Still chafed by the way his tenure in Boston ended, former Boston Red Sox manager Terry Francona said Tuesday he would not be a part of any team festivities next week celebrating the 100th anniversary of Fenway Park.
...
“It’s a shame,” Francona told the Globe’s Dan Shaughnessy, with whom he is writing a book. “I’m sure they’ll have a great event and I was part of a lot of that stuff there, but I just can’t go back there and start hugging people and stuff without feeling a little bit hypocritical.”
...
“Until I’m more comfortable with some answers on what happened at the end of the year, I don’t want to have much to do with the organization and that’s a shame,” Francona told the Globe on Tuesday. “With all the good things that were accomplished, I just feel pretty strongly about that.
“It was pretty raw at the end of the year. I think I’ve done a pretty good job of moving on from that. At the same time, I’m never going to forget that,” Francona said, according to the report. “For me to go back and start waving and hugging, I’m just not comfortable doing that. I made it pretty clear to John Henry. When I told Larry that, he said, ‘Well, I haven’t talked to John about it.’ I said, well then how (expletive) important could it be?
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. Scott Ross Posted: April 11, 2012 at 10:19 PM (#4104573)Tito--> CHB ..... does not compute
I am not.
I am not.
(keep repeating until it becomes true)
Can't really blame him though.
About 4 years ago I said "I can't wait for the Francona book 'The Red Sox Years' in about 10 years". I was off a little.
Edit: If the Sox were 6-0, the FO wouldn't give two shits.
They invited Francona. He told them to f*ck off. How did they #### up?
Francona's the one who's going to look back at this in a few years and regret not going.
As an aside, sox are now 3.5 back...any word on whether Ray has declared their postseason hopes "over"?
Haha
Another 80 odd years and it could grow on you.
He's apparently upset that they didn't launch a full scale investigation to find who leaked it.
I certainly didn't do that. But he was owed a phone call (no less a call back!!) when THEIR employees did it. It's courtesy. Then again, it's lucchino, so all bets are off.
Nope, I think any effort would've been fine. He probably deserved a full-scale one though.
And again, not even a call back.
For the reasons he gave.
He may think that ownership was behind the smears. But he most definitely doesn't say it, and the only reason to come to such a firm conclusion is because you already have.
The Curse of the Lucchino is the way to go. And the curse won't be lifted until divers excavate a submerged piano, or David Ortiz, whichever is more nimble.
I read this exactly the same way. I don't think Francona really BELIEVES that Lucchino and Henry weren't behind the leaks; rather he's calling their bluff and saying "okay, so if it wasn't you it should be extremely easy for you to find out who it was. Care to share?"
Francona is no babe in the woods. He knows how Lucchino and Henry operate. He watched Theo quit for five weeks back in 2005 over the same sort of crap. I'm sure he suspects what we all do: that while it is technically true that Lucchico and Henry weren't the source of the leaks in the sense that they personally spoke to the Globe, it isn't true in any fair understanding of the term. Lucchino & Henry almost certainly did what anyone in their position would do in order to maintain a measure of deniability: they ordered a subordinate to give the information to the Globe.
Yeah, I can see why Francona might still be a little irked.
Francona is too savvy to be any more explicit but his actions speak volumes. If he has future managerial aspirations, getting in a public pissing match with a MLB owner isn't in his best interest.
The Mets could do it.
Or, you're hearing what you want to hear.
You came to the conclusion a long time ago that the Sox FO was behind it. So when the words don't fit, the actions have no choice but to speak volumes.
I'll buy it, CHB or not, and he's more than entitled to take a few shots back after the Hohler piece.
In a few years, no one's going to remember the Fenway Park Centennial festivities.
No one's going to care.
This looks like sports-talk radio fodder to me. It will all be completely forgotten before the All-Star break.
But ... Shaughnessy? If Francona is supposedly so miffed about an underhanded negative story from the Globe, why is he teaming up with the king of underhanded negative stories from the Globe? If he is such a player's manager, why align himself with hatchet man Shank? He is in danger of looking hypocritical if he is going to publicly air a bunch of drama and scandal in order to pimp his book, when supposedly he's offended by the airing of drama and scandal.
But ... Shaughnessy? If Francona is supposedly so miffed about an underhanded negative story from the Globe, why is he teaming up with the king of underhanded negative stories from the Globe? If he is such a player's manager, why align himself with hatchet man Shank? He is in danger of looking hypocritical if he is going to publicly air a bunch of drama and scandal in order to pimp his book, when supposedly he's offended by the airing of drama and scandal.
