Coaching Rotation Revisited

So, still think firing Girardi was a bad idea?

Let's take a look at some of the evidence here - nothing esoteric, just what is in plain view for all.

Girardi was interviewed by the Cubs - and it was inevitable that he was going to sign with the Cubs and coach them back to greatness, right? Well, nope. Instead, Lou Pinella was granted the managerial position. Ironically, it was Pinella who was being discussed as Torre's replacement in New York. But the Boss did a 180 and kept Torre, which probably cost his protegee his next job.

Then there is the Oakland A's situation. Hailed as the genius of all baseball, Billy Beane fired Ken Macha (again) as manager because they just weren't clicking. Macha had only guided the A's to the playoffs, where they were swept by the Tigers - probably this year's team o' destiny.

Sound familiar? It should.

Macha's firing only puts the Girardi firing in better perspective - and supports the Marlins front office's decision to let Girardi go because it was not a good working relationship. One could argue that the A's made a much more sensational move, but they will get the free pass because Billy Beane is highly touted while the Marlins front office is often berated in the media despite their very successful track record.

And if Girardi was such a commodity, why was he not hired in Chicago over Lou Pinella? He is the manager of the year for the NL and was highly touted by media pundits. He is also a one-time Cubbie and a graduate from Northwestern. Girardi was basically primed for the position and could be a welcomed asset to Cubbieland.

Yet, he was passed over.

Doesn't anyone find it interesting to ask why?