184 replies to this topic

[Oil Can Dan]

Sorry if someone mentioned this part too, hadn't noticed it:



link here

"Stop being a baby and show up!" That's the hard sell there.

I think he's being a baby. And that he should show up.

In any event, who's the say the conversation didn't go something like this?

Tito: "Figure out who told Hohler that my drug addiction impacted my job performance" (OCD note - the performance that had him overseeing the biggest collapse in baseball history)
Lucky: "Tito, how exactly are we supposed to get Hohler to tell us who his sources were again?" (OCD note - as a reminder, Hohler said he had "multiple" sources)
Tito: "Figure it out"
Lucky: "that's an unfair request"

Be Lucky in that situation - what exactly would you do differently?

Edited by Oil Can Dan, 11 April 2012 - 11:48 AM.

[quint]

Yes, let's blame Larry Lucchino for all things that are wrong with the Red Sox. It's not as if he hired Theo, was the CEO when Tito was hired and was the CEO when the Sox won two World Championships.

It's fairly awesome that you live in a world that is entirely black and white.

What's that like?

[E5 Yaz]

My respect for Francona grows with each passing day.

A "We want Tito" chant would be awesome ... particularly if it comes when Lucchino is introduced

[Scott Cooper]

Wait, not to gloss over the subject of Francona being there or not, but GRADY LITTLE is going to be there?

[Jinhocho]

Hah, they refused to return Tito's calls (never made it through, talk to lucky, talk to henry, talk to no one soon to be ex manager) then smeared him on the way out (no doubt it traces back to LL its his MO) and now want him to come back so they can make more money off his accomplishments and act like nothing happened? Good for you Tito!

[JimBoSox9]

100 year anniversary of the ballpark seems kind of trivial to me. When it comes time to celebrate the 2004 and 2007 teams I would be upset if Tito isn't there and by then I hope time has heeled the wounds.

Expecting Tito to be alive in 2104 is a little optimistic, no?



Also, Rev, et al are brilliant and a pro-Tito bash/counter-rally at a Landsdowne or Kenmore pub on the evening of the event would be awesome (if someone was willing to organize). I bet we could get some media coverage out of it too.

[Harry Hooper]

LL, tell Tito the limo will pick him up an drive right into canvas alley. All Tito has to do is hop out of the car and walk onto the field when he's introduced. Wave to the fans, and then get back in the limo and go. Tito doesn't have to make nice with anyone involved with the team.

[Toe Nash]

Hah, they refused to return Tito's calls (never made it through, talk to lucky, talk to henry, talk to no one soon to be ex manager) then smeared him on the way out (no doubt it traces back to LL its his MO) and now want him to come back so they can make more money off his accomplishments and act like nothing happened? Good for you Tito!

What extra money would they make if he is there vs. if he's not there? The game is sold out.

[gammoseditor]

Expecting Tito to be alive in 2104 is a little optimistic, no?



Also, Rev, et al are brilliant and a pro-Tito bash/counter-rally at a Landsdowne or Kenmore pub on the evening of the event would be awesome (if someone was willing to organize). I bet we could get some media coverage out of it too.

Well I hope they don't wait 100 years to celebrate the 2004 team. Once everyone is retired seems like a good time to me.

[Savin Hillbilly]

I love Tito and I hate the way he was treated on the way out, but I have to say I'm disappointed by what I'm reading. This isn't just about ownership, it's about the fans and players and the whole city. Tito's absence will spoil the party just a little, and that sucks. I know it's not his fault, and I'm not saying I can't empathize with the way he sees it. I just wish he could have seen it differently.

[TheoShmeo]

It's fairly awesome that you live in a world that is entirely black and white.

What's that like?

Great post.

That I think it's silly to blame Larry Lucchino for all things Tito, or would hope that he'd be on site to drink it all in if the fans broke into an infantile "We Want Tito" chant, in no way tells you that I view the world in black and white terms.

Lucchino is in no way blameless for the current state of the Sox. Anyone who was in management when they signed off on Crawford, Lackey, Jenks and Crawford has a lot to answer for.

Still, the level of hatred one sometimes reads here toward ownership makes no sense to me.

