93 replies to this topic

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

I saw this very interesting article in the Herald today and thought it might deserve some conversation here. Lots of good stuff in there, but this stood out to me:

But Francona seemed uneasy around his former team — “It’s a little awkward for me,” he said — and had a few pointed words for Red Sox principal owner John Henry, who phoned him a few weeks ago after not returning his calls earlier in the offseason.

“It was probably five months too late,” Francona said. “We talked. It doesn’t matter anymore. That’s what I kind of told him. I said, ‘We should have had this conversation a long time ago because anything you say now doesn’t matter.’ But he was good.”

Moreover, Francona said he hasn’t been asked to attend the 100th anniversary celebration of Fenway Park on April 20. He isn’t awaiting an invitation either.

“I’m not quite ready for the hugs yet,” he said. “I’m still trying to stop the bleeding.”

On the one hand, it sounds like the emotional wounds are still too raw for him to be truly comfortable with being around the Sox right now. On the other....how the HELL can the ownership exclude him from the 100th Anniversary ceremonies? That's unacceptable to me, if true.

“When I left, I thought I would just leave,” Francona said. “What happened after that hurt me a lot. It probably always will. The best thing to do is try to move on. Carrying grudges and stuff like that, that’s not real healthy. I spent eight years there, and we did a lot of good stuff. That hurt me a little bit.”

Obviously he's still pretty upset about the "whoring pill popper" story in the Globe. Frankly I can't blame him.

Lots of other info there. Check it out.

[Corsi]

Henry wouldn't return his calls? What a pussy. You OWN the team and sign the checks. Act like a man and stop having Lucchino do your bidding.

[TheoShmeo]

This was really interesting. The first, second and third times I read these points from Francona. Well, except for the "five months too late" point, which was indeed new.

Putting aside whether Tito has a fair beef, the frequency with which he's discussing these issues with the press reminds me a lot of Johnny Damon in his post-Red Sox period. I just hope that Tito wont talk about his departure for as long as Johnny did. Really, what more can be said? It was a great run that should not have ended on a sour note. Not fair, not right. We get it.

[Andrew]

I realize he could potentially just say, "No comment," but it's not like he's going out of his way to talk about this the way Damon did. People keep asking him about it and he is answering. ESPN probably loves it, anyway.

[cornwalls@6]

It's beyond shameful if they don't/haven't invited him to any of the 100 year stuff. I could understand his reluctance to attend, although I would hope he could get past that, but it is a complete joke if they don't ask. It still boggles the mind that an ownership group that has been so smart about most things the've done this past decade, could have butchered Tito's departure so badly. That said, I hope yesterday was his one occasion to vent, and that every sox game he does for espn this isn't going to be accompanied by this kind of interview/story.

[Gambler7]

It doesn't compare to Damon at all. This guy literally was called a drug addict in the papers AFTER he was fired. He had his personal laundry, true or not, aired for no reason. You could literally argue it cost him the St. Louis job, among other future ones. You can argue it is a huge hit to his career. Damon wasn't offered the same amount of millions the Yankees gave him and whined for years. How is that similar? I don't know, putting myself in his shoes I'd be pretty bitter, for a long time. Henry not returning his calls for 5 months? Really? I know we knew about this but it still boggles my mind, it's just like the 98.5 interview he did, he didn't seem that concerned with the article or the damage it did. He hadn't asked anyone questions about it, he was clueless.

[Oil Can Dan]

Kind of sounds like Tito told John Henry to go soak his head when they met a few weeks ago. Assuming that's the case, why would they invite him to the 100 year event? Were it your decision and if he had made it known that he's not over it and not interested in maintaining a relationship at this point in time, would you invite him?

[TheoShmeo]

I realize he could potentially just say, "No comment," but it's not like he's going out of his way to talk about this the way Damon did. People keep asking him about it and he is answering. ESPN probably loves it, anyway.

I realize that Tito is part of the media but he doesn't need to let himself continue to be the story. Bu it's a little ironic that one of Tito's skills as a manager was avoiding this kind of drama and giving answers that calmed potential stories, and now he keeps covering the same ground and picking at the same scab. I'm no shrink but I think he'd probably be better off if he used some of that manager act on himself. I get it, managers get paid to act differently than talking heads and he has no players to protect anymore. Still, I don't see how continuing to say pretty much the same thing is going to help him or change the narrative around the story. Isn't public sentiment already on his side?

