It’s pretty impressive to be below 0.5pts/game. If you’re really committed to not scoring and not defending you can be <1 pt/game, but to put up <0.5 you really need something special: hustle, luck, strategy, team of fit players - any of these and you’re not going to be able to maintain that rate.
Worst seasons in Galaxy history 1. 2017: 8–18–8; +45 -67; (32 points/0.94ppg) 2. 2020: 6–12–4; +27 -46; (22 points/1ppg)* 3. 2023: 8–12–14; +51 -67; (36 points/1.06ppg) 4. 2008: 8-13-9; +55 -62; (33 points/1.10ppg) 5. 2007: 9–14–7; +38 -48; (34 points;1.13ppg) 6. 2003: 9–12–9; +35 -35; (36 points/1.2ppg) 7. 2006: 11–15–6; +37 -37; (39 points/1.22ppg) To avoid a historically bad year, LA needs to average 1.3 ppg from here on out. A positive scenario is finishing 8-17-9 (33 points/0.97ppg), winning a little over. Third of the remaining games, and losing no more than one. An average scenario would be 4-21-9 (21 points/0.62ppg), and a bad scenario would make 2014 DC United look good. It is interesting to note that if Vanney sees out the season, he’d be the only manager with two seasons in the top five worst. Sigi’s is on there twice in 2003 and 2017, but he inherited 2017 from Onalfo. Having 2020 on the list is questionable given that was the weird COVID year.
I think the cost was higher than it had to be. Some poor decisions were made in the offseason. Our additions/replacements other than Ramirez were poor choices.
Ramirez decision was questionable, not that he isn’t a productive forward, but that he’s 34 and we don’t seem to realize that we are in a rebuilding phase (not a reload phase). I think at this point we could have endured whatever “worse” results we would have put up to still have $250K of GAM. And maybe 11 games for some of our young attackers would have helped them develop. We should be in full rebuilding mode, parting ways with any overpriced old players, and maybe even sell Pec or Paintsill if you can’t find a way to keep them long term, or if they have good value and you can improve the team (I’d have Puig on the list too but I can’t imagine after injury he’s going to have good value to move). Also with a rebuild it would be a good idea to bring in some new leadership…
FYI - don't know if Vanney survives this disaster - but the FO might very well be treating this as a re-build year but just not advertisting it (and why would they?). All roster decisions and moves seem to be made towards creating as much salary cap flexibility for 2026 as possible, when Puig will (hopefully) be available for the full year.
I agree with your last sentence. The rest I disagree with. First, no one expected us to suck this bad this season - see all the preseason predictions on this board for proof. I was the most skeptical and I had us as a mid table team until Puig returns. So we didn’t expect to be complete rebuild mode. Second, we wouldn’t be in complete rebuild mode if Kuntz had picked up a couple of decent midfielders in the offseason. We couldn’t afford stars but we could have done a lot better than midfielder Sanabria and “forward” Nascimento. Neither one has a single assist or goal. And I don’t buy the “give them time” argument. Nascimento has exactly 1 regular season goal and one assist in his entire 5 season career. And it only takes 30 minutes of watching Sanabria to see his many weaknesses. I don’t know what happened to our scouting department but these were two useless pickups. And I don’t think our salary cap prevented us from bringing in a high priced, high-quality U-22 DP (not sure, am I correct about that?). And release any of our 3 Ps over my dead body. They are the only significant assets (other than our name) we have and were 90% of the reason we won the Cup last year. The only reason our two healthy Ps aren’t producing is because we (unnecessarily) have the worst non-winger midfield in MLS. But yes, we also need new leadership! Agree 1000%!
I see the logic but I think that is giving them too much credit. I believe the FO didn’t know we were losing Dejan until the last week. We thought our D would be improved with full-time Garces. We didn’t know Paintsil would be injured either. So we just needed to find a Delgado replacement to theoretically be a decent playoff level team this year, especially with Puig likely coming back in August-ish.. So no reason to go into complete rebuild mode. Also even if you want to rebuild why not sign youth with true potential? Our new younger signees (Sana and Nasci) are long term USL level players in my opinion. Some other teams have 75-100k youth that can run circles around them. It was just terrible off-season decision making. And we are paying for it, big time.
They knew Dejan was in the last year of his contract and wanted more money than they could pay. So I think they knew he was leaving. Same with Delgado. Even Josh on COTG was talking as early as January that he didn't think Dejan was staying. But yes, whether trying to reload or rebuild, they've made bad decisions (also trying to feature a different goalkeeper before he was ready and screwing up the first 4 goals with goalkeeper mistakes).
As for Vanney's return, Baxter's article in the LA Times suggests the team's start is doing no favors to his agent in trying to move along negotiations on Vanney's contract
That is good news! It gives me hope that Kuntz is not accepting of mediocrity and will fix our current problems.
