Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, September 27, 2020

Ron Roenicke let go as Boston Red Sox manager; team will begin search immediately

Ron Roenicke will not return to manage the Red Sox in 2021, the club announced before Sunday’s game. A search for his replacement will begin immediately.

Roenicke was hired as Boston’s manager in February, replacing Alex Cora. The Red Sox are 23-36 this season and will play their final game of the year Sunday afternoon in Atlanta.

“Throughout this difficult season, Ron’s consistency and professionalism kept the environment in our clubhouse productive and gave all of our players room to grow and develop,” chief baseball officer Chaim Bloom said in a statement. “While we believe that, moving forward, we will benefit from new leadership and new energy, that does not diminish how strongly we feel about Ron. He is a man of the highest character who cares about our players and the Red Sox organization. As bench coach, he helped this team win a world championship. As manager, he showed poise and leadership in navigating an extremely challenging year. We are grateful for all of his contributions in our uniform.”

RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: September 27, 2020 at 01:40 PM | 45 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: red sox, ron roenicke

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. Captain Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: September 27, 2020 at 02:18 PM (#5979148)
While we believe that, moving forward, we will benefit from new leadership and new energy, that does not diminish how strongly we feel about Ron. He is a man of the highest character who cares about our players and the Red Sox organization. As bench coach, he helped this team win a world championship. As manager, he showed poise and leadership in navigating an extremely challenging year. We are grateful for all of his contributions in our uniform.”


"It's just that his leadership and energy sucked."

No it didn't.


Edit..to be clear, a living, 50 y.o. Earl Weaver wouldn't have squeezed more wins out of this team. If they want to make a splash with a big-name manager, god bless, but unless they add a couple of SPs to go along with Sale and ERod (assuming they return healthy), it will not work.
   2. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: September 27, 2020 at 05:12 PM (#5979169)
As a lifelong Red Sox fan, I was fine with the Betts trade, given that it looked very unlikely that he was going to stay in Boston after the 2020 season (maybe that was the spin by management, etc....whatever).

Then, when the pandemic hit, and Price said he was opting out of the season, the trade looked even better....

Then, when MLB decided to do a half-ass 60-game season, with 16 playoff spots, the trade looked even better...

Then, when Bloom was able to make a series of deadline deals to pick up prospects that strengthen the farm system, the trade looked even better...

Then, when Verdago ended up having an excellent season, and the team was able to give a lot of young players some legit playing time (Houck, Dalbec, etc.), the trade looked even better.

The team took a really undesirable situation entering the season, and instead of muddling through it, half-assing the season, maybe making the final playoff spot, they decided to just call it what it was: a dumpster fire. We learned something about a number of young players, got more prospects for the future, cleaned out a bunch of payroll, dealt with a TJ surgery of our ace and got it out of the way, and didn't lose a dime in gate revenue in the process.

Our farm system (using www.SoxProspects.com rankings), acquired the system's current number 11, 12, 15, and 20 prospects with deadline deals, and a young, cheap, good starting RF and the system's number 2 and 19 prospects, plus got rid of much of Price's salary, for 60 games of Mookie Betts.

Roenicke never had anything to do with the rebuild of the team beyond 2020. Next year won't be amazing, I suspect, but it will get better. They'll probably aggressively seek to keep JBJ, and Martinez will almost certainly opt-in for the remaining contract. That means the team starts the off-season with something like:

C - Vazquez
1B - Dalbec
2B - Downs
3B - Devers
SS - Bogaerts
LF - Hmmm...Benintendi starts with a chance, then we'll see...
CF - JBJ
RF - Verdago
DH - Martinez
SP - Sale
SP - ERod
SP - Eovaldi
SP - Perez
SP - Houck
RP - What...Barnes, Hernandez, Wallace as soon as he looks ready...and then a bunch of guys probably not in the organization right now?
   3. Captain Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: September 27, 2020 at 05:48 PM (#5979175)
Brasier is fine. I wouldn't give up on him.
   4. villageidiom Posted: September 27, 2020 at 06:47 PM (#5979200)
Martinez is gone. If he opts out they won't re-sign him. If he opts in, he will be traded because finally the team trading for him knows what contract they're getting.
   5. Random Transaction Generator Posted: September 27, 2020 at 10:44 PM (#5979289)
What are the odds Alex Cora gets the job? 8-to-1? 6-to-1? He's served his time...
   6. MHS Posted: September 27, 2020 at 11:07 PM (#5979294)


