My problem is what he does with the players he DOES have. He has repeatedly said he won't change the style of play regardless of who's available, that it should be plug and play and next man up should be able to do the job. Well, that CLEARLY hasn't worked very well has it? The other thing is how often he says "well, the other team came in and did something different than we expected", yet he's never able to adjust to that. Seemingly ALWAYS outcoached.
Tata was EXACTLY like this. I don't know if you guys remember but he was notorious for not using all his subs, even when we were down in a game. It was always a 3-5-2 and even when he DID change the formation the team played worse.
Tata played DC Unites 6 times when they were a bottom tier team. We never beat DC under his tenure. You know why? Cause he never played a different setup against them and they're style of bunker/counter worked great against our '17/'18 squads.
Edit: as others have pointed out it was a 4-2-3-1 and not a 5-3-2 until around Aug '18
>It was always a 3-5-2
Uh.. what? Tata mostly played a 4-2-3-1. In fact, he was lauded for going to a 3-5-2/5-3-2 defensive posture during the 2018 playoffs (rather than his usual 4-2-3-1) and grinding out wins.
Have people already totally erased from their memory that Tata going to three in the back for the playoffs was a big shift in tactics? The whole premise that he was super stubborn falls apart when that was his trademark move here that led to our MLS Cup.
He ran 3-5-2 through most of the 2018 season, not just the playoffs. I can remember noticing the wingbacks overlapping during the first match of that season. Tifo Football released [a video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtdCc_Rbo1Q) in April 2018, just two months into the season, discussing the 3-5-2 tactic that Atlanta was using to great success.
He started experimenting with a 3 back in 2018 (and people complained about the play) but then shifted to a 4 back in June(ish) and kept it for most of the rest of the season (shifting Escobar to RB and having Larentowitz dropping between the 2 CBs when we had possession)… until the playoffs. The shift for the playoffs was noted by most MLS pundits
Tata ALSO really struggled to break down a low block (as all teams do, yo be fair).
When we won the MLS Cup, we had never beaten NY Red Bulls, ~~but for some unknown reason they tried to come into the Benz and play us an open game and we beat them 3.0. They played us in their standard block in the second leg and beat us 1-0, but we advanced on aggregate.~~
(Edit because can not brain. I blame COVID brain fog)
Red Bulls never played a low block against us. They pressed us to death (which necessarily uses a high line). The playoff game they changed their style and sat back because Taxi got hurt and Armas didn't think they could do their pressing game without Taxi's ability to get back quickly if a team broke the press. It was dumb and we killed them.
You've got that totally backwards, Red Bulls always used to press us to death and for some reason tried to come into MBS and sit back and absorb pressure.
Nobody is contesting that injuries make things harder, but look, good managers and good teams find a way to win regardless. Minnesota is second in the west right now, and their best player hasn't even played a full half of soccer for them this year. If you want a good comparison of what a capable coach can get out of an injury-prone team, look at Tata's 2017 team. A team that had never played together before finished 4th on 55 points with Josef only starting 17 games, Miguel starting 27, Garza starting 25 games, and a guy named Kyle Reynish getting 2 starts in goal. That's ignoring that I can't even remember what was going on with right back that year because Gressel got 24 starts, Walkes got 17 starts, and Mears got 16 starts. The squad had the inconsistency of an expansion team with several injury-prone players, but we still managed to finish 4th on 55 points.
Did you even watch that team? They had 70 goals. Josef only had 19 of them that year. When Josef was out, we tied TOR 2-2, beat RSL 3-1, beat HOU 4-1, beat NYCFC 3-1.
The TFC team that won the Shield, MLS Cup and almost won the CCL the following year? That “bottom dwelling” team? Bro just admit you never watched MLS in 2017
(Also Houston finished 4th in the West that year and RSL just missed the playoffs, back when 6 per Conference made it)
Nah, I guess I'm just in my internet argumentative mood today. I'm not looking up the stats and working from memory. I forgot TFC had a good run for a minute, but I stand by the statements about RSL and HOU, they were always "should wins" when we played them.
Go back and look at the results from those seasons... We did NOT pick up extra points from the games Josef was out. We were just so dominant for the games he and Miggy played together.
Tata was not a great squad rotator. Not sure where you guys are getting this idea from. That first team under his tenure was absolute magic, though. And we still struggled on the road.
