PDA

View Full Version : Doc Rogers Tearing Reds Apart



NeilHamburger
04-09-2010, 11:55 PM
I'm just listening to Extra Innings on WLW and Doc Rogers is really ripping into the Reds for their decisions:

Hates the Chapman signing, he doesn't thing Chapman will ever amount to anything, and thinks the reds were very stupid to give him 30 million. He thinks they should have spent the money on a veteran starter.

Hates bringing up Leake to start. Thinks he should've started in AA. But, he does think Leake will have a better future then Chapman, as he says Leake has more then 1 pitch he can throw for strikes.

Hates starting Stubbs over Dickerson. Thinks Dickerson should be leading off everyday. Says don't fall in love with Stubbs over a hot streak.

Says the Reds should watch the Yankees and Red Sox to see how to run a franchise. And is predicting another losing season.

I mean he is really ripping the decisions.

GIDP
04-09-2010, 11:57 PM
Doc Rogers is a terrible host and failed at every aspect of major league baseball he ever attempted, including being a front office person so his judgement means very little to me.

mlh1981
04-10-2010, 12:27 AM
Watch the Yankees and Red Sox to see how to operate a franchise?

Clearly, this guy knows nothing about how Major League Baseball operates.

Knightro28
04-10-2010, 12:28 AM
I listened to him a few times last year, but when he couldn't even give the correct names for a couple Reds players, I realized how clueless he was. I mean, if you want some credibility, you have to prove you know what you are talking about. This guy is a joke.

Ghosts of 1990
04-10-2010, 12:32 AM
Honestly, who's Doc Rogers in the scheme of things? That's what I'd say to him.

Reds42MLB
04-10-2010, 12:50 AM
Using the Yankees and Red Sox as examples of how to run a franchise when they are two of the richest clubs in the league? Absolute genius Doc! Someone should tell you we are a small market club who tries to build a roster based off of value signings. Not dishing out 8000 million $$$ contracts.

Guy is as clueless as they come.

mdccclxix
04-10-2010, 01:16 AM
Wow, and I thought this thread would have some valid points about tonight's game - defense, veterans, etc.

Doc is just going for ratings here, I gotta think. Normally he's a pro-Reds guy through and through.

CaliBuck
04-10-2010, 02:10 AM
Anyone who mentions starting Dickerson over Stubbs should no longer be qualified to talk baseball.

RiverRat13
04-10-2010, 03:21 AM
Doc is awful as a radio host. And not just awful, bland as all get-out. My guess is he knows he has to play the controversial host if he wants to stick around for awhile, so he starts making outrageous statements to try to get callers.

BLEEDS
04-10-2010, 06:04 AM
Anyone who mentions starting Dickerson over Stubbs should no longer be qualified to talk baseball.
You just ruled out about 65% of this board - after Spring Training ended.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

TheBigLebowski
04-10-2010, 08:56 AM
Don't know who he is, but he sounds like an idiot.

Newport Red
04-10-2010, 09:04 AM
Don't know who he is, but he sounds like an idiot.

Seasonal, part-time help for a radio station that's fired half its staff.

I don't agree with him much; but I have no problem listening to him.

bgwilly31
04-10-2010, 10:11 AM
Wow he must of been trying to get some people fired up to call in.

he's always (at times disgustingly) Pro-reds.

Two days ago he was praising dusty and calling people who hated on dusty hipocrits.

CincyReds2003
04-10-2010, 11:50 AM
WLW would be better off running an hour of commercial jingles, than Doc Rodgers.

markymark69
04-10-2010, 12:39 PM
There were times last year that I thought he provided some decent insight. I heard some of his drivel last night and turned it off. You don't have to be a homer, but jeesh. He reads one negative scouting report from one unnamed scout on Chapman (of which we have no idea when it was given) and accepts it as gospel.

I heard a scouting report on Chapman in the spring that stated he had the best stuff on the team. Maybe I choose to go with that one.

Leake proved in spring training that he should at least get a chance. The same with Stubbs.

Doc is just one guy, another blowhard of many blowhards on WLW. At least, he lets you give an opinion and is not condescending when he disagrees with you. Take what he says with a grain of salt. Remember his job is move the meter -- comments like last night, move the meter.

Knightro28
04-10-2010, 01:34 PM
You just ruled out about 65% of this board - after Spring Training ended.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Nice.

