People are trying to draw parallels between the Red Sox' 0-6 start in 2011 and their 1-5 start in 2012, and there's one big difference.
Last year, there wasn't what Tom E. Curran quaintly refers to as "a crapstorm" going on between the front office and one of their former managers on the eve of what the team hoped would be a glorious 100th anniversary celebration of Fenway Park:
Harry Truman used to say "the only thing new in the world is the history you don't know," and, with that in mind, we can be fairly certain that Tito eventually will return. The Herald's Steve Buckley points to Berra v Steinbrenner as proof:
(Although Rich Levine believes Francona may not be back until the current ownership group has moved permanently to Liverpool. And he may be right.)
Judging by your opinions here and especially here (if you haven't done so already, like us on Facebook to join the conversation), a winner has been declared in the court of public opinion . . . and it ain't Larry Lucchino. Unsurprising, to say the least. It's true there's no proof that ownership was Bob Hohler's source for the -- shall we say -- unflattering portrait of Francona in the Boston Globe's post-collapse story last fall, but it's also true that ownership didn't exactly rush to a full-throated defense of Tito. Nor, apparently, did they leave no stone unturned in attempting to find the leak. In Francona's mind, that's disloyalty. In the fans' minds, that's ungratefulness for a guy who was a big part of two World Series championships.
So now we're in a crapstorm.
"The Red Sox are trying to protect their image," said the Globe's Dan Shaughnessy, "Francona's trying to protect his image, and nobody wins."