PDA

View Full Version : FIRE MANUEL TONIGHT! (Not a Game Thread Post!)


Viva Magglio
08-28-2003, 01:47 PM
Jerry Manuel could have very well destroyed the psyche of our clubhouse with his boneheaded decision to start Neil Cotts at the expense of Mark Buehrle. The clubhouse was royally pissed at this, and look at what's happening!!!!!!! Manuel has destroyed the harmony in the clubhouse (per Hawk) which could very well destroy our chances.

Forget today's game, we took two of three in New York already. I'm more worried about the certain tailspin that this dope Manuel is sending us down. Every damn time we get into a great groove, this dork has to do something to [bleep] it up!!! It's as is Manuel's desire for us to win is equal to that of the most partisan Cub fans!

If I were Kenny Williams, Manuel would be canned immediately after the ballgame this afternoon. We have not been winning because of Manuel but DESPITE him! I think this team right now would be better off WITHOUT Manuel.

:firejerry

MarqSox
08-28-2003, 01:50 PM
I've NEVER used this tag before, and the fact that I'm about to says a lot.
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/firejerry.jpg
This move is simply inexcusable. :angry: :angry: :angry:

soxruleEP
08-28-2003, 01:54 PM
AMEN!

Manuel is an idiot! In the long history of his idiocy this is the worst decision of all.

Huisj
08-28-2003, 01:54 PM
i thought it was interesting to hear the espn guys talk about how shocked they were at manuel's decision to start cotts in this game because "we already won the first two" as manual said. this seemed like ridiculous reasoning to them (and it is), but that's pretty much the manual standard. how many times in the last few years have the sox pretty much just given away these day games to end series' (especially on sundays) by playing a crap lineup and playing corpseball like they just don't care. i don't think manual understands the concept of winning the most games during the season, he only seems to be interested in winning a series. something must be done. this is just getting too frustrating!

LuvSox
08-28-2003, 02:01 PM
You're right, the Sox have won DESPITE Manuel. Dump his sorry ass already!

Viva Magglio
08-28-2003, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by soxruleEP
AMEN!

Manuel is an idiot! In the long history of his idiocy this is the worst decision of all.

This could be the worst coaching/managerial decision in Chicago sports history since Wannstedt went for two against Green Bay.

Rocky Soprano
08-28-2003, 02:05 PM
:firejerry



:angry: :angry: :angry:

Viva Magglio
08-28-2003, 02:07 PM
Score caller speculates that KW wanted Cotts to start (and not JM) so that KW could stick it to Buehrle. But Bernstein quickly dismissed that theory saying that KW wants to win more than he wants to stick it to Buehrle.

MikeKreevich
08-28-2003, 02:12 PM
I'm furious. Manuel couldn't make a pimple on a real manager's butt.

GoSox2K3
08-28-2003, 02:12 PM
Unbelievable! Hopefully we can come back and win this one in spite of Manual's stupidity.

This was such a stupid move that even Hawk was ripping this decision on TV. I have never heard that much criticism of Sox management from him before!

Viva Magglio
08-28-2003, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by GoSox2K3
Unbelievable! Hopefully we can come back and win this one in spite of Manual's stupidity.

This was such a stupid move that even Hawk was ripping this decision on TV. I have never heard that much criticism of Sox management from him before!

When you have the play-by-play TV announcer, who is normally an apologist when things go wrong, ripping the move...that tells you something. Doesn't it?

Procol Harum
08-28-2003, 03:20 PM
Jerry Manuel has out-thought himself again today. This has proven--thus far, thru 5-1/2 innings--to be a potentially disastrous decision by the bonehead. It's things like this on which pennant races turn. I hope we don't look back this winter and point to the Yankee game on August 28th as the one that turned a potential playoff year into another bout with disappointment. For cryin' out loud--let's say we win two of three against Detroit, including Buehrle's start--does that justify a near forfeit of this game? Somehow, I think we stood a pretty fair chance of winning the game Buerhle's gonna start against the Tiggers even w/ the like of Cotts on the mound.

:jerry
"I believe that when I clean my plate every night I help feed the starving children in China."

dickallen15
08-28-2003, 03:28 PM
The only problem with firing him, is the guy doing the firing would have to explain why he even has Cotts on the roster. It was so stupid. Buerhle better win tomorrow.