Vottomatic
04-10-2010, 02:28 PM
There were times last year that I thought he provided some decent insight. I heard some of his drivel last night and turned it off. You don't have to be a homer, but jeesh. He reads one negative scouting report from one unnamed scout on Chapman (of which we have no idea when it was given) and accepts it as gospel.

I heard a scouting report on Chapman in the spring that stated he had the best stuff on the team. Maybe I choose to go with that one.

Leake proved in spring training that he should at least get a chance. The same with Stubbs.

Doc is just one guy, another blowhard of many blowhards on WLW. At least, he lets you give an opinion and is not condescending when he disagrees with you. Take what he says with a grain of salt. Remember his job is move the meter -- comments like last night, move the meter.

Yep, it got it's own thread on this board. :p:

big boy
04-10-2010, 07:55 PM
I heard this too. He said good teams like the Red Sox and Yankees don't sign guys like Chapman. They would not spend $30 million on an unknown. But, what about Jose Contreres? What about Dice K?

As to Dickerson, I agree the obp guy should bat at the top of the order but not at the expense of Stubbs. I think Doc was suggesting that Dickerson play instead of Bruce or Gomes.

Orodle
04-11-2010, 12:00 AM
Being critical of a baseball team 5 games into a season shows he knows nothing about the game

gedred69
04-11-2010, 10:41 PM
While I don't always agree with Doc, lets review his credentials:
Pitched a few years in the Minors. (How many critics here did)?
Minor league pitching coach.------- " " " " "
Asst, GM. Okay, so it was in Leatherpants term. " " "

Like I said, I don't always agree with him, especially regarding Chapman. The Bosox were in the bidding up to 20+ million. Mo Egghead? Lance? A couple of talking heads who pontificate endlessly, who take few calls, (because they'd rather hear themselves ramble), and devote a whole night's show to ridiculing a few Reds fans for detesting Sushi being offered at GABP???!!

GIDP
04-11-2010, 10:49 PM
Mo Egger > * on the radio. Only guy that mixes it up and doesnt just talk do the daily talking points.

Newman4
04-12-2010, 12:56 AM
Where's Tracy Jones when you need him? Never thought I'd ever say that.

OGB
04-12-2010, 01:29 AM
Doc is awful as a radio host. And not just awful, bland as all get-out. My guess is he knows he has to play the controversial host if he wants to stick around for awhile, so he starts making outrageous statements to try to get callers.

I was reading this thread thinking of how i'd characterize doc rogers and i had to stop becuase i think you hit the nail on the head. This guys' show is unlistenable and he tends to not be too astute of a baseball talking head. I yearn for the day when 700 realizes how awful he is and puts somebody, anybody else in his extra innings spot. I used to love listening to extra innings. I never even had an opinion one way or another on the host. Whether it was Tracy Jones or whoever, every other host was charismatic enough to make that an entertaining program. Rogers sucks, period.

nineworldseries
04-12-2010, 02:21 PM
I was reading this thread thinking of how i'd characterize doc rogers and i had to stop becuase i think you hit the nail on the head. This guys' show is unlistenable and he tends to not be too astute of a baseball talking head. I yearn for the day when 700 realizes how awful he is and puts somebody, anybody else in his extra innings spot. I used to love listening to extra innings. I never even had an opinion one way or another on the host. Whether it was Tracy Jones or whoever, every other host was charismatic enough to make that an entertaining program. Rogers sucks, period.

I completely agree. I've been complaining on Redszone about this buffoon ever since we were cursed by him for the first time. He's like a balloon swaying in the wind (one day tearing the Reds apart, the very next night praising them like the second coming of the Big Red Machine). He can never shut up about his own baseball front-office "experience," and he is a marble-mouthed public speaker (always saying "er" and "um" constantly).

I pray to God someone at WLW reads this board and gets rid of him.

redsfanmia
04-12-2010, 03:01 PM
I think WLW should hire Rod from Norwood and Richard from Indian Hill to co-host.

Kingspoint
04-12-2010, 07:03 PM
I never understood how Doc Rogers ever got employment in baseball. He was always one of the "problems" for the REDS.

OGB
04-14-2010, 04:54 AM
I think WLW should hire Rod from Norwood and Richard from Indian Hill to co-host.

