Learn from the Mets, don't hire Quade!

[Northside_slugger]

I think it would be a mistake to hire Mike Quade as the next manager of the Chicago Cubs. Simply, we just have to look at recent history of the New York Mets and see how they messed up. They hired Willie Randolph mid-season and Jerry Manuel took over. The team was horrid under Randolph, players hated him and the team played with no life. Under Manuel, the team woke up. Probably because they had something to prove, or play for their next contract, and Manuel lead the Mets on a rampage up the standings, which ultimately finished 2nd in the NL East. The Mets hired Manuel as their full time manager.

The following season, you could see the flaws of Manuel as manager. In big games, he was horrid, he seemed lost at times, and nothing really changed from the Randolph days, but, the Mets, a rich club, didn't want to look dumb and admit a mistake, kept Manuel on for a second season despite his 4th place finish. They blamed injuries, ect.

This past year, Mets struggled again. And just like Randolph's final year, players seemed to quit on him, played with no heart and were dull. Mets finished 4th and Mets finally fired him and the GM.

Now, here's Quade. Takes over a team that played with no heart, no passion, no desire and leads them to victories. It's easier to manage in "garbage" games then in games that count. Quade didn't manage any games of importance. Players had something to prove and played well. Quade deserves a high five, but not a new contract.

Theres a reason why the guy has been coaching baseball for like 30 years and never once sniffed a manager job in the majors.

If Quade is a mistake, we'll be stuck with him for another year, the jobs won't want to look dumb, just as the Mets didn't. When the games get bigger, when the expectations get bigger, thats when we can truly see what type of manager Quade is, and he has no experience and has never passed any of his interviews in the past, so, why take the risk now?

 

[Captain Obvious]

I think it would be a mistake to hire Mike Quade as the next manager of the Chicago Cubs. Simply, we just have to look at recent history of the New York Mets and see how they messed up. They hired Willie Randolph mid-season and Jerry Manuel took over. The team was horrid under Randolph, players hated him and the team played with no life. Under Manuel, the team woke up. Probably because they had something to prove, or play for their next contract, and Manuel lead the Mets on a rampage up the standings, which ultimately finished 2nd in the NL East. The Mets hired Manuel as their full time manager.

The following season, you could see the flaws of Manuel as manager. In big games, he was horrid, he seemed lost at times, and nothing really changed from the Randolph days, but, the Mets, a rich club, didn't want to look dumb and admit a mistake, kept Manuel on for a second season despite his 4th place finish. They blamed injuries, ect.

This past year, Mets struggled again. And just like Randolph's final year, players seemed to quit on him, played with no heart and were dull. Mets finished 4th and Mets finally fired him and the GM.

Now, here's Quade. Takes over a team that played with no heart, no passion, no desire and leads them to victories. It's easier to manage in "garbage" games then in games that count. Quade didn't manage any games of importance. Players had something to prove and played well. Quade deserves a high five, but not a new contract.

Theres a reason why the guy has been coaching baseball for like 30 years and never once sniffed a manager job in the majors.

If Quade is a mistake, we'll be stuck with him for another year, the jobs won't want to look dumb, just as the Mets didn't. When the games get bigger, when the expectations get bigger, thats when we can truly see what type of manager Quade is, and he has no experience and has never passed any of his interviews in the past, so, why take the risk now?

That's where I stopped reading. We're the Cubs. Kthanksbye.

 

[X]

I think it would be a mistake to hire Mike Quade as the next manager of the Chicago Cubs. Simply, we just have to look at recent history of the New York Mets and see how they messed up. They hired Willie Randolph mid-season and Jerry Manuel took over. The team was horrid under Randolph, players hated him and the team played with no life. Under Manuel, the team woke up. Probably because they had something to prove, or play for their next contract, and Manuel lead the Mets on a rampage up the standings, which ultimately finished 2nd in the NL East. The Mets hired Manuel as their full time manager.

The following season, you could see the flaws of Manuel as manager. In big games, he was horrid, he seemed lost at times, and nothing really changed from the Randolph days, but, the Mets, a rich club, didn't want to look dumb and admit a mistake, kept Manuel on for a second season despite his 4th place finish. They blamed injuries, ect.

This past year, Mets struggled again. And just like Randolph's final year, players seemed to quit on him, played with no heart and were dull. Mets finished 4th and Mets finally fired him and the GM.

Now, here's Quade. Takes over a team that played with no heart, no passion, no desire and leads them to victories. It's easier to manage in "garbage" games then in games that count. Quade didn't manage any games of importance. Players had something to prove and played well. Quade deserves a high five, but not a new contract.

