I don’t think Ted is really responsuble for Nate’s reaction to their broken relationship, but I think he absolutely bears a lot of fault for the relationship being broken.

At some point these criticisms come off like the readers are just upset you aren’t validating their opinion.

I agree “It is 100% the head coach’s responsibility to know that one of his coaches is bullying players and employees, and it became Beard’s responsibility once he saw it happening and failed to recognize when it wasn’t stopping” but that’s not the same thing as Ted and Beard being responsible for Nate’s heel turn, is…

The Nate storyline should be recognizable for any human being, but especially for those whose professional lives see them serving as mentors. I have been a coach and teacher for over 20 years and try to reach out to others and coach them from a place of kindness and support, like Ted. (Though nowhere nearly as kindly,…

“Ted Lasso isn’t the show that was ever going to deep-dive into the consequences of Sam taking a stand because that’s not the story it’s telling and the world it wants to build. Maybe you find that narratively dissatisfying, but I think that’s different altogether from it being a failure or a missed opportunity.”

I dunno. I’ve tried to keep pace with your issues with this season of Ted Lasso but I think you’ve lost me with this review. I’m not sure that this season has been the smoothest and there’s definitely some withdrawal pangs generally after the extreme high of season one, but I do fear that - like the AV Club’s Lost…

I think that’s a totally valid way to read that scene as well, I just read it differently, because up to that point we’ve not seen Roy have that level of forgiveness to Jamie.

I did think that there was going to be a callback to “the sign” earlier in the season during the final game, and I was a bit surprised there…

You’re not wrong that writing criticism is a personal journey, but there’s no such thing as overthinking a show. Not everyone agrees with that: trust me, I’ve been living with this claim for over a decade now. But as someone whose literal job—and my second job—is to analyze media in a way that many would claim to be…

I think some people have a tendency to project all their frustrations onto one convenient target, and I’m very willing to believe that Nate is exactly that kind of person. Nate’s the guy who shouted at Will because he got upset over a social media post, after all.

Before I start and make it sound like I’m not appreciative, thank you for reviewing this show that I love so much. I always enjoyed reading them.

I can’t really argue with how uneven this episode and this season is. This season ended basically where I thought it would, which is how these characters learn to let go. Or at least to open themselves up. In that way, I find it satisfying, even the path there is a mess.

First of Myles, thank you so much for the reviews and discussion this season. I know it hasn’t always been easy talking about this show, but I have always enjoyed your reviews, especially when it gives me a different perspective.

And the bit about the teacher knowing when to take the paintings away from the kids was lifted straight out of ‘Six Degrees of Separation’.

The narrative says they’ve had a supernaturally good winning streak. You’re assuming that’s on one dude, who is a self-obsessed ticking time bomb BTW, out of four - but we don’t see who it’s on because the focus hasn’t been on the games, it’s been on the things you clearly think are irrelevant or boring or whatever.…

I don’t think the billionaire from Ghana is a fake, but he’s definitely hiding something from Sam and everyone else. I feel like he’s legitimately interested in raising the profile of soccer in Africa and bringing Sam in for that reason, but I think Rupert still has something to do with this.

I think we’ll get a bigger sense of the machinations of Rupert in the next episode.  I don’t think the writing is as sloppy as people think.  Lawrence, Goldstein, Hunt, Sudeikis, et al have been doing this for a while.  I predict that Rupert has been running a long con to either sabotage Richmond (like Rebecca 1 in…

As someone deeply broken when it comes to expectations of verisimilitude, my general rule on this is that it’s fine not to be entirely realistic as long as the streamlining of reality makes the story more effective.

As I said in the review, the whole things makes me suspicious, so I’m not shocked to learn there’s an actual historical analogue to this. But in this case, I’m bereft because it means that Higgins is extremely terrible at his job for not bringing up this very concern, and I hate that for him (and the show).

Writers can’t let a single moment pass without a pop culture reference.

What is bad about Roy and Keeley’s relationship? What aspect of it isn’t working? The show has never even tried to answer these questions.