Tony

I wouldn't show anyone the first three quarters then

I really don't even know, it very well could be. But it's very, very broken

I honestly don’t understand it. I don’t care how bad the line may be, this is a joke. I don’t understand how it can be this broken

See, this is where you’re wrong. That’s not my expectation. Far from it. What you just described is exactly how the White Sox have operated the last three decades, and I want something more than that.

I didn’t say I wanted to give Santander 5 years at 100 million, you did. I’ll make it simpler for some folks: - I want more quality players on the Sox - I don’t want to see the team I root for win 50 games a season consistently. - I don’t have an issue spending money while the team is “rebuilding” - I don’t really care if the contract doesn’t work out as intended, and I have an expectation as a fan that a team won’t let that contract get in the way from achieving the ultimate goal of winning, especially when their isn’t a salary cap in baseball. I don’t expect the White Sox to do any of the above. Doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be what the standard is.

I also disagree with this. As Ray pointed out, if there was history to tell us “ok the payroll is going to be historically low but when guys start to develop, that saved money is going right back into the payroll” but that’s not how it works. It’s just going into the pockets of ownership. This team still has no foundation. Is signing Santander going to make a Sox a contender? Absolutely not. Is he going to make the lineup better? Yes, and he’s not going to be blocking anyone, because there is no one to block. There were a few boobs here saying “there is no difference in losing 100 games and 120 games.” Which most of us, myself included, strongly disagreed with. But that works both ways. There is a difference between winning 60 games and 75 games. And I think a lot of fans are starved, and deserve some competitive baseball on the South Side. The point is adding some actual talent to the 2025 team shouldn’t be a bad thing. It simply costs money, and shouldn’t take away from the efforts of actually rebuilding the right way. You should be able to do two things at once. The Sox probably can’t because they’re incompetent, but that’s also not an excuse for them.

That requires money.

That is another reason on a long list of reasons why you don't bring him back. He's going to be GM'ing with a different motive in mind, trying to fix this as quickly as possible to "right" his "wrongs" so to speak. I want the right process, not him dealing capital away for giant swings because he has something to prove. It's time to turn the page. But they won't.

I agree, and right or wrong, feel like he'd play more on a "good team" and not clock out twice every other game

Not sure if this is frustrating or a positive, but the Bears could make HUGE additions this offseason if done correctly. They will have 3 picks basically inside the Top 40 of the draft (I think the Bears pick 2nd rounder will be No. 41) but they could grab two OL and an edge rusher, all who should be starters. You can, and should probably back up the brinks truck for Trey Smith in free agency, as the Bears will have the money. You could start next season with something like: LT: Will Campbell LG: Tevan Jenkins (I'd probably bring him back even though I don't want to) C : 2nd Round Selection RG: Trey Smith RT: Darnell Wright You take a DE with the other 2nd rounder, and I may follow it up with another edge in Round 3. That is a totally new line that ideally has 3 anchors in Smith, Wright and Campbell on it that are foundation pieces for the next 3-4 years. You hopefully hit on the DE's because the pass rush has to get signficantly better as well to have any shot on defense consistently. Billings coming back next season will also help against the run

I’m sure there is reservations, as well their should be. However, if Johnson is set on becoming a HC this offseason, I do think the Bears are one of the better options, because Caleb. They have the QB, on a rookie deal for the next 4 seasons. That alone makes it fairly appealing, in my opinion.

But don’t know why they can’t do both. You can land Ben Johnson without having Ryan Poles at the helm, especially if Johnson has a pro personnel guy he wants to bring in. To me, landing Ben Johnson isn’t the No. 1 priority. I say that because Ben Johnson will suffer the same fate as Matt Nagy, Matt Eberflus, and everyone else if the roster isn’t improved. He may have some great offensive ideas, but they won’t work with Larry Borom Matt Pryor and Jake Curran blocking for Caleb. It’s like hiring the best chef in the world and telling him he can only shop at 7-Eleven for ingredients.

There are three ways they can proceed, and two of them don’t make a lot of sense: 1. Change nothing. You now have a GM on the last year of his deal, who is going to be in “save his job” mode and responsible for bringing in the next coach for the foreseeable future. Having a lame duck GM is not what I would want for my franchise 2. Extend him. Good luck announcing an extension at the end of the season for a GM with a 14-37 record. If they extend him, they’ll get absolutely roasted, and for good reason. 3. Fire him. The clear move. Start fresh with a GM/HC that are linked up from the start.

They should be able to interview Johnson during the bye week before the SB, if the Lions make it that far

This team is going to win 4 games. With the issues on the OL and DL, even with a new coaching staff, I don’t see a 9-10 win team next year. That means Poles now has 4 years under his belt as GM, without even coming close to a winning record. You bringing him back for a 5th year? Because if you aren’t…then you shouldn’t let him pick the new coach. Because now the new GM is coming into a coaching situation he inherited…which is what the Bears always do, and it’s worked out so well before..,

They basically rushed 3 on this play, not even 4..and they still don’t have a chance on this play. It’s really incredible

Given it’s the right and obvious call to make, my hope is it wouldn’t be a very difficult thing to explain. They’re going to end the season on an 11 game losing streak lol. Poles also has a 14 game losing streak to his name as well, the two longest in Bears history. And this one came after he said “It’s time to win.” There isn’t a single coach that should be back next year. If it’s a totally new staff, there should be a new GM running the show. Easiest decision ever, but it’s the Bears, so they’ll find a way to get it wrong. They’re incredibly good at it

Wouldn’t be my first choice, but they should have a conversation with a dozen candidates.

I don't think anyone is "up in arms" But I personally believe it's fair to question the specific move when we know it probably doesn't happen if LaRussa isn't still part of this organization, and doesn't still have quite a bit of sway internally. Especially when it seems like Getz has made certain moves and investments into new technology, fresh eyes and approach. Whereas LaRussa gave an interview, shortly before coming back to manage the Sox, where he spoke about having the desire to coach again to help "correct the balance" in baseball, referring to "too much data" being used, and not making decisions based on the players "head, heart and guts" You don't have to squint very hard to already see a disconnect happening between different parts of the front office.

Correct, because I was surprised to see him being critical of a move Getz and Co. were possibly going to make, felt like it was significant. Weird how when they actually hire him, albeit for a different role, it's all good, "makes a lot of sense" now....🙄

Oh, James thinks something this front office did is great? I'm shocked, SHOCKED I tell you...

From 2015: https://www.azcentral.com/story/sports/mlb/diamondbacks/2015/09/16/diamondbacks-tony-la-russa-phil-nevin-could-hot-managerial-candidate/72343042/ Also...

La Russa always gets his guy

So was Ian Cunningham. How insane is it that the two football brains running this thing are two former OL's, and they missed the mark SO badly on that specific position?

Discussion was had here a few weeks ago...but if they don't spend the entire offseason investing in the trenches, 2025 will look exactly like 2024. Football has evolved over the years, but at the core, the thing that has stayed the same is needing to be strong in three positions to win....QB, OL and DL. Can't go far without a QB, that's obvious, and I think the Bears have it. Having a good QB doesn't mean much (see 2024 Bears) if he's got 1.5 seconds to throw on a lot of plays. Run game doesn't work either. Things just don't work without it. And I don't care how much you invest, or how talented your CB's, S, LB core is...if you can't generate a sustained pass rush, any secondary is going to get cooked if the QB has 4 seconds to throw the ball. Don't think it's possible to totally fill both sides of the ball in one offseason, but it's all I would be focused on. Only way they'll win.