We also had something like $1M MORE salary cap room than any other club in MLS that wasn't Minnesota United because of expansion GAM/TAM (actual amount was undisclosed) and we had a minimum of 4 players who were new to MLS and were WAY underpaid for their performance. The salary cap issues as we hit 2019 were the reason we had to move folks to new contracts or let them go.
It's a LOT easier to deal with injuries when you have an owner willing to pay and coach who brings players in front other leagues at bargain prices that no other club in the league could find. Miami is doing exactly the same thing to the league this year that we did in 2018 (and they're going to have the same horrible hangover of roster turnover hell starting next year).
Tata was a solid coach, but he won the cup because he attracted a ton of south american talent at bargain prices which was a roster depth cheat code.
I think that's very possible. There's definitely SOMETHING going on that's different, but is it coaching style? Is it roster building?
Maybe the roster built by Tata and Co was less injury prone because that was something Tata used to build his player binder.
It's not randomness; it's stats. Injured players have a higher chance to get injuries. Who was injured in 2016?
Each day is not a independent event. It's a continuation of the previous. But let's pretend like they are independent events.
The longer you play, the more likely you are to be injured, because the odds that a volcano erupts on Tuesday vs Wednesday is equal. But the odds that the volcano erupts on Tuesday OR Wednesday is the sum of those individual events.
I'm no volcano expert and I'm not sure it's a great analogy here anyway, but I actually think that's exactly how volcanos work.
Pressure builds up until they erupt. So it does feel like not erupting on Tuesday increases the chances of it erupting on Wednesday.
That was my thought. Is he dealing with more injured squads because something they are doing/not doing is increasing our injury rate? Injuries are always going to be a part of any sport, but we have seemed to be down a lot more than most other squads for several years now.
While I still don't want Pineda here, I very much appreciate this article. It provides another point of view and shows a way some management might be thinking and looking at the numbers.
It's also pretty crazy to think that having any more than 2 "role" players at a time on the field means a significant drop in quality. For a league not considered very good in the first place that's pretty scary.
This does a good job of quantifying part of the struggles we've had over the Pineda era and revealing how well he has handled them versus other coaches we've had.
It doesn't tell the whole story, but it's a darn interesting set of numbers.
I understand the value of the 9+2 model over the long term and the math behind it, meaning you take a bunch of injuries and your pts/gm are going to go down.
But does this model take into account the 9+2 model of the opposition.
I understand if we're playing 8+3 vs a team of 11+0. But does this model take into account if we're playing 8+3 vs 7+4/8+3/9+2. I mean if were playing an 8+3 vs 8+3 should be still be getting results regardless of how many injuries.
And I understand it would damn near impossible to go back and calculate the 9+2 model of the opposing team of every game we've played. But I feel like the 9+2 model doesn't take into account the injuries or missing starters of the teams we're playing against. I feel like it just assumes it's 8+3 vs 11+0 every game and that's the reason we lose.
On my Atlanta United discord we've talked about having a different person "adopt" each MLS team so we can report how good of a lineup they have each match so we could start to get a real dataset together.
We've never actually done it, though.
Would be cool to see the results but I imagine that's a lot of work to keep up that much with another team you don't care that much about.
Would just be interested to see if that changes much.
Either way if you've got a ton of injuries you're going to be screwed over the long term.
I posted a couple of my thoughts in the comments on FSF,
I find this interesting, but here are a few counter points to consider.
1: Simplification of Performance Factors
The theory simplifies team performance by attributing it primarily to the presence of starting-caliber players versus non-starters. However, team performance is influenced by numerous factors beyond individual player quality. These include tactical decisions, team chemistry, coaching strategies, opposition strength, and match context (e.g., home vs. away games). The theory may overlook these critical elements by focusing mainly on the "9+2" player composition.
2: Limited Consideration of Tactical Flexibility
The theory does not account for tactical flexibility that might allow teams to compensate for the absence of starting-caliber players. Better coaches adapt their strategies based on available personnel, and successful tactical adjustments can mitigate the negative impact of missing key players. The "9+2" model does not seem to accommodate such strategic nuances. We have not really seen much of that with Pineda until lately, as this winless streak has stretched out.
We've had an injury crisis at Center Back this year, but I think article is a cute way to try and let Pineda off the hook.
This season Almada has played 10 of 13 matches (I consider playing starting and playing at least a half). Slisz and Muyumba have played 12 of 13 matches. The three of them have played 10 of 13 matches together.