[Rudy Pemberton]

Everything ends badly. Otherwise, it wouldn't end.

In a few weeks, games will start, and a lot of this off the field garbage will fade off into the distance, where it belongs.

[JBill]

Kind of sounds like Tito told John Henry to go soak his head when they met a few weeks ago. Assuming that's the case, why would they invite him to the 100 year event? Were it your decision and if he had made it known that he's not over it and not interested in maintaining a relationship at this point in time, would you invite him?

Of course. If Tito wants to decline the invite, he's entitled, but you extend him an invitation. If I were Tito, I wouldn't want to be anywhere near this ownership group if I could help it, outside of ESPN responsibilities, so I wouldn't blame him for not attending. Pretty shameful not to even be invited, although that's a distant second to having your bosses leak that you're a pill popper to the press.

[cornwalls@6]

Kind of sounds like Tito told John Henry to go soak his head when they met a few weeks ago. Assuming that's the case, why would they invite him to the 100 year event? Were it your decision and if he had made it known that he's not over it and not interested in maintaining a relationship at this point in time, would you invite him?

Yes. I think you still have to invite the guy who managed the 2004 and 2007 teams to the festivities. It costs them nothing to take the high road here, and it's simply the right thing to do.

[Corsi]

Kind of sounds like Tito told John Henry to go soak his head when they met a few weeks ago. Assuming that's the case, why would they invite him to the 100 year event? Were it your decision and if he had made it known that he's not over it and not interested in maintaining a relationship at this point in time, would you invite him?

Gotta take the high road. Every fan wants to see Tito there, so invite him.

[Hyde Park Factor]

I realize that Tito is part of the media but he doesn't need to let himself continue to be the story. Bu it's a little ironic that one of Tito's skills as a manager was avoiding this kind of drama and giving answers that calmed potential stories, and now he keeps covering the same ground and picking at the same scab. I'm no shrink but I think he'd probably be better off if he used some of that manager act on himself. I get it, managers get paid to act differently than talking heads and he has no players to protect anymore. Still, I don't see how continuing to say pretty much the same thing is going to help him or change the narrative around the story. Isn't public sentiment already on his side?

If the rest of the mediots wouldn't keep asking the same questions...

He could offer up a "no comment", but he's not out of line with anything he's saying so I don't really see the harm.

[Oil Can Dan]

All I'm saying is that he's gone on record as saying he's not interested/not ready "for the hugs", and so I think it's safe to assume he's told the owner that in so many words as well. So to throw stones at the Sox for not inviting him to something they know full well he's not going to accept means very little to me.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

All I'm saying is that he's gone on record as saying he's not interested/not ready "for the hugs", and so I think it's safe to assume he's told the owner that in so many words as well. So to throw stones at the Sox for not inviting him to something they know full well he's not going to accept means very little to me.

They still have to offer him the invite, IMO. Take the high road. Show some goddamn class for just once. How can they have a ceremony celebrating 100 years in the park without at least trying to get the 2 time WS winning manager there?

If they offer it and Tito refuses, well that's on him then, and shame on him in that case. But he hasn't even been invited. That's what we call a "snub."

[TheoShmeo]

It doesn't compare to Damon at all. This guy literally was called a drug addict in the papers AFTER he was fired. He had his personal laundry, true or not, aired for no reason. You could literally argue it cost him the St. Louis job, among other future ones. You can argue it is a huge hit to his career. Damon wasn't offered the same amount of millions the Yankees gave him and whined for years. How is that similar? I don't know, putting myself in his shoes I'd be pretty bitter, for a long time. Henry not returning his calls for 5 months? Really? I know we knew about this but it still boggles my mind, it's just like the 98.5 interview he did, he didn't seem that concerned with the article or the damage it did. He hadn't asked anyone questions about it, he was clueless.

You could argue that.

You could also argue that the guys who run the Cardinals

(1) could have taken a long look at the train wreck known as the September 2011 Boston Red Sox, including some of Tito's in game decisions, and concluded that perhaps the manager deserved some blame for what happened,

(2) could have ascertained that Theo Epstein wasn't going to hire Tito and drawn some conclusions from that,

(3) really liked Mike Matheny and had their heart set on him,

(4) really liked the idea of hiring a manager without managerial experience, as the White Sox also did,

(5) could have looked at Tito and said "man, this guy looks tired, wrong time to hire him,"

(6) could have been unimpressed with Tito's interview, as not everyone clicks, or

(7) could have had many other reasons not to hire him.