Yes, Shaughnessy, b/c he wants to make a lot of F-ing money on the book.
He got hatcheted, and he's going to give it right back. And who's better at that than Shaughnessy?
We all know that a hatchet-job will sell waaaay more copies than a bland positive book. Joe Torre did it, and it doesn't seem to have hurt him.
Why shouldn't Tito cash in?
No reason, but he may have mis-judged how teaming up with Shaughnessy will affect the perception of him. It might cause him to lose credibility and sales.
I think that depends on how much juicy stuff he has. If it's a boring litany of complaints, that could be true.
But, if he has a bunch of "They did what!?!?" revelations, it'll sell like hotcakes.
True. It will be a more interesting book if he goes full revelation on all the players. It would make him look like a hypocrite, though.
Yeah, and it was still a #1 NYT best seller for almost two months.
If I were him I would DEFINITELY come back for the 100th just for that reason though. The ovation he would get would be reminiscent of the fans cheering for Roger when he was with Toronto and Roger walking off the mound glaring at Dan Duquette's box after dominating the Sox.
Well, that's probably some evidence that Francona doesn't blame the Globe for his problems becoming public.
Shaughnessy is an established author. It might well be that a publisher would pay more for their collaborative efforts than was otherwise available. Who knows, maybe no one else made the pitch to Francona.
I'm also sad that Tito doesn't feel like he can come to the Centennial. He gave as much as anyone to the franchise over the last decade, and he deserves the huge ovation that he'd have gotten from the fans. Whoever leaked #### about him has a mean soul.
He lost control of his team in 2011 (a bad start and a horrid finish) and deserves to take the heat.
As for the leaker, only the Globe reporter(s) know the source - and he's teaming up with them?
So what explains their 81-42 record from 4/16 to 8/31? Was someone else managing then?
And he deserves to be accused of being a drug addict, with no real evidence, b/c his team played wretchedly for a month?
As for the leaker, only the Globe reporter(s) know the source - and he's teaming up with them?
Ever think that Shaughnessy might have told him who? And the answer may be causing some of his behavior towards the Sox.
What would be your grade of his managerial job in 2011?
If Francona knows that the owners outright leaked that stuff, or that they knew who did and are protecting him/her, he should say that outright. Otherwise, he's just complaining that the red sox didn't chase down and snuff every negative rumor about him. Was he as vigilant about protecting the players from the leaks about their private behavior as he wanted the owners to be for him?
C+? I'm not saying he didn't deserve to lose his job.
I'm just saying he didn't deserve to be slandered.
I would guess if he ever wants another managerial job, he shouldn't. He may very well not want one, though, which given his health is probably the case.
I wonder if any managers ever tease or threaten their players about whatever obnoxious thing they're doing winding up in their book. It would probably sound like an empty threat at the time, but it could have some teeth.
As for the 81-42 record during the middle of the season, so what? The April swoon and September collapse make that 123 game stretch irrelevant. No one wins an award for being manager of the summer.
I don't think so. He has every right to fire back.
As for the 81-42 record during the middle of the season, so what? The April swoon and September collapse make that 123 game stretch irrelevant. No one wins an award for being manager of the summer.
It matter b/c it shows he wasn't an incompetent manager. Again, it was time for him to go, but it could have been handled much, much better, and I don't blame him at all for being angry.
Depending on the fruits of Francona's apparent liaison w/ Shank, we may end up saying that he could have handled it better, and we don't blame ownership for being standoffish. Hopefully not.
He has the right to fire back, but it doesn't make him right.
The brand of the Red Sox was injured by the September debacle and the locker room stories and division. Francona is directly responsibile for these events. So he was fired for cause and is angry at his bosses? Tell me something new.
Oh please! The brand is just fine. Are they not still selling out every game?
He wasn't fired, his contract had expired.
Bob - All of this is absolutely true as is Francona's culpability in the appalling start of last year and 2010. But that does not mean Francona should have been subjected to the sort of garbage that the Boston Globe spewed out back in October in the Hohler article. I'm of the mind that that is on the Globe, not Henry/Lucchino but if I were in Francona's shoes I would be livid and looking to lash out.
I don't think anyone is saying he was unfairly let go. However, the Globe article makes it absolutely reasonable that he would be furious and given that he was apparently not given a full opportunity to speak in his defense he has every right to tell his side of the story.
