I found this rant over on in the comments section of a Who Dey Revolution? I'm perplexed by this comment...
(WARNING: There is some foul language involved (edited out here) because, y'know, football fans can't express themselves without invoking the Carlin 7).
I was intrigued by the "MUCH worse" comment and, according to my calculations, the Reds under Lindner had a 48% winning percentage while Castellini's limited sample was 47%. One percent worse.I have heard Catellini's name be invoked -- oh now there's a winner! May I remind you of where the Cincinnati Reds finished in their division? Just because a new owner comes to the fray is not a guarantee that the team is going to turn over a new leaf with a signing by the pen! READ MY LIPS: 'It just doesn't happen that way!' In fact, since Castellini took over, things have gotten MUCH worse for the Cincinnati Reds -- so all of you that are out there touting Castellini -- open your eyes a second and just perform a cursory examination of his 'reign' and if you still think he is the baseball messiah -- the one put up to end all the misery that is the Reds... ...go see a shrink because you are not living in reality. While you're at it, I would be willing to bet that you thought the same thing when 'Uncle Carl' took over the Reds -- same situation as Castellini -- but with even more capital -- and he pretty much bottomed out the franchise -- until Castellini proved he could go even lower!
So I ask you... MUCH worse? I've always felt that Castellini had a much better idea and yearn for winning than Brown does. Heck, Castellini has a GM so he's one up right there.