As a lifelong Red Sox fan, I was fine with the Betts trade



Then you are a fool. Good luck.
   7. Jose Needs an Absurd Ukulele Concert Posted: September 27, 2020 at 11:14 PM (#5979295)
I don’t think Cora gets the job, I think Bloom wants to bring someone new in.
   8. Zach Posted: September 28, 2020 at 12:51 AM (#5979298)
Our farm system (using www.SoxProspects.com rankings), acquired the system's current number 11, 12, 15, and 20 prospects with deadline deals, and a young, cheap, good starting RF and the system's number 2 and 19 prospects, plus got rid of much of Price's salary, for 60 games of Mookie Betts.

#2 is one thing, but 11, 12, 15, 19, and 20th best prospects in a single team's farm system? You're letting them off too easy.
   9. Walt Davis Posted: September 28, 2020 at 03:45 AM (#5979308)
fangraphs Red Sox top 10 from 2914 (obviously some good players at the top here):

X, Bradley, Cecchini, Betts, Swihart, Henry Owens, Barnes, Trey Ball, Allen Webster, Vazquez

A bonus 5:

Jonathan Denney, Margot, Anthony Ranaudo, Deven Marrero, Workman

A very deep system in those days. 2 years later here's how mlb.com saw it:

Benintendi, Devers, Jay Groome, Sam Travis, Brian Johnson, Chavis, Josh Ockimey, Travis Lakins, Roniel Raudes, Trey Ball (down from #8)

CJ Chatham, Nick Longhi, Chandler Shepherd, Jake Cosart, Deven Marrero (down from #14), Dalbec

In that second 10, that's about what you can count on -- 1-2 eventually solid players for a few years. Vazquez has amassed 3.6 WAR but seems to have settled into being a pretty good player ... although he would have been FA after this year if they hadn't extended him. Workman had already made the majors and he amassed 3.1 WAR before hitting FA. Margot has put up a solid 7 WAR and still has 2 years of control left. Dalbec has had a ripping first 92 PA.

It's of coure always a good idea for a losing team to trade a pending FA reliever for a top 500 (give or take) prospect -- they probably won't amount to anything but occasionally you'll get lucky and have a player who's useful for a couple of years -- never a bad thing. But you're unlikely to get a player better than Workman or Vazquez and it will probably be a bumpy ride and may take a while. FWIW, all 4 of those guys were drafted by the Red Sox, not acquired in trade.
   10. Astroenteritis Posted: September 28, 2020 at 09:09 AM (#5979327)
A.J. Hinch is available.
   11. Darren Posted: September 28, 2020 at 10:32 AM (#5979342)
I can't for the life of me imagine the Sox going back to Cora. Who wants to have to answer questions about the sign-stealing all over again? Add to that the team's poor showing in 2019 and I put the odds of his return at about 5,000 to 1. No I will not be accepting bets. (I will take Betts though!)
   12. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: September 28, 2020 at 11:36 AM (#5979363)
Double post
   13. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: September 28, 2020 at 11:36 AM (#5979364)
But you're unlikely to get a player better than Workman or Vazquez and it will probably be a bumpy ride and may take a while.