[Hendu's Gait]

100 year anniversary of the ballpark seems kind of trivial to me. When it comes time to celebrate the 2004 and 2007 teams I would be upset if Tito isn't there and by then I hope time has heeled the wounds.

To co-opt Jimbo's correct argument, if Carrigan, Stahl, or Barrow can't be there, Tito should be.

Edited by Hendu's Gait, 11 April 2012 - 12:28 PM.

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

Larry Lucchino commented to a group of reporters, "We did all we could to get Tito to attend. We even offered him some vicoden. I don't know what this guy's problem is..."

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

I can understand Tito not wanting to go, but I think at the end of the day, he will regret not being there. And not because the fans (or we, the fans) want to see him there - but more for the people who played and worked in that park - people he presumably doesn't have any problems with.

He has a problem with a handful of people in the upper reaches of the organization, people he could probably avoid pretty easily but I presume he still has respect/affection for the players and the groundskeepers and the ticket takers - people he'd like to celebrate with. And ten years from now, when he is hanging out with them and they start telling stories of that night, I am sure that he will regret not going.

Also, Rev, et al are brilliant and a pro-Tito bash/counter-rally at a Landsdowne or Kenmore pub on the evening of the event would be awesome (if someone was willing to organize). I bet we could get some media coverage out of it too.

I'd have to think that we'd have a lot fewer chats with people like Ben Cherington if we did this.

[Remagellan]

I respect his choice, but he's not the bigger man unless he acts like the bigger man.

Turn the other cheek, Tito, and show up for the fans and for your players. The crowd will shower you with cheers.

The only people who benefit from your absence are the people who let you go and the man who replaced you, because they won't be embarrassed by the outpouring of affection that is sure to result when you step on the field.

[Sprowl]

Turn the other cheek, Tito, and show up for the fans and for your players.

With notably few exceptions, the players didn't show up for him last September, or come to his defense in the aftermath.

Have a good time, Tito, at some place far away from the embarrassing Fenway spectacle. You can always play cribbage with Pedroia online.

[HomeBrew1901]

LL, tell Tito the limo will pick him up an drive right into canvas alley. All Tito has to do is hop out of the car and walk onto the field when he's introduced. Wave to the fans, and then get back in the limo and go. Tito doesn't have to make nice with anyone involved with the team.

Screw that, Tito showing up at all puts ownership in a good light, not showing up reminds everyone how he was treated on the way out the door and is another black eye for this ownership group. Good for Tito and that article is pretty tame considering what I was expecting.

[soPhisHticated]

What extra money would they make if he is there vs. if he's not there? The game is sold out.

It won't make a bit of difference in terms of money now. But Tito played an integral part in turning the Sox into money machine that it is. Their financial success was very well served by 2 World Series and 8 years of winning courtesy of Tito. Do they get to the sell out streak without that? Did his contribution increase the value of the franchise? Allow them to keep raising ticket prices? You don't get all that by managing a team to .500 ball.

Fans still love the guy. Who is more responsible for 2004 and 2007 - Lucky, or Tito? What does your average fan think?

The point is, Tito contributed more to the success of this organization than wins on the field. He deserved better. If Henry and/or Lucky really knew nothing about where/how Hohler got his info - they didn't exactly break a leg trying to do damage control. If they had any respect or appreciation for Tito, it seems they didn't show it privately or publicly.

And now they'd like to Tito to show up to their self-congratulatory party? They really don't give a crap about anyone but themselves over there and it's getting harder to look past that as a Sox fan.

Edit: typo

Edited by soPhisHticated, 11 April 2012 - 01:06 PM.

[RedOctober3829]

If I was Tito I would tell ownership to go kiss my ass. You don't treat someone like they did who is the most accomplished manager in the history of the franchise.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Yeah, he can show up, but the story making him out to be a drug-addled whoremonger can never be unsaid. And "sources in the front office" put that info out there.

[TheoShmeo]

I can understand Tito not wanting to go, but I think at the end of the day, he will regret not being there. And not because the fans (or we, the fans) want to see him there - but more for the people who played and worked in that park - people he presumably doesn't have any problems with.