I know that Richard from Indian Hill and a couple other WLW "regulars" are actually just creations of the cousins of a friend of mine. As far as I know, everyone on the radio side of it is in on the joke. This same friend and one of his cousins also operate Marty Brennaman's facebook page

redsfanmia
04-14-2010, 08:53 PM
I know that Richard from Indian Hill and a couple other WLW "regulars" are actually just creations of the cousins of a friend of mine. As far as I know, everyone on the radio side of it is in on the joke. This same friend and one of his cousins also operate Marty Brennaman's facebook page

Really? Rod doesnt run a low cost daycare? I must say I agree with Richard about the fans.

daboof
04-14-2010, 10:40 PM
As WLW's operations manager says, "It's all about Rule #1 - Ratings and Revenue". Once they got rid of P Doc and the fake callers started taking up the majority of the air time on all of the non-sports shows, I turned the dial.

GIDP
04-14-2010, 10:41 PM
Doc wasnt much better

Roush's socks
04-15-2010, 02:00 AM
How does he know more about Chapman than anyone else? Has he seen him throw in person several times?

The only thing I agree with is on Dickerson. I don't think he should start over Stubbs, but I think he should be a platoon player splitting time in LF and CF. The Reds need a OBP guy at the top of the order. But Dickerson can't hit LHP at all.

MrMcConnell
04-18-2010, 08:57 AM
I'm just listening to Extra Innings on WLW and Doc Rogers is really ripping into the Reds for their decisions:

Hates the Chapman signing, he doesn't thing Chapman will ever amount to anything, and thinks the reds were very stupid to give him 30 million. He thinks they should have spent the money on a veteran starter.

Hates bringing up Leake to start. Thinks he should've started in AA. But, he does think Leake will have a better future then Chapman, as he says Leake has more then 1 pitch he can throw for strikes.

Hates starting Stubbs over Dickerson. Thinks Dickerson should be leading off everyday. Says don't fall in love with Stubbs over a hot streak.

Says the Reds should watch the Yankees and Red Sox to see how to run a franchise. And is predicting another losing season.

I mean he is really ripping the decisions.

While Rogers has been wrong in the past, I do like listening to him. He seems to enjoy looking for the details on what's going right or wrong compared to just saying "This team isn't hitting." He'll explain why they're not hitting.

After reading three pages of this thread, I've noticed no one has really debated any of his talking points and just ripped Rogers so I'll go ahead and actually provide some decent factual information to agree/disagree with the guy.

Chapman: If the Yankees or Red Sox really wanted this guy, they could've had him. Signing him for 30 million over 6 years doesn't seem like a price that is too expensive for those organizations. This is a huge gamble by ownership, but it's one worth taking. Obviously, we have to give him time to figure stuff out, but I tend to agree with Doc on this one. He only does have one pitch. . . for now. He needs to be in the minors for a long time to improve mechanics and control. As for the signing itself, I'm not sure what they were thinking. They (ownership) desperately need to win to keep a ever-fast dwindling fan base. While the signing excited a lot of people, it doesn't really help the organization out right now. I understand their commitment to development of players in this organization, but at what cost? 30 million is a lot of money for a small market team like us. Adam Dunn is a fine player, but with as many holes and deficiency as he has for a MLB player, IMO, he's just too expensive for a team like the Reds to commit to. Pitching has always been the crux of the problem here. So in the end, while I do agree we should OBVIOUSLY give Chapman more time to improve, I'm not that excited about the signing. It's just too much money to risk for a team like Cincinnati.

Leake: I'll slightly disagree with him about Leake. If he's smart enough and has the pitches, Mike should be up here. However, there's just such a big learning curve going from college to MLB especially for pitchers. Starting him in the minors may have been a better thing to do. Maybe the Reds feel like he's their best option right now, but I don't see how Travis Wood hasn't proved to get a shot yet. Either way, I don't think Leake's moxie and intelligence will drag him down if the Reds pull him back down to improve his game.

Dickerson/Stubbs: Stubbs has been in the minors for how long now? He hasn't exactly dominated. Even with Stubbs hitting toward the end of last year, Dickerson's OBP was 50 points higher than Drew's. After being in the minors so long and not exactly dominating minor league pitching, I think it's safe to say Drew isn't going to be such a good lead-off guy for this organization. I love his defense, but this organization hasn't had a good lead-off hitter since. . . . . . ????

Yankees/Red Sox: Of course they have more money. But then again, the Steelers/Colts/Ravens/Patriots/Chargers all spend a decisive amount of money not only on payrolls, but also on scouting and player development than the Bengals. They're world class organizations who know how to treat their youngsters. Are they always right? Nope, but they're in no hurry to develop anyone.

