PDA

View Full Version : LaRussa Back To Sox In His Future?


Lip Man 1
03-01-2010, 05:20 PM
He said basically the same thing a few months ago on Comcast Sports Chicago. He and JR are still very, very close friends.

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/03/role-with-white-sox-could-interest-la-russa.html

Lip

Frontman
03-01-2010, 05:22 PM
For the love of God; no. Thank you Tony for all your years here; but if you coming here makes it possible for your stupid blind-eye approach to steroids to come along with you?

A thousand times; no thank you.

sox1970
03-01-2010, 05:28 PM
For the love of God; no. Thank you Tony for all your years here; but if you coming here makes it possible for your stupid blind-eye approach to steroids to come along with you?

A thousand times; no thank you.

+1

He needs to go away.

Rohan
03-01-2010, 05:34 PM
For the love of God; no. Thank you Tony for all your years here; but if you coming here makes it possible for your stupid blind-eye approach to steroids to come along with you?

A thousand times; no thank you.

I think this is silly. He'd be a senior adviser, not a trainer or drug pusher. He's proven himself to be a good manager, I don't see why the Sox would turn down one of the great managers of the last thirty years because he's taken a neutral approach to steroid use in the past...

soltrain21
03-01-2010, 05:36 PM
For the love of God; no. Thank you Tony for all your years here; but if you coming here makes it possible for your stupid blind-eye approach to steroids to come along with you?

A thousand times; no thank you.

I'd say about 95% of the entire league had a blind-eye approach to steroids.

HomeFish
03-01-2010, 05:40 PM
Where would he play?

Pablo_Honey
03-01-2010, 05:46 PM
Where would he play?
Team nutritionist / Hitting coach

Foulke You
03-01-2010, 05:53 PM
I'd say about 95% of the entire league had a blind-eye approach to steroids.
Absolutely. Dusty Baker oversaw the Giants when Santiago, Bonds, and Armando Rios were juicing and then again with the Cubs when Sosa and likely Prior were juicing. How about every manager for the A's and Texas Rangers since the early 90s? Joe Torre had juicers like Giambi, A-Rod, and Sheffield under his watch. You can't just single out LaRussa for this. Everyone looked the other way.

Back to the original topic, I wouldn't be opposed to LaRussa in an advisory or scouting role similar to what Scotty Bowman is to the Blackhawks. The man knows his baseball and has kept the Cards competitive despite some bad players.

slavko
03-01-2010, 06:35 PM
He said basically the same thing a few months ago on Comcast Sports Chicago. He and JR are still very, very close friends.

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/03/role-with-white-sox-could-interest-la-russa.html

Lip


Just two guys who are lawyers. Could Tony be an adviser and handle it when people didn't do what he recommended? Or would it be a case of too many chiefs?

Noneck
03-01-2010, 06:57 PM
Very close friends maybe but LaRussa is also a very expensive friend. The Sox have never spent the big bucks for a manager and I dont see them starting now. Unless LaRussa is willing to take a home town discount.

I had a thought about what happens if LaRussa comes here in a President type role. What a royal kick in the teeth that would be to Ken Williams. But stuff like that really wouldn't surprise me.

Frontman
03-01-2010, 07:26 PM
I think this is silly. He'd be a senior adviser, not a trainer or drug pusher. He's proven himself to be a good manager, I don't see why the Sox would turn down one of the great managers of the last thirty years because he's taken a neutral approach to steroid use in the past...

Neutral? NEUTRAL?!!?!?!

I'm might be silly; but that's off the charts. Sorry, LaRussa is one of those who empowers these users to keep using.

Yes, LaRussa was a great manager over the years. But that doesn't mean that I want a steroid apologist as part of the White Sox front office.

Frontman
03-01-2010, 07:27 PM
I'd say about 95% of the entire league had a blind-eye approach to steroids.

Which starts at the top; but nobody seems willing to depose Bud "I have no freakin' clue" Selig from office.

SI1020
03-01-2010, 08:42 PM
+1

He needs to go away. I second that motion.

Rohan
03-01-2010, 11:42 PM
Neutral? NEUTRAL?!!?!?!

I'm might be silly; but that's off the charts. Sorry, LaRussa is one of those who empowers these users to keep using.

Yes, LaRussa was a great manager over the years. But that doesn't mean that I want a steroid apologist as part of the White Sox front office.

He still is a great manager. he's nearing 2,500 career wins, which is the third most in major league history.