Even assuming -- as nearly everyone does -- that the Sox FO caused or were the leaks, it's very convenient to tie every bad thing that happened to Tito to LeakGate. Life is rarely that black and white.

As to Damon, the fact that there are indeed material differences in how they left doesn't change the fact that both of them continued to talk about their respective departures months after it happened. Other guys would have said something like "that was unfortunate but I'd rather not dwell on the past and would prefer to focus on what's ahead of me" or some such thing. And eventually, Tito will do just that.

[Gene Conleys Plane Ticket]

I realize that Tito is part of the media but he doesn't need to let himself continue to be the story. Bu it's a little ironic that one of Tito's skills as a manager was avoiding this kind of drama and giving answers that calmed potential stories, and now he keeps covering the same ground and picking at the same scab. I'm no shrink but I think he'd probably be better off if he used some of that manager act on himself. I get it, managers get paid to act differently than talking heads and he has no players to protect anymore. Still, I don't see how continuing to say pretty much the same thing is going to help him or change the narrative around the story. Isn't public sentiment already on his side?

Honestly, I never thought I'd say this, but Im getting a little sick of Francona and his bellyaching at this point. It's a new season, a new year, you've got a cushy new job and, not incidentally, you're a multimillionaire. Get over it.

I mean, seriously, there was a nasty article about him in the paper. I'm sure that it hurt his feelings and no doubt the bad press was uncalled for -- but get real. Celebrities and public figures are subjected to a million times worse every freaking day. And Terry Francona is both a celebrity and a public figure, no matter how down-to-Earth or "blue collar" he seems.

And as for John Henry not calling him back, frankly, who cares? When I've left jobs under whatever circumstance, I've never expected my calls to the old boss to be immediately returned or returned at all (which is why I have rarely made them). They've moved on and hopefully, so have I.

One thing I would not do is call over and over again -- SEVEN times! That sounds more like Jon Favreau in Swingers than an accomplished Major League manager. His complaining about not getting a call from John Henry seems whiny and small to me.

Did it ever occur to Tito that maybe, just maybe, John Henry doesn't want to talk to you?

Why not? Well, he gave you the most expensive and certainly one of the most talened teams in Red Sox history and entrusted you, not to mention paid you quite handsomely to "manage" it. And you managed it, all right. Into the ground.

In any other employment situation, I'd expect a boss to be pretty damn pissed off at one of his employees who turned in that level of performance. Or is the boss supposed to remain eternally grateful for accomplishments that happened years ago? Francona was generously compensated for his service to the Red Sox. It made him wealthy and famous and led to his current employment status as one of the highest-profile baseball commentators in the world. What else does John Henry owe him? Soothing words and pat on the head?

Was anything that happened to Terry Francona so horrible that it merits this continued bitching and moaning five months after the fact?

Please.

[mandro ramtinez]

Was anything that happened to Terry Francona so horrible that it merits this continued bitching and moaning five months after the fact?

He was anonymously accused of being an adulterous drug addict in the paper of record of the city where he worked and lived for the last eight years and where he had his greatest professional success. I think Francona has every right to feel aggrieved about that for as long as he chooses. He was treated awfully on his way out the door.

[Pearl Wilson]

Kind of sounds like Tito told John Henry to go soak his head when they met a few weeks ago. Assuming that's the case, why would they invite him to the 100 year event? Were it your decision and if he had made it known that he's not over it and not interested in maintaining a relationship at this point in time, would you invite him?

Yes. I don't care if Tito ran over JH's dog, slept with his wife, and peed in his cheerios. You swallow your pride and extend an olive branch. Because you can. And because not including Tito would turn the big celebration into a total sham, IMO.

How else will this rift ever be mended other than by a change of ownership? Do we expect Tito to wake up tomorrow and say "Gee I think this is the morning I'll forgive and forget"? It's not going to happen. The ugly episode dogs him daily. John Henry? I doubt the arrogant SOB ever gives it any thought.

[Gene Conleys Plane Ticket]

He was anonymously accused of being an adulterous drug addict in the paper of record of the city where he worked and lived for the last eight years and where he had his greatest professional success. I think Francona has every right to feel aggrieved about that for as long as he chooses. He was treated awfully on his way out the door.