As a Phillies fan the idea that a randomly selected prospect would be better than Brandon Workman sounds extremely likely, in fact.
   14. Nasty Nate Posted: September 28, 2020 at 11:54 AM (#5979367)
Workman gave up more extra-base hits in his 13 Phillies innings this year than he did in the entire 2019 season (70 innings).
   15. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: September 28, 2020 at 12:07 PM (#5979374)
Also for anyone who was wondering, Heath Hembree gave up 17 hits, 5 walks, 2 HBP and 7 home runs in 9.1 Phillies innings.
   16. puck Posted: September 28, 2020 at 02:31 PM (#5979406)
I noticed the Phillies bullpen somehow ended up with a higher ERA than the Rockies' bullpen. That's an achievement.
   17. Tom Goes to the Ballpark Posted: September 28, 2020 at 03:39 PM (#5979419)
Then, when the pandemic hit, and Price said he was opting out of the season, the trade looked even better....
Doesn’t that make the trade look worse? The Red Sox sent a bunch of money to the Dodgers this year and the Dodgers didn’t have to pay Price anything.
   18. Jose Needs an Absurd Ukulele Concert Posted: September 28, 2020 at 04:27 PM (#5979431)
Doesn’t that make the trade look worse? The Red Sox sent a bunch of money to the Dodgers this year and the Dodgers didn’t have to pay Price anything.


That's interesting. How do those trades work? Did the Sox actually send them a bunch o' dough or do they just pay his salary each month (or whenever)?
   19. Tom Goes to the Ballpark Posted: September 28, 2020 at 05:14 PM (#5979445)
Bunch o’ dough
   20. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: September 28, 2020 at 06:03 PM (#5979457)
If the Dodgers still demanded all the money after Price opted out, I think I'd send it in pennies.
   21. Ron J Posted: September 29, 2020 at 12:19 AM (#5979491)
#20 I know Derek Sanderson once paid off a bet in dollar bills and pennies. It was only one thousand dollars though. There is a practical downside.
   22. Tom Goes to the Ballpark Posted: September 29, 2020 at 02:28 AM (#5979495)
If the Dodgers still demanded all the money after Price opted out, I think I'd send it in pennies.
This is a bit silly. The trade is the trade. The Dodgers aren’t going to ask for Jeter Downs back because they got 100 games fewer from Mookie in 2020.
   23. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: September 29, 2020 at 09:53 AM (#5979514)
That's interesting. How do those trades work? Did the Sox actually send them a bunch o' dough or do they just pay his salary each month (or whenever)?


Fairly certain the Sox and Dodgers each pay Price. And since Price was not high-risk, and he opted out, it means the Sox didn't have to pay his prorated $6M. Which may reduce his overall contract numbers, saving the Sox some room in their CBT number through 2022. I think.
   24. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: September 29, 2020 at 11:52 AM (#5979533)
I think #23 is correct - the Red Sox send less money over to LA, and LA saves some money this year, as well, by not paying Price their portion of his prorated 2020 salary.

My basic point, as a Red Sox fan, is that if we had not traded Mookie, how much better would the 24-36 Red Sox have been? Keep in mind, Verdago has the 6th-highest WAR (tied with Bradley, actually) among AL position players, with 1.9 WAR. He was excellent this year. Betts had the highest WAR in the majors, with 3.4. He was elite.

Then, if you want to add some increased win total by *not* trading Moreland, Pillar, Workman, Hembree, etc., I guess you can try - but the team's best stretch was *after* they started trading all those guys away. They were 6-18 after the games of August 18th, and 18-18 after that. Shoot, they went 12-9 in their last 21 games (which was more than a third of the "season"), mainly because their starting pitching got a lot better and more stable (Houck, Pivetta, and Eovaldi were quite good down the stretch). They started trading guys on August 21st.

If we hadn't traded Betts, we'd be in a whole heap of cost-cutting trouble with the luxury tax, we wouldn't have gotten Verdago, Downs, Wong, or any of the deadline deal prospects...and we probably *still* wouldn't have made the playoffs. And much of Red Sox Nation would be complaining this week that we should have ripped the band aid off in 2020, and gotten to the task of building the next great Red Sox team.
   25. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: September 29, 2020 at 01:45 PM (#5979560)
I think #23 is correct - the Red Sox send less money over to LA


