Originally Posted by Betterread
That's a broad generalization, and a shallow one, I suspect. Do you know the names of all of these employees? If you feel that the Reds organization is that mediocre, why do you support the parent team?
I don't need an answer to these questions, I just think you are unaware of how negative and pessimistic your viewpoint is.
I'll answer them anyhow. Honestly, my support of the Reds has nothing to do with the quality of the organization. Like many, when I first started paying attention, the BRM was in full bloom. I am a fan for life, regardless of who is in charge, but then that really has nothing to do with nothing, unless one simply chooses their sports teams like stocks.
Knowing names of certain employees really has no bearing on making a rather simple evaluation of the state of the Reds org., which as I already mentioned, has not had the new regime in place long enough to make too many sweeping changes. There were several moves made after Krivsky was hired, but most of the key employees were retained in some capacity. The coaching staffs were essentially already in place. But you do have me caught in one point--I have not done an organizational chart and an evaluation of each and every employee.
I only have about five years running of a barren pitching development program to go on and consistently one of the worst major league pitching staffs for a similar amount of time. Pardon me for being unimpressed by one performance from an ever increasingly hyped prospect being developed by an organization still bragging about Tom Browning. I hope as much as anyone that Homer lives up to the expectations. But do I have to make him into something contrary to the evidence thus far to hold out that hope? Or would it be better to say something along the lines of "wow, hopefully this is a sign of dramatic improvement and not just a night where he was on"?