to pay him anyway so here’s a nice job for you. Call if you need something. Maybe a new stapler.
Oh, no, not the big red stapler!
Make it red.
Haha, I had the same thought. Would be a shame to burn down PP after all of the renovations.
I don’t think he warrants main character status. He’s probably one of the guys at Chotskies. I’m just hoping Gale isn’t the annoying guy who prides himself on his flare
And, uhhh, I'm going to need you to come in on, uuuhhh, Saturday.
“We actually have somebody (Norris) who’s probably more ideal for this (technical director) position, because if you look at him, he’s a processor. He’ll be up in the stands. One of his strengths is to analyze and process, then come down to communicate what needs to happen.”
KK may very well be correct in terms of Norris being more suited to an upstairs role, but this is an objectively hilarious way to frame it given *he very clearly failed to communicate what needs to happen to his players* to the point where he got fired.
There was so much bad with his analysis in almost every conceivable aspect, that I think the Peter Principle with a splash of Canadian bias is at play here. I'd say he tops out as GK coach. No shame in that, though. And he seems like a good guy and the players seem to like him.
You may be right. It's also very possible, like KK said, that his skillset is better suited for a behind the scenes analysis role. I guess we'll find out. Adjustments, player management, and tactics is an entirely different skillset than scouting.
I do like the (rather obscure) players the Thorns brought in, and it sounds like he had a role to play in the scouting there. I don't know what the chance is that he'll be a good technical director, but I don't want to assume he won't be good at it just because he wasn't a good coach. Whether he *deserved a promotion* is a different story lol.
Yeah, scouting I can see. I didn't think his new role meant "scouting," though. I thought it meant more of a bird's eye view of the team and players, which is where it seemed his "analysis" of player usage, tactics, etc. seemed pretty poor.
It sounds like it's a little bit of both. If he's in charge of the tactical direction of the club, that would suck...but I don't realllly think that what he'll be doing. I think it's reasonable that he could be good at influencing roster choices but suck at coaching, which seems to be what KK thinks.
This is just her way of saying "We like him, he's a good guy, but he's been in the wrong role."
Right, and I think she's probably right. Still a funny way to say it given everyone's been making fun of him for watching the first part of games from the stands lol
I’m just so relieved I’m gonna keep spamming here 🤷🏽
Any idea why Gale rather the Lowdon? She seems to be the one w recent head coach experience. Seems like a weird reach…
I'd have preferred Lowdon too, but Gale does have head coaching experience as well and has been here longer. The fact that it's unlikely to be for more than a few months makes me less concerned overall.
It's gonna be a process!