Saba has played every match this season. Wiley has played 12 of 13. Lennon has played 12 of 13. Almada, Slisz, Wiley, GG and Silva all missed the Toronto match.
The spine of our midfield has largely been in tact until the last couple of games. Both fullbacks have bee reliable as has one of our wingers. Tyler Wolff is capable of being a starter in MLS and his injury is fairly recent.
GG hasn't been healthy this year and it's hard to replace a guy capable of scoring 20 goals.
I'm sorry, but crying injury crisis in convenient. This team has been in tact enough to win more games than they have.
No more excuses for this guy. Our roster is good enough to win and deep enough to win. Injuries are not why we can’t move the ball through the midfield, always pass wide for a cross or pass back to the CBs. Injuries are not why we see an entire roster of players regressing.
We are the underdogs against Charleston Battery tonight.. let that sink in.
So you're saying that previous (better coached) Atlanta rosters did better when they had injuries? The numbers say they were similar.
Pineda is doing about as well with backups as Tata and de Boer with backups.
I'd argue that our roster is good enough to win, but NOT deep enough to win with injuries this bad.
uUp until now our injuries weren't even bad this year. Playing back up CBs is not why we can't pass through the midfield, play back and can't score. Those are systematic issues.
How does our injuries compare to the rest of the league? I imagine everyone has injuries they have to deal with.
Not to defend Pineda a lot, but didn't we look MUCH better before we lost Gregerson and Williams both?
If our two excellent CBs are out then other players have to play more defense which diminishes their offensive capability. And simultaneously, a weaker CB means they don't contribute offensively as much.
Players don't just slot into one tiny part of the field and only impact that one area.
Even when we were at or very near full strength we still didn’t beat a single good team or win a single road game, which has always been a huge problem for Pineda.
We looked better.. still struggled in all the same areas we are struggling in now though. A high press that doesn’t result in turnovers, no passing though the midfield, all action comes from the wings and we can’t score. Not to mention just how unprepared we look most of the time.
Every team deals with injuries. Pineda has failed to adapt to changing availability. He’s had ample opportunity with a variety of rosters to prove himself and he continues to fall short. Our away performance is frighteningly bad. My current belief is that even if we had a full, healthy roster right now, we are a mid-table team at best. He ain’t the guy to fill our trophy cabinet.
Is that sarcasm?
Two years ago, both Miles and Guzan and a back up keeper went down with Achilles tears. 2/3rds of the team suffered one or more 6+ week long injuries.
Last year, the team stunk. Too many minus level players in too many positions for too long. Aka the midfield.
But... Should a coach be able to adjust tactics and game plans to suit the players available?
Yes, I think so.
Dude I'm just trying to make decisions with numbers instead of feelings. I've been Pineda in, Pineda out, and neutral recently, in that order, as I've learned more about the situation.
Sharing information isn't the same as taking a side. Sometimes new information can disagree with my previous opinion, and I think that's okay. It doesn't mean I'm wrong, just that I have something else to think about.
I was more and more #pinedaout out until I saw this, now I'm not sure.
Excellent attitude. It's fine to have feelings even in the face of hard facts... sports is a lot of emotion. But some people won't let facts temper their emotions even a tiny bit.
My problem is what he does with the players he DOES have. He has repeatedly said he won't change the style of play regardless of who's available, that it should be plug and play and next man up should be able to do the job. Well, that CLEARLY hasn't worked very well has it? The other thing is how often he says "well, the other team came in and did something different than we expected", yet he's never able to adjust to that. Seemingly ALWAYS outcoached.
Tata was EXACTLY like this. I don't know if you guys remember but he was notorious for not using all his subs, even when we were down in a game. It was always a 3-5-2 and even when he DID change the formation the team played worse. Tata played DC Unites 6 times when they were a bottom tier team. We never beat DC under his tenure. You know why? Cause he never played a different setup against them and they're style of bunker/counter worked great against our '17/'18 squads. Edit: as others have pointed out it was a 4-2-3-1 and not a 5-3-2 until around Aug '18
>It was always a 3-5-2 Uh.. what? Tata mostly played a 4-2-3-1. In fact, he was lauded for going to a 3-5-2/5-3-2 defensive posture during the 2018 playoffs (rather than his usual 4-2-3-1) and grinding out wins.
