Rex Hudler

Depends on how you look at it. He said it through interpreter Rafael Santana.

Lots of young guys, a sprinkling of idiots. You'll figure out everyone soon enough. I find it best to try and ignore stupid comments. I am not always successful, however.

And I love the way Florida said " :fyou " to this bulls*** rule and hired a manager of their choosing without the BS dog-and-pony show of interviewing a minority. The hiring of McKeon turned their season around and now Florida is going to the playoffs. Ballsy move. and congratulations Florida Actually, senior citizens are a minority! And so are women. I'm gonna laugh the day an owner finally stands up to this bulls*** and interviews a woman, a senior citizen, a Mexican, a Venezuelan, a Pakistani, a black, etc. just to satisfy the complete idiocy of a rule that MANDATES you will interview a minority that may be completely unqualified for the job. Where's the rule requiring the interview of capable white men when an owner has made up his mind to hire a minority before the interview process has even begun? Killa, I understand your distaste of mandates, but in this case, I disagree with you. Perhaps there could be exceptions for an in-season hiring, but I don't see the problem with interviewing a minority candidate. You have either missed the point or are just making an inflammatory statement. The ARE qualified minority managerial candidates out there. I firmly believe that you should be hired on merit and merit alone, however I don't have a problem with a system that encourages a GM to take his tiem and hire the right guy. How often is the obvious choice, indeed turn out to be the wrong guy? Why not listen to differing points of view from people with different backgrounds (that includes people from different organizations, not just different races). That was basically my point when I started this conversation. It is my personal opinion that if KW is doing the hiring, that there will be tunnel vision to hire an african-american manager. Whether you like my opinion or not, it is a feeling I get and I would be surprised if he went a different direction. I just think KW will go in the opposite direction from the above scenario. But the bottom line is, that as long as it is the best person for the job, race doesn't matter.

Excuse me, have you forgotten a guy by the name of Reed?? Honel has more upside than Reed, and Honel has done very well for his 2nd straight year. I'm not calling Reed a fluke or anything, but I think Honel gets the #1 spot on future upside. I'll have to see Honel break 90 before I buy the "upside"

You can read, roman?? Im impressed

To quote one of the smartest people in baseball.... "Don't think. It can only hurt the ballclub."

Be sure to wipe the tears away as you waive goodbye to Carl after Sunday.

Could very well happen. However, we still have to see Manuel leave first. Mere formality lol

The 'stros losing tonight makes the Cubs DH even more interesting tomorrow.

I think you guys think too much. LOL

He didn't trash him, he just didn't agree with him. As adults, we have that right.

I hate to play this card, but it is a feeling I have....... If KW is indeed the GM, expect the next Sox manager to be a minority.

Excuse me, have you forgotten a guy by the name of Reed??

Hey Michelle, leave your foot fetish out of the boards, k?

I am not asking them to evaluate him as a manager, but more to describe his style, sans judgement. I think that can be done without problem, but I will leave it up to them to decide themselves how comfortable they are.

This was from today's Daily Southtown article... I think Backman is being misrepresented here. His teams play aggressively and he takes up for his players on the field with umpires in a fiery way, but I have never heard any players say that he "gets up in their faces". Most players I know of, loved playing for him. I'd love to hear what Bullard and/or Cotts have to say about him. I know you are already both on record as having liked playing for him, but I'd like more from you guys. Does Backman indeed get into player's faces? How does he handle situations when guys are dogging it or not giving their best effort? Without mentioning names or specifics, can you guys tell us how he handles the players in the clubhouse?? Your input would be greatly appreciated.

Hate to rain on this parade, but this is not the final roster. The roster will still have to be pared down some (25, maybe?.. I'm not sure of the exact size). My guess is Jeremy will still make it, but it is not a done deal. This is the team that will play a qualifying tournament in Panama. They will have to finish 1st or 2nd to qualify for the Olympics. The actual Olympic team will look quite different as those games are a year away. Cerb, 34-year old Ernie Young is on the team because of experience. He was on the 2000 Olympic team that won the Gold. A veteran presence should be a good thing, don't ya think? Especially a guy who has been through this type of competition before. They generally try to pick a mixture of young guys and vets for these teams.