Theres a reason why the guy has been coaching baseball for like 30 years and never once sniffed a manager job in the majors.

If Quade is a mistake, we'll be stuck with him for another year, the jobs won't want to look dumb, just as the Mets didn't. When the games get bigger, when the expectations get bigger, thats when we can truly see what type of manager Quade is, and he has no experience and has never passed any of his interviews in the past, so, why take the risk now?

Though you're comparing apples to asparagus, I see what you're trying to say. And I completely agree that we are setting ourselves back if we "settle" for Quade. I don't think they will, at the end of the day. If they are going to settle for anyone, it will probably be Ryno.

 

[Captain Obvious]

It's not settling if he's the best option. Which I'm really starting to think he is.

 

[stormbolter73]

The more I look at the situation, I am beginning to think that Quade might be the best option. If we are honest with ourselves, the Cubs are in full "rebuilding mode" despite what Hendry might want the fanbase to believe. So taking in the rebuilding, why throw Sandberg to the wolves with a less than stellar lineup in the near future. Are Cubs fans ready to hate Sandberg for not delivering with a mediocre team? It may do more harm than good. Then again, letting him go to another franchise could be just as damaging.

Quade might be just right to get through the transition that is going to take place. If he is successful, GREAT! Somebody gave Bobby Cox a break at some point and that turned out to be a pretty good situation for the Braves. If he struggels, he's out and you didn't have another big name hire fall flat on his face with a team in major transition.

It's just a thought, and like any sports fan worth their salt, I want the person that is going to give the team the best chance to win, but other factors have to be taken into consideration in that process.

I don't expect this scenario to hapen, but I wouldn't be shocked either.

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

I think it would be a mistake to hire Mike Quade as the next manager of the Chicago Cubs. Simply, we just have to look at recent history of the New York Mets and see how they messed up. They hired Willie Randolph mid-season and Jerry Manuel took over. The team was horrid under Randolph, players hated him and the team played with no life. Under Manuel, the team woke up. Probably because they had something to prove, or play for their next contract, and Manuel lead the Mets on a rampage up the standings, which ultimately finished 2nd in the NL East. The Mets hired Manuel as their full time manager.

The following season, you could see the flaws of Manuel as manager. In big games, he was horrid, he seemed lost at times, and nothing really changed from the Randolph days, but, the Mets, a rich club, didn't want to look dumb and admit a mistake, kept Manuel on for a second season despite his 4th place finish. They blamed injuries, ect.

This past year, Mets struggled again. And just like Randolph's final year, players seemed to quit on him, played with no heart and were dull. Mets finished 4th and Mets finally fired him and the GM.

Now, here's Quade. Takes over a team that played with no heart, no passion, no desire and leads them to victories. It's easier to manage in "garbage" games then in games that count. Quade didn't manage any games of importance. Players had something to prove and played well. Quade deserves a high five, but not a new contract.

Theres a reason why the guy has been coaching baseball for like 30 years and never once sniffed a manager job in the majors.

If Quade is a mistake, we'll be stuck with him for another year, the jobs won't want to look dumb, just as the Mets didn't. When the games get bigger, when the expectations get bigger, thats when we can truly see what type of manager Quade is, and he has no experience and has never passed any of his interviews in the past, so, why take the risk now?

:lmao:

 

[poodski]

I somewhat agree, but the Rockies did alright with Tracy?

 

[Northside_slugger]

:lmao:

Yeah, you're right. What was I thinking? Quade is the next great thing, the next great manager, Cubs will win 108 games next year and win the series. :beerbang:

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

Yeah, you're right. What was I thinking? Quade is the next great thing, the next great manager, Cubs will win 108 games next year and win the series. :beerbang:

:fap:

 

[Lex L.]

Northside slugger, youve expressed very valid concerns. Dont mind these Cubs organization apologists and let their criticisms discourage you from more lucid and honest posts.

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

Northside slugger, youve expressed very valid concerns. Dont mind these Cubs organization apologists and let their criticisms discourage you from more lucid and honest posts.

Opinions are like assholes.. Everybody has one.

 

[Lex L.]

Opinions are like assholes.. Everybody has one.

How original.

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

How original.

Originality doesn't matter. Content and point matter.

 

[Lex L.]

Originality doesn't matter. Content and point matter.

Exactly, and, once again, youre a Cubs organization apologist who wants very much for them to be like the Florida Marlins.

