The Folly of Bootlickism

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: The Folly of Bootlickism

    In response to georom4's comment:

    In response to pike's comment:

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

    This spring when I said Valentine was a bad choice and you kept saying that he wasn't you were the bootlicker.  Not me.

    It was a good post and I respect your opinion but if anyone is a "bootlicker" it was you for insisting that the organization made a good choice with Valentine for so long.




     

    Was this right Georom?




    i liked bobby V because he was the anti-Francona...but he really wasnt...and the GM and brass made sure of that so i was way wrong about what i thought the management wanted, and what bobby v could do for the team...




    Lots of us were in favor of Valentine because he had a reputation of a sound fundmental manager who would set the clubhouse right. Turned out he was not a good manager at all by any measure. However, assigning any significant portion of the disastrous results this year to him rather than where it belongs is a mistake: it was the PITCHING and, to a lesser extent, the injuries. Valentine was set up for failure from the beginning and didn't help himself when he added to the problem rather than ameliorating it.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: The Folly of Bootlickism

    In response to georom4's comment:

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

     joey...i think that backtracking was caused by Ben and sox management...cmon they want a yes man...no other explanation for the fact that they want farrell now...the guy is a lousy manager with toronto....

    BV has passive-aggressive tendencies which he thinks no one will notice.  He uses this all the time, thinks he is being clever, but everyone sees through it, and that in itself is an issue.  Even before the FO forced him to backtrack on Youk, he was saying 'what did I say wrong' and pretending that he didn't really mean to stab him in the back.

    He told the press that Buchholz refused to move up his start, then said Buchholz was right.  Because he wanted to take a dig at Buchholz, but then deny it was a dig.

    Wanted to punch out a write, but hey, I was only kidding.

    Took a dig at the O's after his interview.

    Said his coaches undermined him, but wouldn't say which ones and how, thus inpugning all of them.




    you really think Bobby V was the problem with the team and not the managment? really?




    Its not "either or". There is plenty of blame to go around.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: The Folly of Bootlickism

    In response to FenwayJimmy's comment:

    Do you live near Fred, Pumpsie? good buddies?




    We live in the same state. I met him once when we took in a Sox-Giants game. We talk on the phone as well. Why do you ask?

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: The Folly of Bootlickism

    It there is a silver lining to all of this...regardless of who they bring in to manage...he will have to look good because it would be very hard to not improve on this year...assuming of course that the FO really does go out and try to improve the team in a major way.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: The Folly of Bootlickism

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to georom4's comment:

    In response to pike's comment:

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

    This spring when I said Valentine was a bad choice and you kept saying that he wasn't you were the bootlicker.  Not me.

    It was a good post and I respect your opinion but if anyone is a "bootlicker" it was you for insisting that the organization made a good choice with Valentine for so long.




    he was actually quite good at the start of the season when the team was tanking....but as the season wore on, he lost the players, he lost management, and then he lost interest because he knew he was losing his job...a bad situation all the way around

     

    Was this right Georom?




    i liked bobby V because he was the anti-Francona...but he really wasnt...and the GM and brass made sure of that so i was way wrong about what i thought the management wanted, and what bobby v could do for the team...




    Lots of us were in favor of Valentine because he had a reputation of a sound fundmental manager who would set the clubhouse right. Turned out he was not a good manager at all by any measure. However, assigning any significant portion of the disastrous results this year to him rather than where it belongs is a mistake: it was the PITCHING and, to a lesser extent, the injuries. Valentine was set up for failure from the beginning and didn't help himself when he added to the problem rather than ameliorating it.




     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share