I agree with everyone else that Michael looks like he's skating with a lingering injury this season. If that's the case the first thing they need to do is turn down down a reserve spot for Worlds and take as much time off as is needed so he can get treatment/rehab/whatever is needed to get completely healed.
Also agree that if they stay with MIDA they need to look to outside choreographers.
One thing in their favor is that they're very versatile. They did great with the Martha Graham program; they did great with Rhapsody in Blue after it was reworked a little (and I always thought their Thoroughly Modern Millie RD looked fantastic on them). They're good at classic and at contemporary.
I was thinking about this recently in the context of a different team. The flip side of versatility is lack of a distinct identity. What is it that stands out about a Green/Parsons programme? What makes their skating different from other teams? At the moment their identity seems pinned to the Martha Graham FD as much as anything. There's some work to define it in a more expansive sense.
From the outside it's hard to tell if the coaching situation is a problem. Last season's programmes were bland, but they were on top of their game at NHK, US Nats and Worlds. If they're dealing with injury or some other external factor this season they could still be getting what they need from their coaches (except perhaps advice to take some time off). But they've been at MIDA 18-ish months now and if the relationship isn't working it's long enough to know. Count your losses, send Tanith a bouquet
and move on.
I said it last week and I'll say it again - if GreenP do consider a coaching change, I think they should go to Karine Arribert or YGA. I don't think any of the North American centers are a good fit for them.
I don't think they should go to YGA. Sure, they could race Taschlers and Mrazeks and an ever increasing number of Czech junior and novice sibling teams everyday and improve their speed, but Zanni is a much weaker choreographer than coach so his weakness matches theirs. Arribert could be interesting; she seems to have a distinct formula for her teams, but it could fit them well. I was also wondering about Margaglio; he seems to have done a great job in bringing our the different on ice personalities of his teams. I also get the sense that Caroline is someone who could thrive in a completely different environment.
Splitting is the nuclear option. I don't see anything to suggest they're at that point. But with any team with such a large age gap there's a concern that their competitive peaks won't coincide. Is this blip something temporary or do they feel that they're no longer well matched in that respect? What are their goals as a team now? Olympic medal in 2030? Or making the US team in 2026 before Caroline goes on to medal in 2030 or 2034 with mystery future partner? If their long-term goals don't match, should Caroline start looking for someone whose goals do now? (But who's available?) If they are in that situation - and again, I don't see signs that they are - she shouldn't wait around so Michael can have a shot at going to the Olympics.
Who knew I had so much to say about Green/Parsons?
