Red Sox non-interim managers got canned after just one season?
-- "Okay, if you're going to question the importance of an actor's signature on a
plastic helmet from a movie based on a comic book then all of our lives have no
meaning"!!!
On Oct 5, 7:40 am, DonFromBa...@webtv.net (Don Violette) wrote:
> Red Sox non-interim managers got canned after just one season?
> --
> "Okay, if you're going to question the
> importance of an actor's signature on a
> plastic helmet from a movie based on a
> comic book then all of our lives have no
> meaning"!!!
Red Sox non-interim managers got canned after just one season?
===============================================
I'd point out that you accidently hit the reason he failed. He always WAS an interim manager. I think everyone (including BV) knew he wouldn't be given much leash.
On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 12:12:48 -0400, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>I'd point out that you accidently hit the reason he failed. He always WAS >an interim manager. I think everyone (including BV) knew he wouldn't be >given much leash.
IMHO you're wrong. He failed because the manager and owners
utimately have no power over players who have enormous egos,
are extremely overpaid, and have little motivation to perform.
Of all the jobs in baseball manager has got to be the worst.
Players make mega bucks, turn in a louy job, and get away with
it. Managemnt has little power to do anything about it, except to
trade the player to another sucker (team).
The players perform badly, but it is the manager who is the one who gets fired in the end. The manager gets fired becuas you can't fire the players.
On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 12:12:48 -0400, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>I'd point out that you accidently hit the reason he failed. He always WAS
>an interim manager. I think everyone (including BV) knew he wouldn't be
>given much leash.
IMHO you're wrong. He failed because the manager and owners
utimately have no power over players who have enormous egos,
are extremely overpaid, and have little motivation to perform.
Of all the jobs in baseball manager has got to be the worst.
Players make mega bucks, turn in a louy job, and get away with
it. Managemnt has little power to do anything about it, except to
trade the player to another sucker (team).
The players perform badly, but it is the manager who
is the one who gets fired in the end. The manager gets
fired becuas you can't fire the players.
=====================================
All I'll say is that if I actually believed that...I would stop watching altogether. Are you THAT much of a masochist to subject yourself to that treatment from players? IF you actually believe that yourself...you would really have to be a moron to pay five seconds of attention...let alone spend money to watch at the park...or even watch for free on the tube. Is your time worth so little my friend?
On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 15:19:10 -0400, N...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 12:12:48 -0400, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>>I'd point out that you accidently hit the reason he failed. He always WAS >>an interim manager. I think everyone (including BV) knew he wouldn't be >>given much leash.
>IMHO you're wrong. He failed because the manager and owners
>utimately have no power over players who have enormous egos,
>are extremely overpaid, and have little motivation to perform.
>Of all the jobs in baseball manager has got to be the worst.
>Players make mega bucks, turn in a louy job, and get away with
>it. Managemnt has little power to do anything about it, except to
>trade the player to another sucker (team).
>The players perform badly, but it is the manager who >is the one who gets fired in the end. The manager gets >fired becuas you can't fire the players.
Really? In most entertainment businesses, including professional
sports, the "talent" gets a fairly good hunk of the take. Baseball
players were once woefully underpaid as a group. Now, the take of the
players from baseball seems around right.
Of course, some individual players (younger stars) are underpaid and
some aging former stars are overpaid. No team, no system, gets that
stuff exactly right. But is Ortiz overpaid relative to, for example,
the stars of "Castle" or some other hit TV show or movie? Doubt it.
Athletes as a group are extremely competitive, so it takes some
special circumstances for them not to be motivated to play their best.
I suspect it is more common for an actor to "mail it in" than a ball
player.
If you want to talk overpaid, start with investment bankers. At least
ball players can be entertaining.
I do agree that if players underperform, the manager's job is at risk.
That's a good and a bad thing, depending on why the players
underperformed.
On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 15:19:10 -0400, N...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 12:12:48 -0400, "Dano" <janeandd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I'd point out that you accidently hit the reason he failed. He always
WAS an interim manager. I think everyone (including BV) knew he
wouldn't be given much leash. IMHO you're wrong. He failed because the manager and owners
utimately have no power over players who have enormous egos, are
extremely overpaid, and have little motivation to perform. Of all the jobs in baseball manager has got to be the worst. Players make mega bucks, turn in a louy job, and get away with it.
Managemnt has little power to do anything about it, except to trade the
player to another sucker (team). The players perform badly, but it is the manager who is the one who gets
fired in the end. The manager gets fired becuas you can't fire the
players. Really? In most entertainment businesses, including professional sports,
the "talent" gets a fairly good hunk of the take. Baseball players were
once woefully underpaid as a group. Now, the take of the players from
baseball seems around right. Of course, some individual players (younger stars) are underpaid and
some aging former stars are overpaid. No team, no system, gets that
stuff exactly right. But is Ortiz overpaid relative to, for example, the
stars of "Castle" or some other hit TV show or movie? Doubt it. Athletes as a group are extremely competitive, so it takes some special
circumstances for them not to be motivated to play their best. I suspect
it is more common for an actor to "mail it in" than a ball player. If you want to talk overpaid, start with investment bankers. At least
ball players can be entertaining. I do agree that if players underperform, the manager's job is at risk.
That's a good and a bad thing, depending on why the players
underperformed. *********************************************
Howzabout no talent ambulance chasers who wind up "teaching"?
You still groping in the Harrington?
Just askin'....
