Well then we don’t need the scene with Ted either? I mean why have him come back to Richmond at all. His turn was over…
How absurd
…that wasn’t an appeal to authority.
That’s a “this person has summarized my position better than I can.”
Then why the “a well respected TV critic” parenthetical?
And besides, iSiddiqui got their opinion across just as well as Sepinwall.
…why not?
Still wasn’t an appeal to authority.
Redemption arcs require penance, and in my opinion, accountability is the only ethical path forward. Now I love me a good redemption arc. At a certain point Nate has to trade the thing he most wants (approval) with the thing he most needs (acceptance as he is.) That moment for Nate was when he chose his values over his career. What came after was (should have been) accountability.
Ted Lasso is a wonderful, warm, inspiring show, but at times it skirts dangerously close to “the way to be a good person is to forgive without strings attached.” But I would argue accountability is a very large string that needs to be attached, in order for a damaged relationship to be repaired. We see glimpses of accountability but one piece of accountability is facing the devastation wrought by your actions. I didn’t see Nate having to do that, which disappointed me.
This is a recurring theme in the show. Nate’s Dad completely fucked him up, but it’s okay because he meant well, and this one conversation is going to change Nate’s perspective and catapult him into happiness. There is no accountability for Nate’s Dad. As the child of a parent who royally fucked me up and 20+ years later I’m still paying the consequences, I cannot let that go.
The character who came closest to accountability in this season was Jamie. Not only did he fess up to Keeley, he deleted all his photos, changed his password and vowed to do better.
It’s been established in past seasons that Ted’s forgiving spirit is somewhat pathological, in fact it was a part of his character arc in this season that he was able to get mad and confront his mother. I love Ted, I think he is way better for society than many other models of behavior, but he’s missing an important piece there, and I think the show generally takes on his worldview, such that you can get some tricky messaging out of Ted Lasso that comes dangerously close to encouraging people to be doormats.
Because they were appealing to his authority as a well respected TV critic.
lol
This throwaway line had me laughing so hard:
After getting the “ussie” with Ted, the guy in the airport says “Wicked!” to which Ted replies “Kinky Boots.”
…merely quoting an authority isn’t “an appeal to authority.”
ISiddiqui had, as you concede, gotten their opinion across. Sharing the opinion of a respected critic, which also mirrors a lot of the criticism of this episode from other people, including me, is entirely fair and not an appeal to authority.
Because this isn’t a formal debate. It is entirely subjective. We are allowed to post television show reviews. We should be allowed to do that in a cafe society thread without being accused of a logical fallacy.
It wasn’t a perfect season. Too much time with Keely for little character growth. But Nate’s arc seemed fine. We can fill in the nature of his return that resulted in his being the kit boy’s assistant, not a coach, and agreeing to pay 5000 pounds as fair.
And I have to disagree with @Spice_Weasel on accountability.
Pretty sure as a parent I have made mistakes. Not the same ones my parents made, my own. No idea if my mistake was not pushing enough, too hard, or other that I am still clueless about. But I tried to help my kids find their best thems as best I could. That may color my view. Nate’s dad was mistaken. Lots of parents are and many in very similar ways.
Except they weren’t merely quoting. They framed Sepinwall’s opinion as that of a well respected TV critic, which unavoidably gives the appearance of having more gravitas than either of ours. While the post was not a direct response to me, considering it was certainly within the flow of our back-and-forth, I interpreted it as a continuation of our discussion, which means they were trying to use Sepinwall to back up their opinion, not just quote a review for edification’s sake. Maybe that isn’t what they were trying to do, but it sure felt like it to me.
Nobody cares. Please get back to talking about the show.
His journey with Ted wasn’t over, his journey as a part of Richmond wasn’t over.
Lord, we all do our best. I just want to see parents do a better job at reconciliation than my Mom did. She apologized but expected me to be okay forever after and she did not change. It’s also what I found unrealistic. It’s rare for a parent to turn upon reflection and suddenly be everything you want them to be. It’s more like you have to accept that they will never give you what you thought you needed from them and either salvage the relationship or cut them off.
Nate seemed to have major psychological issues as a result of his Dad, which suggests to me he was treated pretty badly. But I don’t know. Obviously forgiveness is a major theme of the show and I wouldn’t want to take forgiveness away, but forgiveness only goes so far. I liked what they did with Jamie, though. He knew his Dad wasn’t going to change and found a way to not need his approval and get on with it.
On a different note, I would 100% watch a spinoff with an all-women’s league.
Alan Sepinwall did make one interesting point, that Bill Lawrence, one of the show creators, wasn’t much involved in the third season because he was busy with Shrinking, another Apple TV+ series that he was working on. Perhaps that’s one reason the third season didn’t work as well as the first two?
“Human beings are never gonna be perfect, Roy. The best we can do is to keep asking for help and accepting it when you can. And if you keep on doing that, you’ll always be moving towards better.”
That’s a Ted Lasso redemption arc.
I thought that was phenomenal advice, by the way.
Right. It wasn’t from Ted’s knowledge of stock trading. It’s from Sudekis’ knowledge of what the Packers actually do.
His dad is dead, right? That’s why he couldn’t find him in the stands and why those two guys said something like, “his dad would have been proud”?
I believe it is his father we then see applauding from some manner of in-patient treatment facility. Not dead, but (presumably) getting better. Like everyone else near the end of the series except Rupert, who is cemented as the unambiguous and unredeemed villain of the show.
No, we saw him in what looked to be rehab in the next-to-last episode. Then we saw him and Jamie talking in the last episode.