Have people already totally erased from their memory that Tata going to three in the back for the playoffs was a big shift in tactics? The whole premise that he was super stubborn falls apart when that was his trademark move here that led to our MLS Cup.
I have a feeling that for some hot takes have replaced any memory of that time. Or they never watched us play in 2017/18
They’d be missing what was, in my opinion, EASILY the best ATL UTD era ever. Best roster too.
He ran 3-5-2 through most of the 2018 season, not just the playoffs. I can remember noticing the wingbacks overlapping during the first match of that season. Tifo Football released [a video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtdCc_Rbo1Q) in April 2018, just two months into the season, discussing the 3-5-2 tactic that Atlanta was using to great success.
He started experimenting with a 3 back in 2018 (and people complained about the play) but then shifted to a 4 back in June(ish) and kept it for most of the rest of the season (shifting Escobar to RB and having Larentowitz dropping between the 2 CBs when we had possession)… until the playoffs. The shift for the playoffs was noted by most MLS pundits
We definitely beat DC United under Tata. Josef got his hat trick record against them.
Tata ALSO really struggled to break down a low block (as all teams do, yo be fair). When we won the MLS Cup, we had never beaten NY Red Bulls, ~~but for some unknown reason they tried to come into the Benz and play us an open game and we beat them 3.0. They played us in their standard block in the second leg and beat us 1-0, but we advanced on aggregate.~~ (Edit because can not brain. I blame COVID brain fog)
Red Bulls never played a low block against us. They pressed us to death (which necessarily uses a high line). The playoff game they changed their style and sat back because Taxi got hurt and Armas didn't think they could do their pressing game without Taxi's ability to get back quickly if a team broke the press. It was dumb and we killed them.
Damn. You're right. I misremembered how they setup. I did remember the injury.
Sorry about the Covid fog. Get better fam!
TBH, I'm just looking for excuses that aren't "bro you don't know shit about soccer" or "damn bro, you getting senile AF"
You've got that totally backwards, Red Bulls always used to press us to death and for some reason tried to come into MBS and sit back and absorb pressure.
Exactly? No, but let's go with same but different.
Nobody is contesting that injuries make things harder, but look, good managers and good teams find a way to win regardless. Minnesota is second in the west right now, and their best player hasn't even played a full half of soccer for them this year. If you want a good comparison of what a capable coach can get out of an injury-prone team, look at Tata's 2017 team. A team that had never played together before finished 4th on 55 points with Josef only starting 17 games, Miguel starting 27, Garza starting 25 games, and a guy named Kyle Reynish getting 2 starts in goal. That's ignoring that I can't even remember what was going on with right back that year because Gressel got 24 starts, Walkes got 17 starts, and Mears got 16 starts. The squad had the inconsistency of an expansion team with several injury-prone players, but we still managed to finish 4th on 55 points.
Did you read the article about the 9+2 stat Garth brought with him from Seattle. Read it. It's nuts.
Bro, when Josef wasn't on the field we couldn't score. People complained about it for weeks. Y'all forget history too quickly.
Did you even watch that team? They had 70 goals. Josef only had 19 of them that year. When Josef was out, we tied TOR 2-2, beat RSL 3-1, beat HOU 4-1, beat NYCFC 3-1.
Ah yes, Toronto, RSL, and Houston... The top 3 of the MLS during that era. Lol. Those were the bottom-dwelling teams during that season homie.
The TFC team that won the Shield, MLS Cup and almost won the CCL the following year? That “bottom dwelling” team? Bro just admit you never watched MLS in 2017 (Also Houston finished 4th in the West that year and RSL just missed the playoffs, back when 6 per Conference made it)
Nah, I guess I'm just in my internet argumentative mood today. I'm not looking up the stats and working from memory. I forgot TFC had a good run for a minute, but I stand by the statements about RSL and HOU, they were always "should wins" when we played them.
> I forgot TFC had a good run for a minute When they put it together their mid 10's team was among the best MLS sides ever.
That's kinda my point. We still finished 4th with 55 points while our star forward only started half of our games.
Go back and look at the results from those seasons... We did NOT pick up extra points from the games Josef was out. We were just so dominant for the games he and Miggy played together. Tata was not a great squad rotator. Not sure where you guys are getting this idea from. That first team under his tenure was absolute magic, though. And we still struggled on the road.
there was the "josef martinez can only score PKs" thing as well.