This seems right to me. I don't know if Terry is wired to second guess himself. Not everyone is. But I think many people in his position would look back with regret at a decision to skip this kind of event, and the chance to say thank you to, and be thanked by, a lot of people you care about and the fans.

That Hohler article was awful on so many levels. But if Francona does lurk here, and does read the Globe and other Boston media, he has to know that popular sentiment is overwhelmingly with him. Whatever he feels about the FO doesn't change the fact that, perhaps perversely, the article probably galvanized the fanbase in support of him and ultimately served to give him a whitewash in the eyes of many for whatever happened last season. I am, of course, not saying that he should be thankful for it. Far from it. But maybe he's overstating its impact.

[behindthepen]

really the best revenge is showing up and getting the 5 minute standing O that he would receive.

He should just show up unannounced in the middle of Lucchino's speech.

[fenwaypaul]

I'll be at the game too, and if there's an audible chant in support of Tito, I'll happily chime in.

Does anyone know if Theo's been invited? Dan Duquette? Mike Port?

[Rocco Graziosa]

Show for the fans? Since when does he owe us anything? He certainly doesn't owe ME anything.

Eh, I'm hesitant to use this card, because by and large I believe the players and managers are worth every cent they make..........but he owes it to the fans to come back because not only did they support his ass through thick and thin (now being the thin part) they put an incredible ammount of money in his pocket. To me its a day of mutual respect, a chance for the fans to thank Francona and Francona to thank the fans.

He would get, IMO, by far the biggest ovation of anyone that would attend an event this season.

That said, he can do whatever he wants, and I wouldn't blame him for saying fuck you to the owners. BUT thats taking the low road IMO. The high road is "doing the right thing" one last time.

[HomeBrew1901]

This seems right to me. I don't know if Terry is wired to second guess himself. Not everyone is. But I think many people in his position would look back with regret at a decision to skip this kind of event, and the chance to say thank you to, and be thanked by, a lot of people you care about and the fans.

That Hohler article was awful on so many levels. But if Francona does lurk here, and does read the Globe and other Boston media, he has to know that popular sentiment is overwhelmingly with him. Whatever he feels about the FO doesn't change the fact that, perhaps perversely, the article probably galvanized the fanbase in support of him and ultimately served to give him a whitewash in the eyes of many for whatever happened last season. I am, of course, not saying that he should be thankful for it. Far from it. But maybe he's overstating its impact.

Let me get this straight, he won two World Series with the Sox, will never have to buy a drink in any bar or restaurant that a Red Sox fan is in World wide, has been cheered by crowds of tens of thousands while on duck boats and in ballparks, and he is giong to regret not showing up for a dog and pony show to get a standing ovation at Fenway?

He's going to be "Thanked" by fans for the rest of his life, I don't think he is going to regret missing the 100th anniversary of Fenway.

[HomeBrew1901]

Yeah, he can show up, but the story making him out to be a drug-addled whoremonger can never be unsaid. And "sources in the front office" put that info out there.

The "sources in the front office" isn't even the worst part, it's the strange silence and non-denials in the immediate aftermath of that article that are most damning to me. If they truly had nothing to do with the leak, something I find very difficult to believe, they should have been out in front the day it came out trashing the article and the sources that spread that information.

Instead they let it hang out there expecting to look like heroes for getting that bum Francona out of the organization and it was only when the blowback started that they realized how big of a mistake they made and had to start the damage control. I mean, how the fuck does this article come out in October and Francona doesn't get a call until February?

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

The "sources in the front office" isn't even the worst part, it's the strange silence and non-denials in the immediate aftermath of that article that are most damning to me. If they truly had nothing to do with the leak, something I find very difficult to believe, they should have been out in front the day it came out trashing the article and the sources that spread that information.

Instead they let it hang out there expecting to look like heroes for getting that bum Francona out of the organization and it was only when the blowback started that they realized how big of a mistake they made and had to start the damage control. I mean, how the fuck does this article come out in October and Francona doesn't get a call until February?

I'm assuming the answer is: because the front office didn't give a damn about the damage that was done to Tito's reputation.

[Oil Can Dan]

I'm assuming the answer is: because the front office didn't give a damn about the damage that was done to Tito's reputation.