Bit of a quibble - the Sox pay Price directly, there's no money to LA. If LA trades Price the new team would be on the books for $32 of Price's remaining contract, and the Sox the other $32, and LA $0.
   26. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: September 29, 2020 at 01:58 PM (#5979567)
Steve Balboni - I admire your patience, but continuing to explain your perfectly reasonable defense of the Mookie trade is just going to bounce right off the MHSs of the world.
   27. Captain Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: September 29, 2020 at 02:04 PM (#5979568)
I don't think the post mortems on the Betts trade stop at the 2020 season. Going forward, would you want Betts, or Verdugo et al? If you can't pay Betts, then you're telling fans that you can't pay Devers, when he becomes a FA. Boston isn't a small market team. They shouldn't be losing elite players to FA.
   28. SoSH U at work Posted: September 29, 2020 at 02:09 PM (#5979571)
I don't think the post mortems on the Betts trade stop at the 2020 season.


They also don't start with the 2019 offseason. If this was the priority, than it should have started by not giving Sale the ridiculous extension and other moves following the WS win.
   29. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: September 29, 2020 at 02:27 PM (#5979579)
#24/26 - Should the Angels trade Mike Trout to facilitate a re-build?
   30. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: September 29, 2020 at 02:41 PM (#5979583)
I don't think the post mortems on the Betts trade stop at the 2020 season. Going forward, would you want Betts, or Verdugo et al? If you can't pay Betts, then you're telling fans that you can't pay Devers, when he becomes a FA. Boston isn't a small market team. They shouldn't be losing elite players to FA.
So much of the discussion of the trade just assumes that Mookie would definitely have re-signed with the Red Sox, but there's no evidence of that. And even if you do assume he would have stayed if Boston was the highest bidder, not wanting to pay a player top-of-the-market dollars until he's almost 40 is perfectly reasonable, even without all the other concerns like getting under the tax.

They also don't start with the 2019 offseason. If this was the priority, than it should have started by not giving Sale the ridiculous extension and other moves following the WS win.
True.

#24/26 - Should the Angels trade Mike Trout to facilitate a re-build?
Come on. Trout is already signed long-term, so it's a totally different situation. Whether that contract was a good idea or not is a separate issue, but it's as reasonable as a huge-money, long-term contract is going to get.
   31. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: September 29, 2020 at 03:49 PM (#5979609)
Come on. Trout is already signed long-term, so it's a totally different situation. Whether that contract was a good idea or not is a separate issue, but it's as reasonable as a huge-money, long-term contract is going to get.


Trout is getting $37M until he is 38. Betts is getting $30.4 until he is 39. Seems like if Trout's contract is reasonable then Betts's is too. And Betts is as close to Trout as anybody else in baseball. Since 2015, Betts first full season, he's 4 wins shy of Trout!

Put simply - if the Sox are not willing to sign Betts, then they shouldn't be willing to sign anyone to large contracts - likable, homegrown, amazingly good, obviously can play in Boston, young, no health issues.

And clearly the Sox do have the resources to sign very large contracts, and they have a history of doing so. As Bivens said - They shouldn't be losing elite players to FA.
   32. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: September 29, 2020 at 04:10 PM (#5979619)
#31:

Obviously, Mookie Betts is somebody the Red Sox want to keep, the fans, his teammates, everybody. He is everything you say.

The Red Sox have the money to give multiple big-time contracts to players. If there had been no luxury tax element, it is entirely possible they would have opened the vault for Mookie - or at least offered the vault.

But the problem is not Mookie Betts at $30.4m/yr. It is also not Mike Trout at $37m/yr.

It is Nathan Eovaldi at 4 yrs/$68m.

It is David Price at 7 yrs/$217m, with a player opt-out clause in the middle so that if he's awesome, he walks, and if he isn't, the team is stuck with him.

It is, amazingly, Pablo Sandoval, at 5 yrs/$90m, with a $5m buyout of a sixth-year option...which the Red Sox had to pay *this year*. Let me say that again: Pablo Sandoval's contract is still costing the team millions of dollars against the luxury tax threshold *this f**king year*, and they cut him in 2017. He played 159 games, with an OPS+ of 71, and they paid him $90 million, including $5 million this year.

It is Chris Sale getting 5/$145 despite worrisome health indicators, with a player opt-out after 2022, and no-trade status starting next year.

