I actually mentioned that we can't assume Gall's standup is bad. He did drop Jackson quickly. His wrestling isn't really that bad either.
Your issue with capping that fight was that you assumed the worst every time with Gall. It was based on "he doesn't have the experience". You ignored the fact that on the ground, you can tell by his movements that he's very solid even if it was against worst competition. You could also tell that he's fairly athletic, unlike some other BJJ guys that fail to transition well to MMA. You kept going back to guys in BJJ that do not translate well to MMA, but there are a lot of examples that do. In fact, when watching lower level fights (and Sage is lower level comp still), a decent grappling background almost always swings me into favoring that person. The reason is because most fights at a lower level will end up on the ground. It's happened in all of Sage's fights now because he does not have the skill, experience, gameplan, or whatever to keep it standing.
The fact that he does reverse may look impressive, but it's actually one of his downfalls. He executes those things due to his athleticism, but in the end, he thinks he's better than he is on the ground. He goes there way too often.
IMO, Gall looked like a justified moderate (or above) favorite in there. He got the clinch quick, takedown quick, passed quick, etc. He then defended when Sage got on top. He then gets Sage back down again before the end of the round. Round 2 really saw Sage's only significant offense, one punch. Gall then drops Sage and subs him.
So literally, Sage only has one really significant punch in the fight which is overshadowed by a better punch by Gall. Gall controlled the distance best getting the clinch, won the wrestling exchanges, and then won on the ground. It's pretty safe to say Gall was a solid play.