And I'm assuming the answer is: because the truth hurts.

[Rudy Pemberton]

At this point, TIto should realize that he's the lucky one. He doesn't even need to be there; the booing that will rain down on ownership and this current cast will speak volumes about how the masses feel. Ownership thought changing the manager would change things, and while it's only 6 games, this team has picked up right where it left off. Tito not being there will generate a ton of press and articles reflecting on what has happened since, and it ain't good...and that's why the powers that be are suddenly desperate to make sure he's there.

[Sprowl]

I'm assuming the answer is: because the front office didn't give a damn about the damage that was done to Tito's reputation.

There was also the account (I can't remember who wrote it) that Lucchino and/or Henry took offense when Tito said that he didn't feel that he had the backing of the front office, and considered that to be breaking the compact of a graceful exit for both sides.

Well, Tito clearly did not have the backing of the front office, and it's not a terrible thing to say. Tito also took the initial blame himself, saying that he felt that he had lost the clubhouse (which, in hindsight, was true). That was the way it should have been left.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

And I'm assuming the answer is: because the truth hurts.

Since the FO's design was seemingly to cover their own craven asses and blame Tito for the catastrophe of 2011, I would take the veracity and extent of such statements with a very large grain of salt. Front office sources said this, and Tito denied it.

BTW this year's wonderful start certainly doesn't back up ownership's implication that the poor play was directly tied to Tito.

[24JoshuaPoint]

I don't blame him. After the tireless hours he put in and after succeeding the main goal more than once, the front office responds by trashing his life in one stupid little article? Almost 1,300 games. And that's just games. The guy has blood clotting issues. His knees are shot. And the last picture that was painted of him is always the one not easily forgotten. That's crap.

I'm assuming the answer is: because the front office didn't give a damn about the damage that was done to Tito's reputation.

I'm sure they don't. John Henry for one albeit a genius doesn't come off as the most heartfelt person. It's all strictly business.

[E5 Yaz]

And I'm assuming the answer is: because the truth hurts.

Whether what was written was the truth is immaterial. It's when it came out and how it came to be written that is the issue

[terrynever]

Yes, show up and make it 100% clear to Henry, Lucchino et. al to stay the fuck away from him.

It would be great if the crowd chanted "We want Tito!"

This is exactly why Tito's not coming. He doesn't want to distract from the birthday party, nor does he want to serve as the good guy while fans boo players and the current manager.

[Dogman2]

It's all strictly business.

By posting in this thread I assume that means you have followed this saga since last September, yes?

Does your statement make any sense given what has happened since then?

[joyofsox]

Wait, not to gloss over the subject of Francona being there or not, but GRADY LITTLE is going to be there?

If so, I expect to hear the boos. ... I live in Ontario.

[Average Reds]

I don't blame Tito one bit here, and I'm glad he's sticking to his guns.

[Harry Hooper]

Gammons was just on 98.5 He says the medical people told him that when they were contacted by Hohler regarding Tito, Hohler said he was calling for the CHB. Note to Tito, if you want to blame anyone for your not getting the Cardinals job, you might want to look at your co-author. The CHB is no friend of yours.

[24JoshuaPoint]

Does your statement make any sense given what has happened since then?

At the time it did. At least i thought it did. Back then i assumed they ran him through the mud so to make it known to the fans as to why because even after the collapse it didn't seem as though Francona was going to get the boot.

[E5 Yaz]

Gammons was just on 98.5 He says the medical people told him that when they were contacted by Hohler regarding Tito, Hohler said he was calling for the CHB. Note to Tito, if you want to blame anyone for your not getting the Cardinals job, you might want to look at your co-author. The CHB is no friend of yours.

I wouldn't believe what Hohler told me if his hand was nailed to a stack of bibles and his feet were on fire

[HomeBrew1901]

By posting in this thread I assume that means you have followed this saga since last September, yes?

Does your statement make any sense given what has happened since then?

His statement makes perfect sense in talking about Henry, it is strictly business with him which is why he didn't even bother calling Tito until February. If Henry cared about the personal side of things he would have called him that day. Now that Tito is not showing up it is hurting his brand and potentially costing him money.

