re: Should timeouts be allowed in soccer?

Giving you the benefit of the doubt that you aren't trolling, which your somewhat pointed word choice makes me think you are, the difference in a time out and an official water break is quite large. With the official "cooling break", both teams know when it will happen. Much like the TV timeouts in basketball, they are done in a way as not to give one team an advantage (or at least to not do so intentionally). If teams had say 1 timeout per half, even if said to be used as a "cooling break", managers would use them at opportune times either to break the other team's momentum or to address some tactical aspect of the match. At its very basis, soccer is set apart from nearly every other sport in that coaches cannot directly interact with their teams during the run of play. This forces players to do most of the thinking for themselves. Yes, changes in tactics can be yelled from the sidelines and passed along, but it is much different to have everyone huddle up while the coach explains clearly and concisely what will happen.

Also, it is a case of "why fix what isn't broken?" If you add a timeout to act as team-decided water break, then you have to establish the criteria when they should be allowed. It would be a slippery slope to eventually just having a timeout or two for purely tactical reasons. As of now, the "cooling break" rules are contingency plan that allow the game to go on while protecting players from heat levels which may prove dangerous to an athlete running 7+ miles in 45 minutes at stop-start intervals including very high intensity sprints.