MHOUSE
08-28-2003, 03:35 PM
That is ridiculous. They tell Buehrle he's gonna start Thursday if he can and then after winning game two it's like oh well don't worry Mark, we'll start Cotts instead. Neal could be a fine pitcher one day and his last outing was great so give him a chance to pound Detroit and get into a groove. Don't throw him out there the night b4 against the YANKEES. Now Buehrle is mad, Cotts is shot, and our bullpen needs to pitch 7 2/3 innings. Can you imagine what a sweep of the Yankees would do for this team and the media? I hate giving away day games. What is our record in day games on the road that are the last of a series? I bet not good at all. He better have something to say in his postgame talk. What an idiot. :angry:

MarqSox
08-28-2003, 03:35 PM
Originally posted by dickallen15
The only problem with firing him, is the guy doing the firing would have to explain why he even has Cotts on the roster. It was so stupid. Buerhle better win tomorrow.
Good point. And you know Cotts realizes what's going on ... the fact that this was such a contentious topic probably put even more pressure on Cotts to begin with, creating a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy. Now Cotts feels like he let the team down, and that's not the way to deal with the psyche a young kid.

Even if today doesn't end up screwing with the team's playoff chances, it at least set Cotts back a few steps.

IronFisk
08-28-2003, 03:37 PM
:angry:

This really does top it all! I STILL believe that with Manuel at the "helm", we are DOOMED NOT to win this division. I stated this a month ago, and I stick to it now.

By the way, I LIKE Cotts - but this was simply cruel and unusual punishment for him. You think the Sox were pissed....how bout those "Cranky Yankees" who probably took this as a slap in their faces, and promptly went out and kicked tail.

There are SO many things wrong with this...I can't even breathe right!

KW....PLEASE FIRE THIS MORON NOW!!! GIVE THE FANS WHAT WE WANT - WE'LL LIVE WITH THE "CONSEQUENCES" (yeah, like a World Series appearance?).

RRios8191
08-28-2003, 03:37 PM
Get rid of him..I agree..everybody is tired of his crap!!! :angry:

How in the hell do you start a goddam rookie at Yankee Stadium, when you're only 1 game in front?? Freakin Cotts couldn't hit the broad side of a barn in the 1st!! Bastard is still probably peeing in his bed!!! LOSER!!!

Fire him today Kenny Williams!!!! :angry:

MHOUSE
08-28-2003, 03:40 PM
I can't believe this bs. Cotts is good, but he's a rookie. Throwing him to the Yankee wolves in his 4th start is cruel. Give the kid a chance. Pitch Mark today and Cotts vs. the Kitties. With Loaiza and Colon pitching strongly, he hasn't gotten a chance to tinker with the bullpen lately.

chisox06
08-28-2003, 04:33 PM
100% absolute stupidity, there is abosoultey no logical explination for this decision. Lets take a look at what Manuel has done here.

1.) Shot all of the confidence of a young rookie by throwing him to the wolves for his fourth start ever.

2.) Lost the chance to sweep the yankess at home. ALSO, now puts the sox in a poisition to lose 1st, HEY MANUEL YOU IDIOT ITS A 1 GAME LEAD, WHO CARES IF WE WON THE SERIES EVERY DAMN GAME COUNTS!

3.) Pissed off the entire club, got there clubhouse that was filled with passion and confidence, now the clubhouse is filled with anger and frustration. A good example of this is when no one comforted Cotts when he came off the bench,(until Buehrle went over).

4.) Gives the finger to Mark Buehrle, no wonder why this hasnt resigned. Hes been pitching great, expressed his desire to pitch in NY and Manuel gives him the shaft FOR A DAMN ROOKIE!!! Sounds a lot Thomas/ 1st base huh! What a jerk this guy is!!

I am just 100% baffled by this decision, IM FUMING! :angry:! FIRE THIS INEPT TINKERING A*****!!! :angry: :angry:

soxruleEP
08-28-2003, 05:04 PM
Originally posted by ˇViva Mágglio!
Score caller speculates that KW wanted Cotts to start (and not JM) so that KW could stick it to Buehrle. But Bernstein quickly dismissed that theory saying that KW wants to win more than he wants to stick it to Buehrle.

KW would NEVER do anything to lose a game to "stick it to a player."