Now if you want to argue that the reason they threw Francona under the bus was because they took his "FO didn't ahve my back" comments personally I can accept that.

[HomeBrew1901]

Gammons was just on 98.5 He says the medical people told him that when they were contacted by Hohler regarding Tito, Hohler said he was calling for the CHB. Note to Tito, if you want to blame anyone for your not getting the Cardinals job, you might want to look at your co-author. The CHB is no friend of yours.

What does this have to do with anything? All this means to me is that Hohler contacted the medical people hoping they would open up if he used CHB's name.

[smastroyin]

This story is unfortunately magnified by the shitty play of the team so far. I guess there is some catharsis in re-hashing the events of last fall (as compared to the events of the last 6 days), but I think this is well trodden ground.

[E5 Yaz]

Now if you want to argue that the reason they threw Francona under the bus was because they took his "FO didn't ahve my back" comments personally I can accept that.

I tend to believe Francona wasn't coming back once the season was lost ... even before the "don't have my back" remarks. Remember, JWH was the one who said "Can we fire him now?" about Grady Little in the game against the Yankees.

The die was cast after the Orioles won, and maybe even before that had the Sox made a quick playoff exit. At that stage, the business side goes into the mode of how do we do this? Francona's remarks made it easier for them to unleash the hounds ... or as LL initially said about the Hohler "story" ..."there's a lot of interesting details in there"

[Oil Can Dan]

There was also the account (I can't remember who wrote it) that Lucchino and/or Henry took offense when Tito said that he didn't feel that he had the backing of the front office, and considered that to be breaking the compact of a graceful exit for both sides.

Well, Tito clearly did not have the backing of the front office, and it's not a terrible thing to say. Tito also took the initial blame himself, saying that he felt that he had lost the clubhouse (which, in hindsight, was true). That was the way it should have been left.

Tito himself said he told the FO that he was not the right guy for the job, and so they were parting ways. He then said that he was not sure whether or not he had the backing of the FO during the Sept swoon. Now if you're the FO, and in your opinion he had been distracted and asleep at the wheel during the epic collapse, and you had supported him during that time and throughout the season, how would that comment sit with you? For me it would upset me. Not the point that I'm going to go tear him up to Hohler, but it would definitely piss me off. And it would do the opposite of making me super interested in getting Hohlers sources so that I could fry them up.

Since the FO's design was seemingly to cover their own craven asses and blame Tito for the catastrophe of 2011, I would take the veracity and extent of such statements with a very large grain of salt. Front office sources said this, and Tito denied it.

BTW this year's wonderful start certainly doesn't back up ownership's implication that the poor play was directly tied to Tito.

Who in the FO are you speaking of here? Theo? The guy that didn't give him a sniff for his opening manager position in Chicago? Or are you simply chalking this up to JWH and Lucky, because that's far more convenient for this particular narrative?

And I've yet to see any indication that ownership implied the poor play was directly tied to Tito. Any chance you can back that up with something? In any event, I'm fine with tying the poor play to Tito, at least in part. By his own account the players had tuned him out. That's certainly on the players to some extent, but how is Tito blameless on that?

Whether what was written was the truth is immaterial. It's when it came out and how it came to be written that is the issue

I disagree that what was written was immaterial. But in any event, I've still not figured out how it's just assumed that it's the old evil ownership that was responsible. Hohler has said there were multiple sources. If everyone under the sun knew he was chasing tail and popping pills, why is it all on JWH and Lucky?

[soxfan121]

Front office sources said this, and Tito denied it.

Oh-for-two. "Team sources" not "front office sources". Team sources COULD HAVE BEEN the clubhouse guys, the janitors, the security team, the Aramark concessionaires. If you've decided that it was "front office sources" AFTER Terry has confirmed it was not "ownership" then you are accusing someone in Baseball Ops or Sam Kennedy's department.

Terry Francona commented for Hohler, on the record, confirming that Terry Francona's children had come to Terry Francona expressing concern about the pill usage. And I continue to laugh every single time someone claims "Tito denied it" and is referring to the pill accusation because it's 100% verifiably false. A lie. A made-up fabrication. Terry Francona admitted, on the record, that the pill story had enough legs that his kids were concerned. Should it have come out in the first place? No. But that's not the issue - Terry is the only person directly quoted about pills and he ADMITS IT WAS A CONCERN TO HIS FAMILY.

