The Curious Case of Jim Curtin and the Philadelphia Union

Philadelphia Union fandom has had a few days to digest the news that the Union fired its long-time coach Jim Curtin.  To be sure, some fans have been quick with their own criticisms of Curtin, from player favoritism to substitution policy to playing minutes for the younger players.  At the same time, Philadelphia fans are loyal and the vast majority are supportive of the two-time MLS Coach of the Year, despite the Union’s less-than-stellar 2024 season.

Yesterday’s press conference with Jay Sugarman and Ernst Tanner alluded to the veiled reasons for Curtin’s  termination.

Sugarman – who has been subjected to repeated fan criticism for not opening his wallet to acquire quality players – distanced himself from the firing decision.  Sugarman emphasized that he supported Tanner’s decision, all the while underscoring that it was Tanner’s decision.  Of course, hiring and firing coaches legitimately is the Sporting Director’s decision, but Sugarman seemed to have anticipated that the termination would result in even more fan mudslinging in his direction.

Tanner’s rationale was opaque.  He referred to a “misalignment” and that in the past that he and Curtin had been aligned  He explained that when Jim’s contract had been extended in 2023, Tanner’s expectations had been clearly stated.  Although Tanner did not set forth precisely the nature of the misalignment, he suggested that substitutions and playing time for young players were a part of the consideration.

It is true that Curtin’s lineups have leaned toward the veteran players – although at this point youth players Jack McGlynn and Quinn Sullivan are fixtures in the team’s starting lineup.  The gradual integration of these two young players into the lineup did not hurt them and both are now legitimate MLS starters.  By contrast, a baptism of fire for the 15 year-old Cavan Sullivan could result in injury or simply be detrimental to his development.  It is a matter of judgment.

Jim Curtin consoling José Martínez right after his surprise sale to Corinthians this summer.

 

Tanner also argued that – had the team been in Europe – Curtin would have been fired far earlier in the year, essentially blaming the season on the coach.  True, 2024 was not a great season.  As Tanner pointed out, there were home losses, one goal losses, and the Union did not make the playoffs.  But really, how much of the season should be chalked up to goalkeepers as opposed to the coach  No one can blame Andre Blake for getting injured.  The new back-up Oliver Semmle was an improvement over Joe Bendik, but no one – Semmle, Curtin and Tanner included – could have foreseen that Semmle would end up starting 15 games with 1412 minutes in net.  That was 2 starts and some 300 minutes more than the team treasure, Andre Blake.   And, Semmle had points of weakness, notably his range in the air.  The fact that later in the season the Union resorted to the Union II keeper, Andrew Rick, who started 6 games, is telling.  Once Blake returned, the defense was more organized and performed better.  The point is that goalkeeping struggles were far more likely than coaching to be the cause of the lackluster 2024 season.

So, Philadelphia’s 2024 record was merely cover for Curtin not doing what Tanner wanted him to do – a/k/a, the misalignment – the misalignment that is evident now, but was not in years past.  The poor record just made it easy for Tanner to take the plunge, i.e., if this were Europe Curtin would have been gone far earlier in the season.

Sometimes a coaching change does jolt a clubhouse into improved performance, and perhaps this will happen in Philadelphia.  Alternatively, perhaps the change is just a change for the sake of a change.  Time will tell.