06-02-2010, 11:25 AM
<!--quoteo(post=99496:date=Jun 2 2010, 10:12 AM:name=veryzer)-->QUOTE (veryzer @ Jun 2 2010, 10:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=99495:date=Jun 2 2010, 10:10 AM:name=Scarey)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Scarey @ Jun 2 2010, 10:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->When did it become necessary to call out the manager for over-managing every time a double switch is used? What's wrong with a double switch?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You'll defend anything Lou does. You will never criticize him for anything. You're Lou love has completely blinded you.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And you're a grumpy fuck that has to find something to scapegoat. You'll also jump all over every single fucking comment that anyone makes that isn't negative towards your scapegoat.
I'm not even fucking defending him, especially in that statement above. It's become common place here that a double switch can in no way be beneficial, and I disagree.
I've criticized Lou plenty of times. I've stated he's not the right manager for the Cubs going forward. I've said I would be indifferent if he were fired. HOW THE FUCK DOES THAT MAKE ME BLIND WITH LOVE FOR LOU!!!????
This incessant bitching about every little microscopic flaw is fucking childish, and I don't see it changing with the next manager. Or the next one. Or the next one. That's why I speak up. Not for Lou, but for the fact that using conjecture as a reason to scapegoat someone (especially the manager who doesn't have as much an effect on the outsome as some people think) is ridiculous. Just as BT was saying, the next manager is going to get the same treatment as soon as his team dips below .500. Maybe it won't be "he's too old" or "he doesn't care". Maybe it will be, "he doesn't have enough experience controlling a clubhouse" or "his style is behind the times with the current game". Whatever the case may be, I can promise you this. The performance of the manager will be judged in hindsight. It always is. The only person I can't say this about is Ruby.
You'll defend anything Lou does. You will never criticize him for anything. You're Lou love has completely blinded you.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And you're a grumpy fuck that has to find something to scapegoat. You'll also jump all over every single fucking comment that anyone makes that isn't negative towards your scapegoat.
I'm not even fucking defending him, especially in that statement above. It's become common place here that a double switch can in no way be beneficial, and I disagree.
I've criticized Lou plenty of times. I've stated he's not the right manager for the Cubs going forward. I've said I would be indifferent if he were fired. HOW THE FUCK DOES THAT MAKE ME BLIND WITH LOVE FOR LOU!!!????
This incessant bitching about every little microscopic flaw is fucking childish, and I don't see it changing with the next manager. Or the next one. Or the next one. That's why I speak up. Not for Lou, but for the fact that using conjecture as a reason to scapegoat someone (especially the manager who doesn't have as much an effect on the outsome as some people think) is ridiculous. Just as BT was saying, the next manager is going to get the same treatment as soon as his team dips below .500. Maybe it won't be "he's too old" or "he doesn't care". Maybe it will be, "he doesn't have enough experience controlling a clubhouse" or "his style is behind the times with the current game". Whatever the case may be, I can promise you this. The performance of the manager will be judged in hindsight. It always is. The only person I can't say this about is Ruby.