There's plenty of factual, truthful ways in which this Front Office fucked over Terry Francona; you don't need to make shit up if that's what you want to rail upon. But please, let's not perpetuate versions of the story that are not factual.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

I disagree that what was written was immaterial. But in any event, I've still not figured out how it's just assumed that it's the old evil ownership that was responsible. Hohler has said there were multiple sources. If everyone under the sun knew he was chasing tail and popping pills, why is it all on JWH and Lucky?

Because they've done this before at multiple occasions, most notably in 2005 which led to their GM quitting for 5 months due to constant media leaks?

It's not some huge leap of logic to make here. It's on JWH and Lucky because they've done it before and have shown to have hair-triggers when it comes to deflecting blame upon others.

[HomeBrew1901]

I disagree that what was written was immaterial. But in any event, I've still not figured out how it's just assumed that it's the old evil ownership that was responsible. Hohler has said there were multiple sources. If everyone under the sun knew he was chasing tail and popping pills, why is it all on JWH and Lucky?

As i mentioned above, their letting the story sit for a few days before denying they had anything to do with it is what stinks to me. Had they categorically denied that they had anything to do with that story the day it came out, I might agree with you, that they didnt' have anything to do with it.

However, comments like LL's, some interesting tidbits in there or something along those lines indicates to me that they were the source and couldn't call Hohler out because he would then turn around and play the tapes of Luccino or Henry or Werner saying "You know he popping pills like they were skittles and that's why the team bailed on him."

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Oh-for-two. "Team sources" not "front office sources". Team sources COULD HAVE BEEN the clubhouse guys, the janitors, the security team, the Aramark concessionaires. If you've decided that it was "front office sources" AFTER Terry has confirmed it was not "ownership" then you are accusing someone in Baseball Ops or Sam Kennedy's department.

Terry Francona commented for Hohler, on the record, confirming that Terry Francona's children had come to Terry Francona expressing concern about the pill usage. And I continue to laugh every single time someone claims "Tito denied it" and is referring to the pill accusation because it's 100% verifiably false. A lie. A made-up fabrication. Terry Francona admitted, on the record, that the pill story had enough legs that his kids were concerned. Should it have come out in the first place? No. But that's not the issue - Terry is the only person directly quoted about pills and he ADMITS IT WAS A CONCERN TO HIS FAMILY.

There's plenty of factual, truthful ways in which this Front Office fucked over Terry Francona; you don't need to make shit up if that's what you want to rail upon. But please, let's not perpetuate versions of the story that are not factual.

I'm not making anything up. You're reading far more into what I said than is warranted. Tito denied that THE PILL USAGE HAD BECOME A PROBLEM OR WAS AFFECTING HIS JOB. No one denied he was taking painkillers, his physical ailments were well known to all.

Red Sox sources means front office sources...do you really think Hohler talked to Pookie Jackson for his story? He talked to many people in the organization, but there's very little doubt that people in the front office and operations played a major part in him getting the story in the first place.

I certainly agree that any concerns anyone had about him should never ever ever EVER have been made public for the sole purpose of trashing his reputation and baseball career. That was absolutely despicable behavior. For Lucky to call up Tito and say Tito was being "unfair" to the Sox for not attending their soiree after what they did to him this offseason shows how utterly tone deaf they all are.

[E5 Yaz]

Oh-for-two. "Team sources" not "front office sources". Team sources COULD HAVE BEEN the clubhouse guys, the janitors, the security team, the Aramark concessionaires. If you've decided that it was "front office sources" AFTER Terry has confirmed it was not "ownership" then you are accusing someone in Baseball Ops or Sam Kennedy's department.

Do we have to go through this again?

If ownership tells Person X to talk to Hohler about something, then Hohler can claim it didn't come from ownership and ownership can claim they didn't talk to the reporter ... and they're both right.

Edited by E5 Yaz, 11 April 2012 - 02:46 PM.