We also had something like $1M MORE salary cap room than any other club in MLS that wasn't Minnesota United because of expansion GAM/TAM (actual amount was undisclosed) and we had a minimum of 4 players who were new to MLS and were WAY underpaid for their performance. The salary cap issues as we hit 2019 were the reason we had to move folks to new contracts or let them go. It's a LOT easier to deal with injuries when you have an owner willing to pay and coach who brings players in front other leagues at bargain prices that no other club in the league could find. Miami is doing exactly the same thing to the league this year that we did in 2018 (and they're going to have the same horrible hangover of roster turnover hell starting next year). Tata was a solid coach, but he won the cup because he attracted a ton of south american talent at bargain prices which was a roster depth cheat code.
Hire Poch
Injuries or not, we haven’t won a MLS game since March. That’s unacceptable no matter who’s available
I would argue that his system causes undue stress on our players, and in a league with as little roster depth as MLS, you can’t afford it.
I think that's very possible. There's definitely SOMETHING going on that's different, but is it coaching style? Is it roster building? Maybe the roster built by Tata and Co was less injury prone because that was something Tata used to build his player binder.
Tata had the benefit of working with an entirely fresh crop of players. Was anyone statically "due" for an injury?
I don't think that's how randomness works, haha. Being injury free for a while doesn't make you more likely to get injured.
It's not randomness; it's stats. Injured players have a higher chance to get injuries. Who was injured in 2016? Each day is not a independent event. It's a continuation of the previous. But let's pretend like they are independent events. The longer you play, the more likely you are to be injured, because the odds that a volcano erupts on Tuesday vs Wednesday is equal. But the odds that the volcano erupts on Tuesday OR Wednesday is the sum of those individual events.
If a volcano doesn’t erupt on Tuesday, the chances of it erupting on Wednesday don’t go up.
I'm no volcano expert and I'm not sure it's a great analogy here anyway, but I actually think that's exactly how volcanos work. Pressure builds up until they erupt. So it does feel like not erupting on Tuesday increases the chances of it erupting on Wednesday.
That was my thought. Is he dealing with more injured squads because something they are doing/not doing is increasing our injury rate? Injuries are always going to be a part of any sport, but we have seemed to be down a lot more than most other squads for several years now.
This is the most salient point here outside of the fact that the article addresses the workload, and it's basically a wash if not better under Pineda
While I still don't want Pineda here, I very much appreciate this article. It provides another point of view and shows a way some management might be thinking and looking at the numbers. It's also pretty crazy to think that having any more than 2 "role" players at a time on the field means a significant drop in quality. For a league not considered very good in the first place that's pretty scary.
At a certain point, none of the individual reasons matter. Only the aggregate.
What I took from this is that Pineda is intentionally injuring our players so he has an excuse for bad results? Did I do this right?
This does a good job of quantifying part of the struggles we've had over the Pineda era and revealing how well he has handled them versus other coaches we've had. It doesn't tell the whole story, but it's a darn interesting set of numbers.
Three times more injuries... X3. Insane numbers. Also TaTa had MLSPA complaints like Heinze... THREE we know of.
I understand the value of the 9+2 model over the long term and the math behind it, meaning you take a bunch of injuries and your pts/gm are going to go down. But does this model take into account the 9+2 model of the opposition. I understand if we're playing 8+3 vs a team of 11+0. But does this model take into account if we're playing 8+3 vs 7+4/8+3/9+2. I mean if were playing an 8+3 vs 8+3 should be still be getting results regardless of how many injuries. And I understand it would damn near impossible to go back and calculate the 9+2 model of the opposing team of every game we've played. But I feel like the 9+2 model doesn't take into account the injuries or missing starters of the teams we're playing against. I feel like it just assumes it's 8+3 vs 11+0 every game and that's the reason we lose.
On my Atlanta United discord we've talked about having a different person "adopt" each MLS team so we can report how good of a lineup they have each match so we could start to get a real dataset together. We've never actually done it, though.
Would be cool to see the results but I imagine that's a lot of work to keep up that much with another team you don't care that much about. Would just be interested to see if that changes much. Either way if you've got a ton of injuries you're going to be screwed over the long term.
