Originally posted by RedSchmo
Thunder you cited several managers (Leyland and Anderson included) who went through down years, but are considered great managers. The key here is that they had good years, and great years as well, besides the bad. Boone hasn't had a good year as a manager.
The difference between Boone and Anderson is, that Sparky was directly handed a great team by the Reds. He only had to let the Big Red Machine play ... the great players made all the difference as you can see when he later took over the Tigers. As I said, I don't think that a manager has that much effect on the outcome of the game. Other managers like Leyland or Bobby Cox also needed their time (and most important a good team) to get to the playoffs. Bob Boone hasn't yet managed long, so I find it unfair to label him as a bad manager solely based on the W-L record of the teams he managed so far.
I am also the last person to say he is the ultimate and best manager, but I just think that by criticising him over and over again some fans tend to lose out of sight a lot of the problems why the Reds have went from 11 games over to now 4 games under .500.