To which I say, big f'in deal. If you don't want bad press, don't become a major public figure. It's an occupational hazard. He said his piece at the time, which it was his right to do. I guess its still his right to whine in public if he so chooses. But at this point, to me, it just makes him look petty and weak.

[Oil Can Dan]

Fine. I'm with Gene and Death (oops - meant Theo) on this. I'm willing to believe that the things mentioned in the article about Tito were - GASP - true! And that there remains a sentiment in the front office that those things did indeed have an impact on the greatest collapse of all time. Add that to the apparent fact that Tito told the owner to go eat his hat, and I'm not shedding tears that they didn't offer an invitation that they knew full well would not be taken.

edit to add - I think it's pretty disingenuous of Francona to offer up that he's not been invited to the party given that he apparently told Henry he's "not ready for the hugs". He's no idiot and he knew what he was doing when he mentioned that. And it worked.

Edited by Oil Can Dan, 23 March 2012 - 11:16 AM.

[JBill]

edit to add - I think it's pretty disingenuous of Francona to offer up that he's not been invited to the party given that he apparently told Henry he's "not ready for the hugs". He's no idiot and he knew what he was doing when he mentioned that. And it worked.

No, the "hugs" comment is not what he told Henry, it's what he told the author of the article. And he said this after telling the paper he wasn't invited. It reads more prideful to me, "I didn't even want to go to your stupid party anyway!" than some plan to garner sympathy. And how is he being disingenuous? It's all right there. He and Henry had an unpleasant convo, he's not invited, and he's still hurting after everything that happened. What deviousness!!

[Philip Jeff Frye]

To which I say, big f'in deal. If you don't want bad press, don't become a major public figure. It's an occupational hazard. He said his piece at the time, which it was his right to do. I guess its still his right to whine in public if he so chooses. But at this point, to me, it just makes him look petty and weak.

This wasn't "he can't manage a bullpen" or "why didn't he pinch hit for so and son" bad press. And it wasn't some reporter digging up news about his private life. There's stuff that comes with the territory and then there are private matters that you wouldn't expect your employer to use against you in a publicity stunt. The stuff ownership planted in the media clearly well beyond the line of "if you can't stand the heat..."

[Rudy Pemberton]

Maybe the invites just haven't gone out yet.

[86spike]

You could argue that.

You could also argue that the guys who run the Cardinals

(1) could have taken a long look at the train wreck known as the September 2011 Boston Red Sox, including some of Tito's in game decisions, and concluded that perhaps the manager deserved some blame for what happened,

(2) could have ascertained that Theo Epstein wasn't going to hire Tito and drawn some conclusions from that,

(3) really liked Mike Matheny and had their heart set on him,

(4) really liked the idea of hiring a manager without managerial experience, as the White Sox also did,

(5) could have looked at Tito and said "man, this guy looks tired, wrong time to hire him,"

(6) could have been unimpressed with Tito's interview, as not everyone clicks, or

(7) could have had many other reasons not to hire him.

or maybe he did a background check and found out that Tito actually does have some problems with his pill usage.

I know I'm distinctly in the minority on that topic, but I've felt all along that Francona's need for medications due to his health issues could have easily impacted his managerial responsibilities, whether he realized it or not. I'm not saying talking about it anonymously to the Globe was the right thing to do, mind you. I'm just saying that people who regularly use pain killers, even under strict doctor's supervision, are at serious risk of it affecting their life in negative ways.

Regardless, I'm with the "Tito should STFU now" crowd. John Henry's a big bad meany. Boo Hoo.

[wutang112878]

Lets assume all the leaked Tito stuff is true, if you are going to fire the guy is there a need to leak it other than for PR reasons? Probably not, so basically he had to take some tough press on his way out the door to help the RedSox PR, regardless of your profession I dont think thats necessary.

I have a feeling Tito has some dirt on Henry and Larry as well. I am going to go out on a limb and say there are some things Tito could leak that could make them look very bad, from baseball decisions/opinions, ownership involvement, bad management or even things not RedSox related. To his credit, I dont remember anything that it seemed that Tito leaked to make these guys look bad and make himself look better or just get revenge. So, if the worst thing he is going to do is whine to the press, on the record, then I think he should be allowed to do that without much criticism.

As for the 100 year invitation, maybe he got it maybe he didnt. Regardless, the high road / class act way to manage that would be for Larry and Henry to go to Tito and say 'it sucks the way things ended, but you were the most successful manager we ever had. So at least for this day could we bury the hatchet and celebrate the team and what you accomplished here'. I have this feeling that if they did that, Tito would probably be willing to go even if he didnt socialize with them.