It would be one thing if the Globe dug up the dirt on it's own, but the article itself said the info came from a team source. Once it was handed to the Globe, I don't see how they don't run a story, although they did a good job of getting Francona's rebuttal. It's also worth noting that, as far as I know, Francona has never directed his ire over the leaks toward the Globe, which might suggest that he thinks the blame lies elsewhere.
The problem I had with it is tht in the story they didn't link the drug and family stuff to performance in a tangible way. I feel if you are going to run something like that I think deceny demands you be able to demonstrate that it's newsworthy and they didn't do that.
The other issue is that by saying "a team source" the Globe leaves open the question of it being Henry or some putz in the mail room. I doubt it's either extreme but I think it's relevant to the story how connected the source is. The Globe's failure to provide context is another mark against them in my mind.
But I agree with Joe Bivens. I'd better have the chance to salute Tito in the near future, he earned it.
All of this is absolutely true as is Francona's culpability in the appalling start of last year and 2010.
Imagine how bad they'd have started this year if Francona were still there!
Oh, and it's not news that a recently fired (ok, not technically) manager doesn't want to come back for a lovefest. A few months doesn't heal that ####. Of course he's not coming back.
It's been reported that he'll be doing the Sunday Night ESPN telecast in the same series as the anniversary game he's skipping. Shouldn't be too difficult for the Red Sox to put him on the scoreboard with a "Thanks Tito" - unless they want to go ### for tat. Of course, some fans may start chanting "BRING BACK FRANCONA" before then if the current difficulties continue.
EDIT: The Nanny seems a little over-zealous.
yeah. why is ### banned? especially when the plural isn't? who ever refers to a single ### unless it's not actually a mammary?
Exceeded in the franchise annals by whom, exactly?
Jus checkin.
Well, Joe McCarthy was a better manager (maybe the best ever), but only 2.5 seasons (excellent ones, 223-145) of that was for Boston.
I don't think they are. And I'd guess their TV ratings are going down.
That being said, the brand is still fine as you say, and the mid-aughts peak of Sox fever was unsustainable either way.
edit: E.G. plenty of tickets available for the games against the Rangers next week (although the Sox might fudge it to claim that the "sellout streak" lasts).
But the issue is that it is unlikely that the same people doing the firing were doing the smearing.
True, but Tito didn't do any tarnishing. He may though, when the book comes out.
I think Bob Tufts above was saying that the September losing and poison clubhouse, both helmed by Tito, did some tarnishing.
And I disagree. Failure is not necessary a shameful activity.
Absent any info that Tito did something different than what he was doing during all those winning years, I can't really affix any blame.
It doesn't tarnish your reputation or the teams' reputation that you reach the end of your shelf-life as a manager. It happens to every manager, no matter how great.
Maybe that info isn't absent to the owners.
Then they should share that instead of letting accusations of drug abuse float around.
If they weren't behind those leaks, they should have immediately called Tito, and made a public announcement that they gave no credence to the allegations. It's basic human decency.
Unlikely? Maybe not proven to everyone's satisfaction, but unlikely seems an overstatement.
But then they would be smearing the guy on the way out of town! The people who are complaining that they didn't defend him enough from leaks would be twice as mad.
I agree in general, and it seems this is what bothered Francona. But let's remember the context of the "allegations." It was a big long all-encompassing piece about the September collapse that covered a lot of aspects. Within that, if I am remembering correctly, was a relatively brief anonymous claim that "team sources" became concerned about Tito's personal stuff detracting from the team. I don't think the team necessarily has to issue a public defense every time someone writes something negative about one of their players/managers. If so, they would be issuing public statements three times a day. Should they rush out and give public support every time someone makes fun of Bobby V? Now it does seem likely that they misjudged Tito's feelings about this particular situation and messed up by not paying attention to him. But it's not "basic human decency" to defend their people and ex-people from every bad thing uttered on the web, in papers, and on TV and the radio. It wasn't like Francona was accused of some evil crime and the Sox ownership stood by silently.
Quid pro quo, in exchange for confirmation that the front office was the source of the leak.
"I always knew it was you, Fredo."
Which is exactly what you'd expect Henry or Lucchino to say, if they were the source of the initial leak. Blame it on the guy who just left town... just like with Francona.
that update was obviously planted by Lucchino and Henry as they twirled their mustaches...
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main