The economics of the sport isnt set up that way. The money gets funneled to the big market teams, who, in turn, should be spending more money. The Cubs are a huge piece of the current economic model and you continue with your silly mantra of being like the Marlins.

So, again, please explain to me what kind of content you provide?

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

Exactly, and, once again, youre a Cubs organization apologist who wants very much for them to be like the Florida Marlins.

The economics of the sport isnt set up that way. The money gets funneled to the big market teams, who, in turn, should be spending more money. The Cubs are a huge piece of the current economic model and you continue with your silly mantra of being like the Marlins.

So, again, please explain to me what kind of content you provide?

Not really a big Marlins fan.. but..

they do have two World Series rings with their system.. Seems to be more than we've had in over a century.

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

Lex.. you seem to be more of the Cubs apologist than I am.

Just saying.

 

[Lex L.]

Not really a big Marlins fan.. but..

they do have two World Series rings with their system.. Seems to be more than we've had in over a century.

Then for every Marlins, you have teams like the Royals, Pirates, Nationals/Expos that have been nothing but feeder systems for big market teams.

Ive got news for you. Look at the bigger markets. Theyre the ones that typically make the playoffs. Philadelphia (5), Houston (4), NY(1), LA (2), and, while Boston and St Louis arent top 5 in population, they have massive fan bases where baseball is concerned.

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

Then for every Marlins, you have teams like the Royals, Pirates, Nationals/Expos that have been nothing but feeder systems for big market teams.

Ive got news for you. Look at the bigger markets. Theyre the ones that typically make the playoffs. Philadelphia (5), Houston (4), NY(1), LA (2), and, while Boston and St Louis arent top 5 in population, they have massive fan bases where baseball is concerned.

Okay... That's somewhat normal baseball knowledge to anyone..

You aren't really basing your point on much.. Just repeating the same bullcrap over and over again thinking someone else is gonna change their mind based on what you keep repeating.

Guess what.. We are in the top 3 of earnings. No shit.

Does it mean that we are gonna go out and spend 100 mill this offseason on players? Probably not. There's nothing wrong with that.

Like you say.. there's teams that do well with certain strategies.

Yankees win with spending..

Cubs, Mets, Mariners.. etc... haven't done extremely well with spending.

There are plenty of avenues to take.. Sure Dunn, Webb.. whomever the big ticket is this offseason is an avenue.. There are other ones..

So don't just whine and repeat crap over and over and over again because you disagree with someone.

It gets boring in here and I think its gotten tiresome in the Bears forum too..

Cue Lex coming in: Daaah why don't they just play flag football then...Dahhh these players aren't tough!

Something about being paid a lot of money, Butkus et al did it for free, etc. Boy, I can't wait.

Nice reputation for not making very logical posts there.. Other posters notice it too buddy.

 

[Lex L.]

Okay... That's somewhat normal baseball knowledge to anyone..

You aren't really basing your point on much.. Just repeating the same bullcrap over and over again thinking someone else is gonna change their mind based on what you keep repeating.

Guess what.. We are in the top 3 of earnings. No shit.

Does it mean that we are gonna go out and spend 100 mill this offseason on players? Probably not. There's nothing wrong with that.

Like you say.. there's teams that do well with certain strategies.

Yankees win with spending..

Cubs, Mets, Mariners.. etc... haven't done extremely well with spending.

There are plenty of avenues to take.. Sure Dunn, Webb.. whomever the big ticket is this offseason is an avenue.. There are other ones..

So don't just whine and repeat crap over and over and over again because you disagree with someone.

It gets boring in here and I think its gotten tiresome in the Bears forum too..






Nice reputation for not making very logical posts there.. Other posters notice it too buddy.

Why am I not surprised that you would quote the two vaginas that no one likes.

Actually, theres nothing wrong with spending. Its the Cubs place to spend. Its a madate almost. And if theyre not spending money well, they need to replace Hendry. But Hendry (ie keeping Hendry) isnt bigger than the entire economic model of the sport or the Cubs place in it.

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

Why am I not surprised that you would quote the two vaginas that no one likes.

Actually, theres nothing wrong with spending. Its the Cubs place to spend. Its a madate almost. And if theyre not spending money well, they need to replace Hendry. But Hendry (ie keeping Hendry) isnt bigger than the entire economic model of the sport or the Cubs place in it.

There's no fan approved mandate to go up or down or stay the same. Ricketts can tell Jim to what to be at payroll wise.. It's his millions of dollars.

That's just what it is.