Vottomatic
04-18-2010, 10:08 AM
While Rogers has been wrong in the past, I do like listening to him. He seems to enjoy looking for the details on what's going right or wrong compared to just saying "This team isn't hitting." He'll explain why they're not hitting.

After reading three pages of this thread, I've noticed no one has really debated any of his talking points and just ripped Rogers so I'll go ahead and actually provide some decent factual information to agree/disagree with the guy.

Chapman: If the Yankees or Red Sox really wanted this guy, they could've had him. Signing him for 30 million over 6 years doesn't seem like a price that is too expensive for those organizations. This is a huge gamble by ownership, but it's one worth taking. Obviously, we have to give him time to figure stuff out, but I tend to agree with Doc on this one. He only does have one pitch. . . for now. He needs to be in the minors for a long time to improve mechanics and control. As for the signing itself, I'm not sure what they were thinking. They (ownership) desperately need to win to keep a ever-fast dwindling fan base. While the signing excited a lot of people, it doesn't really help the organization out right now. I understand their commitment to development of players in this organization, but at what cost? 30 million is a lot of money for a small market team like us. Adam Dunn is a fine player, but with as many holes and deficiency as he has for a MLB player, IMO, he's just too expensive for a team like the Reds to commit to. Pitching has always been the crux of the problem here. So in the end, while I do agree we should OBVIOUSLY give Chapman more time to improve, I'm not that excited about the signing. It's just too much money to risk for a team like Cincinnati.

Leake: I'll slightly disagree with him about Leake. If he's smart enough and has the pitches, Mike should be up here. However, there's just such a big learning curve going from college to MLB especially for pitchers. Starting him in the minors may have been a better thing to do. Maybe the Reds feel like he's their best option right now, but I don't see how Travis Wood hasn't proved to get a shot yet. Either way, I don't think Leake's moxie and intelligence will drag him down if the Reds pull him back down to improve his game.

Dickerson/Stubbs: Stubbs has been in the minors for how long now? He hasn't exactly dominated. Even with Stubbs hitting toward the end of last year, Dickerson's OBP was 50 points higher than Drew's. After being in the minors so long and not exactly dominating minor league pitching, I think it's safe to say Drew isn't going to be such a good lead-off guy for this organization. I love his defense, but this organization hasn't had a good lead-off hitter since. . . . . . ????

Yankees/Red Sox: Of course they have more money. But then again, the Steelers/Colts/Ravens/Patriots/Chargers all spend a decisive amount of money not only on payrolls, but also on scouting and player development than the Bengals. They're world class organizations who know how to treat their youngsters. Are they always right? Nope, but they're in no hurry to develop anyone.

I thought Chapman had 4 pitches, and also occasionally threw a 5th pitch (sinker). Fastball, Slider, Changeup, Curve, and Sinker.

With this team......it all comes down to how long management wants to wait for some of these guys to develop. The fans are getting impatient.

goreds2
04-18-2010, 10:11 AM
Doc Rogers is a terrible host and failed at every aspect of major league baseball he ever attempted, including being a front office person so his judgement means very little to me.

Bring back Tracy Jones!! :wave:

GIDP
04-18-2010, 11:24 AM
He said last night "When the team loses everything is bad, the manager, the pitching, the hitting, the owner, the GM, even the post game show is bad"

I laughed and almost called into say "You are bad no matter if they win or lose"

Vottomatic
04-18-2010, 05:53 PM
It appears Doc Rodgers is right.

gedred69
04-18-2010, 09:33 PM
It appears Doc Rodgers is right.

Uhhh,----Yep.

GIDP
04-18-2010, 09:39 PM
What exactly was he right about? Saying his show sucks?

Vottomatic
04-19-2010, 08:04 AM
What exactly was he right about? Saying his show sucks?

...uh......saying The Reds suck.

Actually, he backed off a bit last night and tried to bring some hope to the fans. Said he thinks they will be a .500 team this year.

GIDP
04-19-2010, 02:35 PM
...uh......saying The Reds suck.

Actually, he backed off a bit last night and tried to bring some hope to the fans. Said he thinks they will be a .500 team this year.

He didnt really say that though. He just talked badly about Walt, chapman, Leake, and a slew of other things.

FlyerFanatic
04-19-2010, 03:00 PM
is anyone surprised that the media are talking bad about the reds. even local media? first off it its a win-win, if the reds dont do well, its "well i told you so" if they do well its "great! i'll eat crow, they have surprised me" etc. right now, the way this team is playing, and the 9 straight losing seasons, people arent going to give the reds the benefit of the doubt.