[wutang112878]

I know I'm distinctly in the minority on that topic, but I've felt all along that Francona's need for medications due to his health issues could have easily impacted his managerial responsibilities, whether he realized it or not. I'm not saying talking about it anonymously to the Globe was the right thing to do, mind you. I'm just saying that people who regularly use pain killers, even under strict doctor's supervision, are at serious risk of it affecting their life in negative ways.

I dont disagree that using pain medication can impact ones ability to work. But it seems more like a convenient PR excuse to fire him to me. If it really was a problem, did it just crop up this season, or just in the last month? If they knew it was a problem during the season, why let him keep managing the team? If they really thought he was a great manager why not force him to get help?

Just my opinion, and we agree the leak thing was classless, but the use of the medication thing as the reason to me brings up more questions than it provides answers.

[Lose Remerswaal]

Maybe the invites just haven't gone out yet.

According to Gammons "everyone" who has ever worn a Sox jersey on the field has been invited for the festivities.

[trekfan55]

IMO Tito has to be invited to the 100 years Celebration.

The 2004 and 2007 teams will be mentioned, so he should at least be invited. Whatever excuse he gives for not participating should be besides the point (should he choose to do so).

OTOH, I really do not think that the Globe article is what prevented him from being hired by the Cardinals. They are the defending World Champions and are replacing a guy who is considered the bestest manager ever. Just because Tito interviewed we should not assume that this Globe article made them shy away. Like TheoShmeo said, there are plenty of possible reasons.

[Gene Conleys Plane Ticket]

I dont disagree that using pain medication can impact ones ability to work. But it seems more like a convenient PR excuse to fire him to me. If it really was a problem, did it just crop up this season, or just in the last month? If they knew it was a problem during the season, why let him keep managing the team? If they really thought he was a great manager why not force him to get help?

Just my opinion, and we agree the leak thing was classless, but the use of the medication thing as the reason to me brings up more questions than it provides answers.

Look, I think we all agree that the Hohler article was a low blow, true or not. But a) it comes with the territory and b) there is still no evidence that the "pill" leak came from management. They've consistently denied it. Maybe they're lying, maybe not. But the fact is, it is not at all implausible that Tito's legitimate use of pain pills cold have slipped over into overuse territory. That could happen to anyone, frankly. And if it did happen to Francona, my guess is that aroud the organization it would be pretty comon knowledge, if not all around baseball.

But it has become the conventional wisdom that "management leaked the story to damage Tito and justify firing him." But there isn't a shred of evidence to support that assumption. It's just an assumption. All we know for sure is that it turned up in the Globe story and that was a bummer for Francona. Maybe it affected whether he got the St. Louis job, maybe it didn't. We don't know that either. But otherwise, it doesn't seem to have damaged him at all, except by hurting his feelings. Sucks, but that's life in the public eye.

Edited by Gene Conleys Plane Ticket, 23 March 2012 - 01:00 PM.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

According to Gammons "everyone" who has ever worn a Sox jersey on the field has been invited for the festivities.

Will be great to see Jose Canseco out there once again.

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

If John Henry called Tito to break the ice in order to take the first step to get him to the 100th anniversary celebration, and received a response such as, "We should have had this conversation a long time ago because anything you say now doesn’t matter," yeah, maybe he would be inclined not to tender an invitation.

[Gene Conleys Plane Ticket]

Will be great to see Jose Canseco out there once again.

And Wil Cordero. Ah, the memories!

[wutang112878]

Look, I think we all agree that the Hohler article was a low blow, true or not. But a) it comes with the territory and b) there is still no evidence that the "pill" leak came from management. They've consistently denied it. Maybe they're lying, maybe not. But the fact is, it is not at all implausible that Tito's legitimate use of pain pills cold have slipped over into overuse territory. That could happen to anyone, frankly. And if it did happen to Francona, my guess is that aroud the organization it would be pretty comon knowledge, if not all around baseball.

I think we agree on a few things, the story was a low blow, we dont have evidence that management leaked it, and we also dont have evidence that they didnt. So its a judgement call on our opinions of who actually leaked it, and its probably not entirely relevant to this topic.