It is signing a DH (a good one), J.D. Martinez, for 5/$110, with player opt outs after 2019 and 2020.

I don't mind the Pedroia contract, but he is obviously all done...and he had a $13m number this year, and a $12.5m number in 2021.

It is maddening to think about all the wasted money that could have gone to Betts, but once all that poor decision-making was done, *that's* when you are in a position to either trade Betts while you can, or get nothing. This actually has nothing to do with how anybody feels about Betts...it's about a lot of terrible contracts coming home to roost.
   33. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 29, 2020 at 04:10 PM (#5979620)
So much of the discussion of the trade just assumes that Mookie would definitely have re-signed with the Red Sox, but there's no evidence of that.
Well, there is no evidence that Betts wanted out of Boston, either. Why would he? Are the Red Sox fans & people of Boston really that bad? Did Betts always want to play on the West Coast? Never saw anything here or elsewhere indicating Betts disliked playing for the Red Sox. On TV, FWIW, he looked to be having a good time. What is perplexing, is that the Red Sox never made him a fair market proposal, or last best offer. They appear to have offered a mildly low-ball deal, and then decided to move on when Betts balked at that.
   34. Captain Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: September 29, 2020 at 04:30 PM (#5979628)
33...all pretty much accurate.

The team is one of the highest valued franchise in all of sports. They can afford to pay a luxury tax to keep players like Betts. (I didn't have this opinion at the time of the trade...I bought in to the austerity program they've undertook. But yeah, as 32 says, the problem isn't paying Betts 400M, it's paying unproven oft injured Eovaldi 68M, The Fat Kid 90M, and the list goes on. Maybe Bloom will be smarter than that. I don't want to see this team build, then get torn apart, then re-build, on a constant loop.)
   35. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: September 29, 2020 at 04:55 PM (#5979633)
The team is one of the highest valued franchise in all of sports. They can afford to pay a luxury tax to keep players like Betts.
Is there any limiting principle on that line of thinking? What is the point of having a luxury tax if it doesn't prevent what it's supposed to prevent - (a) rich teams from signing all the [good] players, or (b) rich teams from avoiding the consequences of their bad decisions by just throwing more money at other players?
   36. Ron J Posted: September 29, 2020 at 05:34 PM (#5979651)
#35 Yes. Ownership unwillingness to follow that line of thinking.

Thing is there are plenty of owners willing to cut big checks. They mostly own soccer teams in Europe though. Even Steinbrenner the elder had some sensitivity to the luxury tax.

And a lot of ownership groups have borrowed substantial money and even if they personally were willing to go past the cap, they're answerable to others -- who generally want a fairly conservative financial setup.
   37. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: September 29, 2020 at 05:39 PM (#5979654)
#35 Yes. Ownership unwillingness to follow that line of thinking.
Right, but Mr. Bivens is arguing that that's not valid.
   38. Captain Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: September 29, 2020 at 07:27 PM (#5979680)
I'm saying that in the case of the Red Sox, it isn't valid. If the Indians want/need to be frugal, I get it. But the Red Sox have played in a sold out Fenway park for years, charging some of the highest ticket prices in the majors, offering sub-standard ballpark food at ridiculously high prices, again, for years. TV revenue. They are making lots of money.

I'm not sure that winning a WS every 5 years or so (on average), coupled with teams either mediocre or cellar dwelling in between (with some exceptions) is better than having a team that has a chance to win every year.

   39. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: September 29, 2020 at 07:36 PM (#5979681)
I'm saying that in the case of the Red Sox, it isn't valid. If the Indians want/need to be frugal, I get it. But the Red Sox have played in a sold out Fenway park for years, charging some of the highest ticket prices in the majors, offering sub-standard ballpark food at ridiculously high prices, again, for years. TV revenue. They are making lots of money.
So the luxury tax should just be toothless against the teams it's supposed to be targeting?
   40. Captain Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: September 29, 2020 at 07:57 PM (#5979690)
So the luxury tax should just be toothless against the teams it's supposed to be targeting?