I bet Vanney regrets not agreeing to whatever they were offering before the season starts. I can't think of a worse change in bargaining power than going from "MLS winning coach" to "longest winless streak in league history coach".
if they would have advertised it, expectations from the fanbase would have been tempered a bit, the common sense fans would have been fine floundering for a year to give Puig a chance to fully recover and would have also allowed the FO to test out the Academy kids without the immense pressure from fans expecting instant results. so in my opinion advertising their intentions would have allowed the fans to adjust their expectations but also to agree with your point a bit, if it was a rebuild on the down low, Vanney is not the guy for a rebuild, as I recall he likes to say his system is complicated and its not easy to grasp and that is not what you want to have with young players in a rebuild so if they announce it and the play on the field doesn't reflect it, then they have to answer to it, so they left it alone and now we have whatever this is. I don't think Vanney has the strategic wherewithal or the acumen for tactical strategies to run a rebuild, he is more effective when he has a talented roster who can overcome his deficiencies and I think because of that the FO was going to stay non committal on the future of the club, till things went one way or the other and as we can see it went way the wrong way.
Can't disagree with anything Doyle wrote here (except calling Reus a "cipher," which is fancy columnist-speak in lieu of real analysis). https://www.mlssoccer.com/news/mls-tiers-revisited-ranking-all-30-teams
"cipher" is such an odd word to use here, he could have said a non-factor, a disappointment, a waste of space but he went with "cipher" makes me think he is mailing it in and dipping into the A.I. well I know the article is a recap of his previous article but it would have been nice for him to have expounded on that last line in the article and not just leave it hanging
Eh I think in this case he’s being testy because they’re setting worst in league history records and it’s gonna get him fired or not have his contract renewed. He’s been getting a little more surly at every post-match presser, which I think is understandable.
I agree 100%. But part of leadership is owning responsibility. If he would just acknowledge that reporters and fans have a right and a valid reason to ask questions then he would a) better received and b) a healthier and happier individual. Because until you look objectively at what is causing your failures you can’t fix them. By criticizing the questioners and saying we need new “pieces” he isn’t taking any ownership for the Galaxy problems. It’s all laid on the reporters and players fault. Look I understand why some feel a bit sorry for him. I do as well. But the answer isn’t to ignore the elephant in the room - everyone (including likely him subconsciously) knows it’s there. Better to talk about it directly. How about this from Vanney - “Hey I first want to say we need to do better. Much better. We have been badly underperforming for our talent level and that falls on me, the coach. So I’m taking the following steps to make sure we change directions, onto a path of success. One - expectations in training are going to be much higher higher going forward. Players set their work habits in practice so anyone not giving their best both mentally and physically in training will find their butts firmly on the bench. And that applies to everyone, even our star players. I would rather lose a game than field a team giving less than 100%. Working harder and smarter than our opponents has to once again become the whole foundation of the Galaxy. Second I’m going to bring in outside consultation to help us solve our longstanding problem on defense. We are too talented to be giving up 2, 3 4 goals a game. So it’s clear that what we are doing is not working. So I want to bring in the best minds to help us solve this issue. We have started a search for an assistant who has a track record of building stingy defenses. Mr. Kurtz backs me in this effort. And third, I want all the fans to know I feel your pain. You have always only wanted what was best for the team and you let us know, very loudly I might add, when our organization started coasting. That is what makes you the best fan base in the league, one that personally inspires me to work harder and do better. So thank you. Now excuse me, I have work to do!”
Fairly long Paul Tenorio piece "Already set up to struggle, MLS Cup champion LA Galaxy are snakebitten, too" from The Athletic that showed up in Apple News today ( https://apple.news/AH_WgWuECQRigriQgube4xQ no idea if it's paywall). A lot of diagrams on chance creation and how not having Puig really affects a lot of things. Kuntz: the roster challenges from winning are part of the issue. But every winning team deals with it. "We took a little bit of an aggressive stance because we thought we had a chance to win. The league rules stuff is a crutch. It’s a reality, but it’s not unique to us." Reus, only 322 minutes and no production for a max-TAM player is deadly. Recent games, dangerous offensive chance creation has increased from 15.8 over the first 6 games to 19.5%. But that it isn't enough. Last year's Galaxy were #4 in chance creation, now tied with the Fire at 15. Vanney is quoted “I do think that the results build confidence, right, it builds that positivity and that energy that you want to use to build momentum,” Vanney said. “So I think those are key. Nobody has played us to a way that we feel like we were overwhelmed or we were really behind it in a game. And that’s why I think the margins are thin for us to turn this thing into positive results. “It’s not big things, it’s little things.” _____ In most ways nothing new and not anything we don't see in this BS echo chamber or even with the MLS commentators. Without the team failing to keep giving up cheap goals and some kind of creativity coming from somewhere in the midfield, the season seems lost.
The Vanney question is a tough one because we have seen what he can do when he has had time with the players and the roster is set up for his tactics and style of play to work. I think he can salvage his position if he can start picking up a few wins here or there and build up some momentum that can be carried into 2026. On the other hand, that seems very unlikely to happen and if we are approaching 20 games without a win, which is actually possible given how bad we are and the next set of games after the SKC game, I think the front office sacks him. Regardless of whether one thinks its a good idea or not to make a coaching change, I don't think any club that takes itself seriously is going to be able to withstand the optics of allowing a manager to stay on who set a record for games without a win that will likely never be broken.