If we go back to the issue that brought us here, should Tito have a right to complain to the media, let me provide an example. The Yankees eventually decided they wanted to move on from Torre and it got ugly at the end there too. On the way out the door Torre didnt like the way he was treated and provided some info regarding the contract offer and how he thought it was a low-ball offer and it was just an attempt to get him to quit. I would argue that Torre was held in equal or maybe even higher regard in NY than Tito was here. I have to say the Torre exit was handled much better by the Yankees than the Tito exit was here. The Yankees basically said nothing, let him move one and didnt really crap on him in anyway as far as I can remember. In the management press conference after Tito's, Larry said he was 'confused' by Titos comments about not having management support... My point being, sure Tito took a small shot at management in his press conference, Larry took a shot back, then we had the leak [and who knows where it came from] but all things considered, while its spiteful and isnt going to help him get a job, if I were Tito I would probably be complaining to the press too.

[Lose Remerswaal]

Will be great to see Jose Canseco out there once again.

And Wil Cordero. Ah, the memories!

Israel Alcantara for me!

[Hyde Park Factor]

As far as where the leaks about Tito's personal life originated, the only thing that's truly relevant is what Tito believes and who he holds responsible. Everything going forward will be colored by that, whether or not he's right about what he thinks. He holds the FO responsible for something, in some fashion (there may even be stuff we don't know), and until he resolves that, this conversation will keep coming up.

[Hyde Park Factor]

Will be great to see Jose Canseco out there once again.

And Wil Cordero. Ah, the memories!

Israel Alcantara for me!

Sean Berry, anyone?

[trekfan55]

I think we agree on a few things, the story was a low blow, we dont have evidence that management leaked it, and we also dont have evidence that they didnt. So its a judgement call on our opinions of who actually leaked it, and its probably not entirely relevant to this topic.

If we go back to the issue that brought us here, should Tito have a right to complain to the media, let me provide an example. The Yankees eventually decided they wanted to move on from Torre and it got ugly at the end there too. On the way out the door Torre didnt like the way he was treated and provided some info regarding the contract offer and how he thought it was a low-ball offer and it was just an attempt to get him to quit. I would argue that Torre was held in equal or maybe even higher regard in NY than Tito was here. I have to say the Torre exit was handled much better by the Yankees than the Tito exit was here. The Yankees basically said nothing, let him move one and didnt really crap on him in anyway as far as I can remember. In the management press conference after Tito's, Larry said he was 'confused' by Titos comments about not having management support... My point being, sure Tito took a small shot at management in his press conference, Larry took a shot back, then we had the leak [and who knows where it came from] but all things considered, while its spiteful and isnt going to help him get a job, if I were Tito I would probably be complaining to the press too.

It was not exactly crapping on him but Hank did respond:

This article on ESPN.com has it.

You guys think Tito will also write a book? Edit to add: The book goes into a little more detail and Torre claims he made an offer to Cashman which he never relayed to ownership.

Edited by trekfan55, 23 March 2012 - 02:04 PM.

[Sprowl]

Look, I think we all agree that the Hohler article was a low blow, true or not. But a) it comes with the territory and b) there is still no evidence that the "pill" leak came from management. They've consistently denied it. Maybe they're lying, maybe not. But the fact is, it is not at all implausible that Tito's legitimate use of pain pills cold have slipped over into overuse territory. That could happen to anyone, frankly. And if it did happen to Francona, my guess is that aroud the organization it would be pretty comon knowledge, if not all around baseball.

But it has become the conventional wisdom that "management leaked the story to damage Tito and justify firing him." But there isn't a shred of evidence to support that assumption. It's just an assumption. All we know for sure is that it turned up in the Globe story and that was a bummer for Francona. Maybe it affected whether he got the St. Louis job, maybe it didn't. We don't know that either. But otherwise, it doesn't seem to have damaged him at all, except by hurting his feelings. Sucks, but that's life in the public eye.

Pedro's Hairstylist asked Hohler about his sources for the claim regarding Tito's use of pain medication, and got a very detailed response. A few excerpts from PH's post:

Hohler and the others said "many, many sources" contributed to the story, including the issue about pill popping and it's perceived effect on the Tito's ability to manage the team. There was a wide net cast -- as there should be -- and the allegations about the pill issue appeared to have legs given the number of people who talked about it and were in a position to know. He didnt say (obviously) if he took it to Larry or Werner or John Henry, nor did he say if he took it to Theo or Cherington (who also would have known if there was a legitimate concern or not), but I think the story implies that there was verification of some sort at every level within the ball club...