I'd have no problem with Barry as a backup, but the problem is what do you do with Tony G. and who is the starter? Can't have both Graffy and Larkin backing up Valentin.

I'm not arguing that JM should stay. The only logical thing they can do is relieve him of his duties. You can't fire the whole team, so the manager is the scapegoat. I've never bought into the whole concept of the manager being the difference maker. They say a good manager can get you what, 6-7 more wins a year. 7 out of 162 are won by the manager. It's done between the line. Just my opinion, of course. The manager can't be a difference maker? ....... Jack McKeon. I rest my case. Exactly right, Chicago and Florida r 2 very similar teams, and 1 could be going to the playoffs with the NL Wild Card and the other will prob have their team broken up during the offseason. It's all JM's fault, we should have never been below .500 bf the all star break in the 1st place, KW actually gave us a chance to win this but in the clutch the players didn't deliver. Simple as that. I hate to be argumentative (who am i kidding, I love to be argumentative), but if you are going to give credit to KW for acquiring the players to give the Sox a chance, then you have to place equal blame on KW for not replacing Manuel. Both are the GM's job.

To each their own..... But I will say this..... You would earn a lot more respect by admitting that you have re-evaluated your thinking and that perhaps you were wrong, than you would lose if you changed your mind. Refusing to admit to the obvious shows more ignorance than re-evaluating your position on something. You have the right to think how you want, but as you grow older, you will understand some of these concepts. Hopefully

Fine, Frank didnt do well at the end either, but he, unlike Loaiza, has led this offense for 13 years. Thats why I respect and love him but hate Loaiza... roman, I have no problem with your love for Frank, blind as it may be sometimes. I can certainly respect that. But your hatred of Loaiza reeks of immaturity and someone who doesn't know the game. Why not try listening to others on occasion and changing your initial opinions when situations merit? It's a grown up kind of thing to do. Well thank you for respecting that Rex. And if I change my opinion, Im a bandwagoner. I, sticking to my opinions from now on. Being an idiot is better than being a bandwagoner... roman, take this for what it is worth....... Changing your opinion does not in itself make you a bandwagoner (is that a word? lol). Changing it daily or weekly based on performance would, however. But listening to others opinions, looking at facts and numbers and making a decision to change your opinion about a guy after careful thought, shows maturity, not the opposite. Being close-minded is a bad thing. Being open-minded and reasonable is what maturing and growing up is all about.

I have said for 3 years now, that the Sox will be better off post-Frank Thomas. I know what Frank's contributions have been and he even exceeded my expectations this year, but I truly believe the Sox will be better off without him. It may take two years but I truly believe that. I am not bashing Frank per so, (althought I have done that in the past) but just think that he by default is a leader of this team and I think that leadership or "corporate culture" needs to be changed for the Sox to move to the next level. Perhaps I am singling out FT unfairly because he is surely not at fault for this team by himself. In some ways, some might say he is not at fault at all. I just think that this team needs an overhaul in the way they go about their business. In my mind, at this point, I believe it means a change in the manager and a Frank-less team. Frank may go on and be successful elsewhere, but as is the case with Seattle, they got better after their big guns left. I think the same could happen on the Southside.

Fine, Frank didnt do well at the end either, but he, unlike Loaiza, has led this offense for 13 years. Thats why I respect and love him but hate Loaiza... roman, I have no problem with your love for Frank, blind as it may be sometimes. I can certainly respect that. But your hatred of Loaiza reeks of immaturity and someone who doesn't know the game. Why not try listening to others on occasion and changing your initial opinions when situations merit? It's a grown up kind of thing to do.

But he finally did produce........ if he didn't keep playing him, then he never would have stepped it up. He's been big for the Sox in the 2nd half..... Also, is it not possible that the reason Carl hasn't played the last two days is that the Sox know he will not be back next year so they are giving PT to Rowand, who they may need to be the CF next year?? Could it possibly not have anything to do with something he may or may not have said??

yeah, things like........ "You Suck" "Get Somebody out will, ya?" "Throw some strikes for a change today" You know, all the good warm fuzzy things, fans like to yell at pitchers as they warm up.