ShoelessFred
08-28-2003, 05:51 PM
Originally posted by soxruleEP
KW would NEVER do anything to lose a game to "stick it to a player."

:jerry

I WOULD

MisterB
08-28-2003, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by soxruleEP
KW would NEVER do anything to lose a game to "stick it to a player."

Remember that Jim Parque outing last year in Oakland? Parque was left out there to get his brains beat in because someone wanted the point driven home that despite Butter's claims to the contrary, he was not ready to come back from his injury yet.

LASOXFAN
08-28-2003, 06:33 PM
DEFENDING MANUEL...

I've done it many times on this site where I think he's unfairly blamed (at times) for a player's performance. This however is not one of those times. I've read every thread about this decision and I just keep getting madder with each one. This was simply one of the worst decisions of his career. I don't even care if Buehrle would've lost. I don't blame him for wanting to play for the Cardinals. Not now.

But can anyone answer one question, and please don't think I'm trying to excuse Jerry again: I heard or read that he was making this move to try and set up a rotation where Buehrle will pitch against both KC and the Twins in three weeks (Sept. 16-21). I'm assuming that means Mark would pitch the first game against KC and the last game against the twins. I don't know enough about rotations and days off to know if this is even possible. Anyone offer some insight?

Rocklive99
08-28-2003, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by MisterB
Remember that Jim Parque outing last year in Oakland? Parque was left out there to get his brains beat in because someone wanted the point driven home that despite Butter's claims to the contrary, he was not ready to come back from his injury yet.

That's true, but correct me when if I'm wrong, I'm pretty sure we weren't in a pennant race or too close to 1st back then. I believe that KW wants this teams to win with the moves he's made before the deadline and even in the offseason (if they worked out or didn't, he wen't for it, he wasn't a chicken**** like Jerry showed to be today). I'd see KW not giving Buerhle the money or extension he wants or trading him to someone other than St. Louis but not making him start against a tough team where every single game of the season counts. Not to mention, that even though it'd be a tough goal to reach, the Sox want to try and get the better record of the teams in 1st cause you know how well they play at home compared to the road.

chisox06
08-28-2003, 08:53 PM
Originally posted by LASOXFAN
DEFENDING MANUEL...

I've done it many times on this site where I think he's unfairly blamed (at times) for a player's performance. This however is not one of those times. I've read every thread about this decision and I just keep getting madder with each one. This was simply one of the worst decisions of his career. I don't even care if Buehrle would've lost. I don't blame him for wanting to play for the Cardinals. Not now.

But can anyone answer one question, and please don't think I'm trying to excuse Jerry again: I heard or read that he was making this move to try and set up a rotation where Buehrle will pitch against both KC and the Twins in three weeks (Sept. 16-21). I'm assuming that means Mark would pitch the first game against KC and the last game against the twins. I don't know enough about rotations and days off to know if this is even possible. Anyone offer some insight?


Well that may be an insight into his madness BUT when JM was asked why he didnt pitch Buehrle he stated "If the series was tied he would of went". With a move like this Jerry would have loved to have your logic, and of course would have stated that was what he was doing, but hes too stupid to think that deeply or that far.

Ventura23Fan
08-29-2003, 02:21 AM
Originally posted by LASOXFAN

But can anyone answer one question, and please don't think I'm trying to excuse Jerry again: I heard or read that he was making this move to try and set up a rotation where Buehrle will pitch against both KC and the Twins in three weeks (Sept. 16-21). I'm assuming that means Mark would pitch the first game against KC and the last game against the twins. I don't know enough about rotations and days off to know if this is even possible. Anyone offer some insight?

By some quirk in the schedule, the Sox have off days on Monday 9/1 and Thursday 9/4. So they have some flexibility there to set up the rotation the rest of the way. I expect Colon to pitch Tuesday 9/2 and Buehrle to pitch Wednesday 9/3 vs. Boston. I'd expect this would have been the rotation regardless if Mark pitched the final game of the Yankees series or the first game of the Detroit series.

steff
08-29-2003, 08:55 AM
Originally posted by ˇViva Mágglio!
Score caller speculates that KW wanted Cotts to start (and not JM) so that KW could stick it to Buehrle. But Bernstein quickly dismissed that theory saying that KW wants to win more than he wants to stick it to Buehrle.



Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding...