Hohler also added that because of the volume of confirmation they got on this one issue, they could not leave it out and did take it right to Francona to confirm/deny.

It seems pretty clear to me that: a) lots of people in the organization were aware of the pain meds issue; b) no single agenda by management or anybody else led to its disclosure; and c) it might not be a low blow by Hohler, if it actually did affect Francona's preparation and game management.

Tito is still the best Red Sox manager of my lifetime, with two World Series championships and countless good-humored and considerate interviews to his credit, but that doesn't mean the issue wasn't real. Maybe it should never have been discussed, but discussion is what message boards are for.

[wutang112878]

It was not exactly crapping on him but Hank did respond:

I have to plead ignorance on that one, I didnt remember hearing Hank say that. That said, Hank also said this after Torre went on his rant about the contract, and I would argue that I could kind of understand this response from Hank after Torre did a pretty effective job crapping on Yankee management. It would be one thing if he said something like 'I thought this was the contract Torre was actually worth', that would be crappy, but he didnt deny any of Torre's points about the contract offer, just pointed out that when Torre was hired it was a bold move. I really dont think thats too horrible of a thing to say, not nice certainly but not awful.

[trekfan55]

Pedro's Hairstylist asked Hohler about his sources for the claim regarding Tito's use of pain medication, and got a very detailed response. A few excerpts from PH's post:



It seems pretty clear to me that: a) lots of people in the organization were aware of the pain meds issue; b) no single agenda by management or anybody else led to its disclosure; and c) it might not be a low blow by Hohler, if it actually did affect Francona's preparation and game management.

Tito is still the best Red Sox manager of my lifetime, with two World Series championships and countless good-humored and considerate interviews to his credit, but that doesn't mean the issue wasn't real. Maybe it should never have been discussed, but discussion is what message boards are for.

This is mostly where I stand as well. In the beginning it looked like an agenda piece, or a smear job by someone in upper management. But Hohler did clarify that there were multiple sources, a lot of research was done, and it was taken to Tito for a response. He may be unhappy but at least it looks like journalism and not a smear job. And if (huge if) this cost him a job with the Cardinals he really cannot place the blame on John Henry for that. But I think he's more upset with Henry himself for the he handled everything.

I have to plead ignorance on that one, I didnt remember hearing Hank say that. That said, Hank also said this after Torre went on his rant about the contract, and I would argue that I could kind of understand this response from Hank after Torre did a pretty effective job crapping on Yankee management. It would be one thing if he said something like 'I thought this was the contract Torre was actually worth', that would be crappy, but he didnt deny any of Torre's points about the contract offer, just pointed out that when Torre was hired it was a bold move. I really dont think thats too horrible of a thing to say, not nice certainly but not awful.

That was my point. He did respond, not exactly to disparaging, but he could have left it alone, and now that he's been sort of demoted (at least as much as speaking to the media) you can be sure that statement would not have been made.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

You guys think Tito will also write a book?

He's already signed up to do one. Unfortunately it's with Shaughnessy.

[soxfan121]

He's already signed up to do one. Unfortunately it's with Shaughnessy.

Tough spot for you. It's SJH's sports book version of Schroedinger's Cat. The book is great! The book sucks!

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Tough spot for you. It's SJH's sports book version of Schroedinger's Cat. The book is great! The book sucks!

No, I'm not torn about it at all. It's with CHB, ergo it's awful. I could probably write the damn thing myself based on Shank's earlier works.

He's the only guy in history who's story about the 2004 Red Sox ended up pissing me off.

[Al Zarilla]

No, I'm not torn about it at all. It's with CHB, ergo it's awful. I could probably write the damn thing myself based on Shank's earlier works.

He's the only guy in history who's story about the 2004 Red Sox ended up pissing me off.

What, did he write this one?

[lexrageorge]

I'm sure it was a bit awkward for Tito to be back in the Red Sox dugout. After spending 8 years with guys like Papi, winning 2 Titles and 28 playoff games, and after being fired and then smeared, it would be truly difficult for him to simply not say anything or just offer a "no comment". The guy is human, not a robot.

Perhaps he didn't need to reveal his conversation with Henry, but the lack of an invite to the 100 year celebration was classless and may have just added enough salt to the wounds that are still quite fresh. I don't blame him for calling out Henry for that. The guy is the only World Series winning manager of the Red Sox that's still alive; you've got to invite him back, even if he does decide to decline.