Yeah he has a track record of defending his players who have been accused, or have even admitted to steroid use. But many managers would have done the exact same thing. He's recently come out and endorsed a zero tolerance policy.

Seriously, to deny that this guy is one of the greats of our time is just stupid. Any club would be lucky to have this guy as a senior adviser.

russ99
03-02-2010, 07:45 AM
He still is a great manager. he's nearing 2,500 career wins, which is the third most in major league history.

Yeah he has a track record of defending his players who have been accused, or have even admitted to steroid use. But many managers would have done the exact same thing. He's recently come out and endorsed a zero tolerance policy.

Seriously, to deny that this guy is one of the greats of our time is just stupid. Any club would be lucky to have this guy as a senior adviser.

Agreed. He did a great job with us in the 80's and his knowledge of baseball can only help our organization.

But right or wrong, his name gets more attached to the steroid era than most, due to managing the Canseco-McGwire A's title team and as Cards manager during the "Great McGwire-Sosa Homer Fraud". Others may be more responsible for looking the other way, but Tony can't claim innocence.

Frontman
03-02-2010, 08:28 AM
He still is a great manager. he's nearing 2,500 career wins, which is the third most in major league history.

Yeah he has a track record of defending his players who have been accused, or have even admitted to steroid use. But many managers would have done the exact same thing. He's recently come out and endorsed a zero tolerance policy.

Seriously, to deny that this guy is one of the greats of our time is just stupid. Any club would be lucky to have this guy as a senior adviser.

And if he did become an adviser to the White Sox; the team that had as the face of playing clean in the steroid era Frank Thomas? Frank's accomplishments in doing so will be immediately overshadowed by LaRussa's presence.

The first White Sox to hit 45 home run after LaRussa re-joins the organization will be looked upon with suspicion. It already has and will continue to happen to Albert Pujols; and even more so this upcoming season with McGwire as part of the coaching team.

Yes, LaRussa is one of the best manangers of this era. I can appreciate that, but I'd prefer to appreciate that at a distance and not as a part of the White Sox organization.

If Tony had actually did a better job of admitting something wasn't on the level; I would be a bit more open to the idea. Heck, I'd take Joe Torre here in a heartbeat; and a number of his former players have admitted using. (I'm not saying ratting out his players, I'm saying have a more intelligent response to it than his "deny, deny, deny; oh he admitted to using? Well, that surprises me!" routine) That's the part that disgusts me. He can't even say what Mark did was wrong. Not fully.

Because then he knows his success will always be tainted by the era of steroids.

jabrch
03-02-2010, 08:42 AM
he's taken a neutral approach to steroid use in the past...

Seriously?

Really?

Neutral?

He's been amongst the most complicit there have been in terms of enabling the worst of the worst steroid users.

fox23
03-02-2010, 08:58 AM
And if he did become an adviser to the White Sox; the team that had as the face of playing clean in the steroid era Frank Thomas? Frank's accomplishments in doing so will be immediately overshadowed by LaRussa's presence.



I have no idea how that makes any sense. So people who think Frank is clean are all of a sudden going to doubt that opinion because of a manager who joined the team years after Frank retired?

RedHeadPaleHoser
03-02-2010, 09:18 AM
I have no idea how that makes any sense. So people who think Frank is clean are all of a sudden going to doubt that opinion because of a manager who joined the team years after Frank retired?

No - the team then is then perceived as sweeping things under the rug by using LaRussa as its new face, when its previous face (Thomas) demanded and volunteered for testing.

white sox bill
03-02-2010, 09:41 AM
I'd welcome Tony back. Very knowledgeable baseball man and has the intelligence. I'd think he'd be an asset this club.
Let the past be the past.

hi im skot
03-02-2010, 10:14 AM
And if he did become an adviser to the White Sox; the team that had as the face of playing clean in the steroid era Frank Thomas? Frank's accomplishments in doing so will be immediately overshadowed by LaRussa's presence.

This is quite possibly the most unnecessarily-paranoid thing I've ever read on WSI.

Rohan
03-02-2010, 10:21 AM
And if he did become an adviser to the White Sox; the team that had as the face of playing clean in the steroid era Frank Thomas? Frank's accomplishments in doing so will be immediately overshadowed by LaRussa's presence.

The first White Sox to hit 45 home run after LaRussa re-joins the organization will be looked upon with suspicion. It already has and will continue to happen to Albert Pujols; and even more so this upcoming season with McGwire as part of the coaching team.