It seems like the Yankees haven't suffered too much since 2002.
   41. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: September 29, 2020 at 10:26 PM (#5979705)
They can afford to pay a luxury tax to keep players like Betts


Yep.

I found the whole thing quite odd. They didn't even offer a reasonable type of 10/340 type of deal. "getting under the lux tax" seems like such a poor excuse for not signing the 2nd best player in baseball. I keep thinking there is more to it, but I could be just way off on that.
   42. Nasty Nate Posted: September 30, 2020 at 01:34 PM (#5979786)
I'm saying that in the case of the Red Sox, it isn't valid. If the Indians want/need to be frugal, I get it. But the Red Sox have played in a sold out Fenway park for years, charging some of the highest ticket prices in the majors, offering sub-standard ballpark food at ridiculously high prices, again, for years. TV revenue. They are making lots of money.

I'm not sure that winning a WS every 5 years or so (on average), coupled with teams either mediocre or cellar dwelling in between (with some exceptions) is better than having a team that has a chance to win every year.
Well, the "exceptions" out-number the mediocre/cellar-dwelling teams and they all had high payrolls, so I think you're mixing up a few things.
   43. Captain Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: September 30, 2020 at 01:57 PM (#5979797)
I was talking only about the Red Sox, and their recent history of feast or famine.
   44. Nasty Nate Posted: September 30, 2020 at 02:03 PM (#5979801)
OK, I thought you were going back in time a bit further. But all the famine years were teams with high spending, so the plan hasn't been frugality in between winning years.
   45. Captain Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: September 30, 2020 at 03:29 PM (#5979861)
But all the famine years were teams with high spending, so the plan hasn't been frugality in between winning years.

True, they saddled themselves with bad contracts from bad signings that forced them to let Betts go. They need to be smarter. I know I'm Monday morning quarterbacking here, but if you're gonna go 5 or more years with a contract, it better be for a Mookie Betts rather than a Pablo Sandoval.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
TedBerg
for his generous support.

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogWORLD SERIES 2020 OMNICHATTER!
(489 - 8:43pm, Oct 25)
Last: Rally

NewsblogEmpty Stadium Sports Will Be Really Weird
(10152 - 8:20pm, Oct 25)
Last: Mayor Blomberg

NewsblogExclusive: Ex-Astros exec Mike Elias eyed for potential MLB pension fraud in his new role as Orioles GM
(7 - 8:16pm, Oct 25)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogAlex Rodriguez says he would have increased Mets' payroll to $225 million if he'd purchased team
(20 - 6:56pm, Oct 25)
Last: Howie Menckel

NewsblogOT - Soccer Thread - Brave New World
(436 - 5:28pm, Oct 25)
Last: AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1932 Ballot
(3 - 4:53pm, Oct 25)
Last: Yardape

NewsblogA Conversation With Tom House, the “Father of Modern Pitching Mechanics”
(7 - 4:15pm, Oct 25)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogBaseball fans’ biggest problem with Rob Manfred? He doesn’t appear to be one of them
(20 - 3:48pm, Oct 25)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogOT - NBA Bubble Thread
(4034 - 2:40pm, Oct 25)
Last: puck

NewsblogSources on what it could take to land Trevor Bauer -- and where he'll end up
(8 - 10:11pm, Oct 24)
Last: The Duke

NewsblogThe Jewish World Series
(34 - 9:29pm, Oct 24)
Last: Starring Bradley Scotchman as RMc

NewsblogOT - October 2020 College Football thread
(164 - 8:38pm, Oct 24)
Last: Meatwad

Sox TherapyMeet the 2021 Boston Red Sox - Position Players
(33 - 7:00pm, Oct 24)
Last: Darren

Sox TherapyJust Say No
(2 - 6:24pm, Oct 24)
Last: Darren

NewsblogShould a Neutral-Site World Series Become Baseball’s New Normal?
(41 - 6:16pm, Oct 24)
Last: Lowry Seasoning Salt

Page rendered in 0.4995 seconds
48 querie(s) executed