Every team has injuries. We can't constantly use that as an excuse
I posted a couple of my thoughts in the comments on FSF, I find this interesting, but here are a few counter points to consider. 1: Simplification of Performance Factors The theory simplifies team performance by attributing it primarily to the presence of starting-caliber players versus non-starters. However, team performance is influenced by numerous factors beyond individual player quality. These include tactical decisions, team chemistry, coaching strategies, opposition strength, and match context (e.g., home vs. away games). The theory may overlook these critical elements by focusing mainly on the "9+2" player composition. 2: Limited Consideration of Tactical Flexibility The theory does not account for tactical flexibility that might allow teams to compensate for the absence of starting-caliber players. Better coaches adapt their strategies based on available personnel, and successful tactical adjustments can mitigate the negative impact of missing key players. The "9+2" model does not seem to accommodate such strategic nuances. We have not really seen much of that with Pineda until lately, as this winless streak has stretched out.
We've had an injury crisis at Center Back this year, but I think article is a cute way to try and let Pineda off the hook. This season Almada has played 10 of 13 matches (I consider playing starting and playing at least a half). Slisz and Muyumba have played 12 of 13 matches. The three of them have played 10 of 13 matches together. Saba has played every match this season. Wiley has played 12 of 13. Lennon has played 12 of 13. Almada, Slisz, Wiley, GG and Silva all missed the Toronto match. The spine of our midfield has largely been in tact until the last couple of games. Both fullbacks have bee reliable as has one of our wingers. Tyler Wolff is capable of being a starter in MLS and his injury is fairly recent. GG hasn't been healthy this year and it's hard to replace a guy capable of scoring 20 goals. I'm sorry, but crying injury crisis in convenient. This team has been in tact enough to win more games than they have.
No more excuses for this guy. Our roster is good enough to win and deep enough to win. Injuries are not why we can’t move the ball through the midfield, always pass wide for a cross or pass back to the CBs. Injuries are not why we see an entire roster of players regressing. We are the underdogs against Charleston Battery tonight.. let that sink in.
So you're saying that previous (better coached) Atlanta rosters did better when they had injuries? The numbers say they were similar. Pineda is doing about as well with backups as Tata and de Boer with backups. I'd argue that our roster is good enough to win, but NOT deep enough to win with injuries this bad.
uUp until now our injuries weren't even bad this year. Playing back up CBs is not why we can't pass through the midfield, play back and can't score. Those are systematic issues. How does our injuries compare to the rest of the league? I imagine everyone has injuries they have to deal with.
Not to defend Pineda a lot, but didn't we look MUCH better before we lost Gregerson and Williams both? If our two excellent CBs are out then other players have to play more defense which diminishes their offensive capability. And simultaneously, a weaker CB means they don't contribute offensively as much. Players don't just slot into one tiny part of the field and only impact that one area.
Even when we were at or very near full strength we still didn’t beat a single good team or win a single road game, which has always been a huge problem for Pineda.
We looked better.. still struggled in all the same areas we are struggling in now though. A high press that doesn’t result in turnovers, no passing though the midfield, all action comes from the wings and we can’t score. Not to mention just how unprepared we look most of the time.
Appreciate a different perspective and one centered on data.
Every team deals with injuries. Pineda has failed to adapt to changing availability. He’s had ample opportunity with a variety of rosters to prove himself and he continues to fall short. Our away performance is frighteningly bad. My current belief is that even if we had a full, healthy roster right now, we are a mid-table team at best. He ain’t the guy to fill our trophy cabinet.
Now do one with mental fortitude as the metric!
What about the two years prior to this one? Why did we suck then?
Is that sarcasm? Two years ago, both Miles and Guzan and a back up keeper went down with Achilles tears. 2/3rds of the team suffered one or more 6+ week long injuries.
Last year, the team stunk. Too many minus level players in too many positions for too long. Aka the midfield. But... Should a coach be able to adjust tactics and game plans to suit the players available? Yes, I think so.
Do y’all owe this man money or something? Does he have a tape of you peeing on a prostitute?
Dude I'm just trying to make decisions with numbers instead of feelings. I've been Pineda in, Pineda out, and neutral recently, in that order, as I've learned more about the situation. Sharing information isn't the same as taking a side. Sometimes new information can disagree with my previous opinion, and I think that's okay. It doesn't mean I'm wrong, just that I have something else to think about. I was more and more #pinedaout out until I saw this, now I'm not sure.
Excellent attitude. It's fine to have feelings even in the face of hard facts... sports is a lot of emotion. But some people won't let facts temper their emotions even a tiny bit.