Yes, LaRussa is one of the best manangers of this era. I can appreciate that, but I'd prefer to appreciate that at a distance and not as a part of the White Sox organization.

If Tony had actually did a better job of admitting something wasn't on the level; I would be a bit more open to the idea. Heck, I'd take Joe Torre here in a heartbeat; and a number of his former players have admitted using. (I'm not saying ratting out his players, I'm saying have a more intelligent response to it than his "deny, deny, deny; oh he admitted to using? Well, that surprises me!" routine) That's the part that disgusts me. He can't even say what Mark did was wrong. Not fully.

Because then he knows his success will always be tainted by the era of steroids.

Hell no, and no.

You speak as if the accomplishments of Frank Thomas are so petty that the presence of an adviser more 6+ years down the line would belittle them. This is not the case at all. Accomplishments like Frank's don't simply get "overshadowed" like that. That's why there's a hall of fame -- What do you think would go through the voters mind. "Oh, well the White Sox brought on Tony LaRussa five years after Thomas left the organization. So the White Sox must be a bunch of cheaters!" :?:

Once again, he would be a Senior Adviser. Not a GM, not a Manager, not a bench coach, not even a base coach. He'd be working at the front office helping with scouting and other such issues. The expertise he brings to the table can only help the franchise.

Nellie_Fox
03-02-2010, 10:31 AM
I have no idea how that makes any sense. So people who think Frank is clean are all of a sudden going to doubt that opinion because of a manager who joined the team years after Frank retired?
That's not what the statement said. Not at all.

Frontman
03-02-2010, 10:55 AM
I have no idea how that makes any sense. So people who think Frank is clean are all of a sudden going to doubt that opinion because of a manager who joined the team years after Frank retired?

I mean that Frank's accomplishments will be put on the back burner and would be overshadowed by the press focusing on LaRussa and his past of denials.

Not that Frank would come into question; far from it. But profiling a clean player versus profiling a steroid apologist?

The steroid apologist will get featured more.

Frontman
03-02-2010, 10:57 AM
This is quite possibly the most unnecessarily-paranoid thing I've ever read on WSI.

Sorry, that record still is held by those who believe Brian Anderson was quote "never given a chance" by Ozzie.

They forget who our starting CF was all of 2006 when they say that. That's the most unnecessarily-paranoid thing ever put up on WSI!

Frontman
03-02-2010, 11:00 AM
Once again, he would be a Senior Adviser. Not a GM, not a Manager, not a bench coach, not even a base coach. He'd be working at the front office helping with scouting and other such issues. The expertise he brings to the table can only help the franchise.

"Ok, Kenny. If the press starts questioning about that player's incredible growth over the 4 months of the off-season; just claim you don't believe he did steroids and that you never saw a thing." T. LaRussa's advice and expertise in a non-coaching position.

Rohan
03-02-2010, 11:28 AM
"Ok, Kenny. If the press starts questioning about that player's incredible growth over the 4 months of the off-season; just claim you don't believe he did steroids and that you never saw a thing." T. LaRussa's advice and expertise in a non-coaching position.

Oh please :rolleyes: that's just being silly. If a player on the Sox is taking steroids, then it will not be a senior adviser who's responsible for it. The blame falls on the player, his medical practitioner, and the trainer. That's it.

Oh by the way, this is completely off topic. But just for future reference, to the right of the quote button there's another button. You can actually click that button each post that you want to quote and it will include it in your reply. That way you can respond to multiple quotes in one post. Not a big deal, just a bit easier to organize.

Frontman
03-02-2010, 11:34 AM
Oh please :rolleyes: that's just being silly. If a player on the Sox is taking steroids, then it will not be a senior adviser who's responsible for it.


The problem is that LaRussa will be perceived this way no matter what. He did such a horrid job trying to spin for Big Mac that any player he helps the team select will be under scrutiny. Period.

fox23
03-02-2010, 01:54 PM
I mean that Frank's accomplishments will be put on the back burner and would be overshadowed by the press focusing on LaRussa and his past of denials.

Not that Frank would come into question; far from it. But profiling a clean player versus profiling a steroid apologist?

The steroid apologist will get featured more.

Ah, I was reading your post wrong then. I still don't really agree, but I get what you are saying, thanks!

TheVulture
03-02-2010, 03:03 PM
LaRussa should be banned from baseball.