I say that caller was closer to the truth than he could ever imagine.

steff
08-29-2003, 08:57 AM
Originally posted by soxruleEP
KW would NEVER do anything to lose a game to "stick it to a player."



LOL..!! Seriously.. ROTFLMAO!

Kenny is the master "screwer" in this orginization. Of course he'd "stick it" to a player. He'd be the FIRST in line to do so.

soxruleEP
08-29-2003, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by steff
LOL..!! Seriously.. ROTFLMAO!

Kenny is the master "screwer" in this orginization. Of course he'd "stick it" to a player. He'd be the FIRST in line to do so.

Are you kidding?

Mark Buerhle is not Rick White--who was stupid enough to say he didn't know his role was to get people out when he came into the game.

Kenny Williams wanted to lose a game so that Mark Buerhle didn't get to pitch in Yankee Stadium?

That's defies any logic and while Manuel is an idiot, I have to say I've come around to the feeling that Williams is not--even though he has stuck with Manuel. {As an aside--when could he have fired him after the All-Star break?]

Much as I wish he would can that idiot today, it's not going to happen.

voodoochile
08-29-2003, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by steff
LOL..!! Seriously.. ROTFLMAO!

Kenny is the master "screwer" in this orginization. Of course he'd "stick it" to a player. He'd be the FIRST in line to do so.

Okay, so we don't have any evidence that JM did something to screw Buehrle and he was "probably making a decision with the team's best interests at heart", but KW is somehow pulling strings that cost us a game?

I want evidence for that concept before I'll believe it. It also doesn't seem to jibe with statements you have been making supporting Jerry's use of Cotts in other threads, so I am curious as to which it is. Was this a medical decision, or was this KW pulling his puppet strings to screw with Buehrle?

TheRockinMT
08-29-2003, 12:49 PM
Listening to Manuel's reasoning to start Cotts over Buerhle one could see the sense to it, but on the other hand where did the idea Manuel always falls back to of playing one game at a time go? We need to play each remaining game to win and not look to far down the road. Mnauel wanted to give Buerhle a rest, but did he need it? The way he has been pitching I just don't think so. He had a rest earlier and now we needed him to beat the Yankees. However, columinist Phil Rogers points out that Buerhle will get the same number of starts (6) with the extra day as he would have if he had started against the Yankees. It's not like we lost the pitching rotation edge, but we most certainly lost a game in the standings to the Royals and that sucks...

voodoochile
08-29-2003, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by TheRockinMT
Listening to Manuel's reasoning to start Cotts over Buerhle one could see the sense to it, but on the other hand where did the idea Manuel always falls back to of playing one game at a time go? We need to play each remaining game to win and not look to far down the road. Mnauel wanted to give Buerhle a rest, but did he need it? The way he has been pitching I just don't think so. He had a rest earlier and now we needed him to beat the Yankees. However, columinist Phil Rogers points out that Buerhle will get the same number of starts (6) with the extra day as he would have if he had started against the Yankees. It's not like we lost the pitching rotation edge, but we most certainly lost a game in the standings to the Royals and that sucks...

I haven't done the math on whether it is true or not, but counting last monday, there were exactly 4 days off the rest of the way. I don't know if it works out or not, but if you are able to skip the 5th starter exactly 4 times, then every other starter picks up a start. It doesn't always work out that way though...

Doesn't matter anyway, according to JM the Sox are going to a 4 man rotation... starting today...

gosox41
08-29-2003, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by steff
Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding...


I say that caller was closer to the truth than he could ever imagine.


Why do you say that? Isn't KW having a lesser role with the team? Also, why does KW want to stick it to Buehrle?

Bob

Konerkoholic
08-29-2003, 03:26 PM
The worst part about the decision is not the psyche of MB or the team. If anything Mark will be extra focused on tonight's start to win. No, the worst part about it is that Manuel knowingly traded a loss on Thursday for a win on Friday. Of course, wins and losses aren't automatic, but basically, Cotts is going to get beaten by the Yankees and Buehrle will most likely beat the Tigers. Therefore, Manuel went with the probable 1-1 record over the 2 games than with the possible 2-0 or 0-2, with MB going against the Yankees and Cotts facing the Tigers. Rather than take a chance, he decided to take the 1-1 record, trading a win for a loss. Well, that kind of thought process will get you a .500 record. Sound familiar? The Sox have had a .500 record for the last 2 years.