Going forward, he's said all that needs to be said, and it's time to move on. The year in the broadcast booth will probably do him well, both from a health standpoint and also professionally. Hey, it worked for Valentine.

[JimBoSox9]

I always try to make sure that if I post on the main board, it's something with a point and not flippant or emotional.

That said...fuck the Red Sox if they don't invite Tito to the 100 years celebration and fuck anyone trashing Tito in this thread. He got trashed on his way out in a manner that embarrassed the organization. The Hohler article does absolutely, positivitely, "come with the territory", it was beyond the pale. If you're gonna accuse someone of benching Ortiz against a lefty, you can use anonymous sources. If you're going to accuse someone of drug use affecting job performance, you damn well better have a source on the record or solid evidence. Hohler had nothing besides a Nation desperate for rational explanations for an impossible collapse.

As far as I'm concerned, Tito's earned the right to say whatever he damn well pleases about the Red Sox.

[reggiecleveland]

As far as I'm concerned, Tito's earned the right to say whatever he damn well pleases about the Red Sox.

It is a good thing curses do not exist because the treatment of Foulke, Bellhorn, Tito, and even Damon by the a significant portion of Sox fans or the organization after decades of "in my lifetime" pleas is shameful, and bad karma.

Edited by reggiecleveland, 24 March 2012 - 12:38 AM.

[LoweTek]

It is a good thing curses do not exist because the treatment of Foulke, Bellhorn, Tito, and even Damon by the a significant portion of Sox fans or the organization after decades of "in my lifetime" pleas is shameful, and bad karma.

Well, can't expect much from the droves of come lately "fans" who emerged leading up to and following '04. Sometimes I wish the team would have a few bad years so they’d all go away.

It not at all a new phenomenon for RS management to mismanage popular personality departures. Harrington did it, Yawkey/O’Connell did it. Hell Harry Frazee did it. Now Henry/Lucchino do it. It’s like a Fenway tradition or something in the water at Yawkey Way.

Upon assuming ownership, it initially appeared as though it was a high priority for the Henry group to mend fences with many former players. A strong alumni office was established and players who’d had no contact with the team for years were extended olive branches. It seemed to be working for a while. Now it’s like nothing has changed at least as far as departures are concerned. It's a return to the norm.

Treating people with dignity on the way out must be a really hard thing to do for some reason.

As for Tito, he was the right guy at the right time. But his affiliative leadership style was bound to run out of steam. When you’re always a nice guy to the people you’re charged with leading, being friends with everyone is your priority, the people will continuously test boundaries and cross them until most boundaries disappear. The overly affiliative leader then loses his grip on his people. I always thought this would catch up to Tito and be his downfall. Assuming accounts of the collapse are true, it looks like this is exactly what happened. He as much as admitted he lost control of the players. It was inevitable given his leadership style.

That he had some prescription drug issues, that he had a deteriorating marriage, that he had a girlfriend as either cause or effect of the deteriorating marriage; I couldn’t care less about any of it. It’s tabloidism. The man is human. What a surprise.

Tito will always have my grace and gratitude. I can't imagine thinking otherwise.

[cornwalls@6]

I always try to make sure that if I post on the main board, it's something with a point and not flippant or emotional.

That said...fuck the Red Sox if they don't invite Tito to the 100 years celebration and fuck anyone trashing Tito in this thread. He got trashed on his way out in a manner that embarrassed the organization. The Hohler article does absolutely, positivitely, "come with the territory", it was beyond the pale. If you're gonna accuse someone of benching Ortiz against a lefty, you can use anonymous sources. If you're going to accuse someone of drug use affecting job performance, you damn well better have a source on the record or solid evidence. Hohler had nothing besides a Nation desperate for rational explanations for an impossible collapse.

As far as I'm concerned, Tito's earned the right to say whatever he damn well pleases about the Red Sox.

This. The issue is not whether it was time for a change, or if Tito had lost the clubhouse. Probably yes to both. The issue is treating the manager of 2 world series champions with some human decency and class on his way out the door. Having private medical information, and dirt about one's marriage leaked to the press by your former employers in some pathetic attempt to win the public over, is not part of the job, or what you signed up for, or whatever other laughable rationalizations that have been offered up in this thread. Tito would have every right to tell them to take their 100 year party and go fuck themselves with it. But if they have a shred of decency, they will publicly, with no reservations, extend the invitation and every courtesy that comes with it.