Fertilizer Factory
As I pointed out in my previous post, there are people in the New York media who, when they hear an intelligent person (like Rick Peterson or Jerry Manuel) use what’s called a metaphor, feel that they have to get shovel and sticks and beat it to a pulp before it eats them.
So Jerry Manuel, in response to a reporter’s question about how booing affects Aaron Heilman, says: “It’s difficult. It’s painful. But it’s also growth. It’s growth for him. It’s very, very – I’m going to say this, and I hope y’all don’t take this wrong. I know you’re going to run out of here with something crazy on this. It’s very, very fertile ground for growth at Shea Stadium. It’s fertile ground for a team’s growth and development. Sometimes fertile ground has fertilizer. (Laughter in room.) Fertilizer is a good thing. It’s a good thing. You get the greatest results, you get the most beautiful plants, when you put it in that type of fertile soil. That’s what we have the opportunity to do. Don’t y’all take that wrong because I know what you’re going to do with it.”
I mean, how hard is it really for a person competent enough to pay bills and drive a car to figure out that Jerry Manuel, in his colorful and cogent comment about fertilizer at Shea, was not calling Mets fans pieces of shit? I mean, do we really have to have a discussion about what he meant? Why would Jerry call Mets fans pieces of shit in this context? Will there really be calls for him to apologize or, who knows, resign, because he’s like, so outrageous? Is there actually a newspaper in New York City with so little respect for its readership that it employs a sports columnist (Bart Hubbuch in the Post) who seriously believes that Manuel intended to insult the fans with this fertilizer remark? I’ve heard that Craig Carton jumped on this bandwagon too. Please, someone, reassure me that no one is this dumb, but there are indeed people cynical enough to milk something like this for ratings and readership.
How much more tired can we get of the way in which a loud minority of sports journalists in New York distort reasonable discourse in order to make lucrative trouble? Why isn’t baseball interesting enough for them? Can you imagine what these jerks would have done with the kinds of things Casey Stengel used to say?
I tell you, I like the way in which Manuel is just eccentric enough to phrase things with originality and how he’s also canny enough to play around with the smarter reporters by joking about what they’ll make of what he says. Manuel has already established himself as a more interesting interview subject than Willie. He has, in less than a week, earned himself a place in the Mets pantheon of characters. But I have a good feeling about this man. I have a sense that he may be more like Bobby V than anyone else: a piece of work, and not exactly careful, but smarter than anyone else in the room. Let’s hope.
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Dana,
Thanks for reminding why I read your blog and look forward to your posts. There is always a level-headed intelligent approach to the usual distractions that come from a ridiculous sports media machine that exists in New York. I have not read the headlines, but I was made aware of this foolishness when I read Metsblog this morning. This season I have chosen to avoid the talk shows and crappy publications(post/newsday/daily news). I have found that my opinions of the state of the team don’t become polluted by the often ill-perceived interpretations of media fools that only have their own self-interest at stake. Fortunately, the “blogoshphere” is lending much greater credibility to sports writing and I welcome this change. Frankly, I have done much the same as it relates to “real” news. Anything that can bring media away from paid advertisement as its primary source of income, can only be construed as a good thing for the reader.
The real story should be that the Mets are once again an exciting team to watch. Having won the last three series in a row and going 4 and 2 on the road, they are clearly pivoting in the right direction. Reyes is hot, Beltran is crushing the ball, young Mike Pelfrey is continuing to grow beyond our expectations and the team is only two back in the loss column despite a dreadful start. Lets Go Mets!
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
I thought this was a hoot, this whole fertilizer thing, and I do get the sense that Manuel might even be gently mocking the whole media circus and frenzy that is sometimes (often?) New York. If so, good for him.
I did think, however, that his more interesting comments were vis a vis Jose Reyes, to whom he referred in several quotes as “she.” LOL
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Dana:
I have no problem with what Jerry Manuel said, and thought it was hilarious. But I disagree with you in one respect. Notwithstanding his disclaimer, he absolutely was calling Mets fans pieces of shit. I doubt he cared less if it bothered the fan base, because his target audience wasn’t the fans. It was the players, possibly the front office (which is hyper sensitive and insecure about its reputation and relevancy with fans). And I think that’s the case because Manuel wants his team to stop giving a crap about the fans, and play hard for each other.
As a side note, q a sizeable minority of Mets fans have acted like petulant shmucks this season, as they boo their players and generally act boorishly, but I think that was an afterthought by Manuel (mainly tweaking them for acting like schizophrenic assholes, first shrieking Fire Willie and booing him and badmouthing him on the radio, then treating him like a saint when he got canned.)
But the main impetus was to fire up the players. Sort of like war - why the US won WWII is because psychologists studying how to get soldiers to perform in the heat of battle determined that they did it principally not to look bad before their fellow squadrom members, rather than “duty, honor” or what the generals said. So small group tactics and independence in the field were amplified from prior military strategy. So too here.
One last note - I recently read a piece where White Sox GM Kenny Williams (who is African American with a Latino manager, inverse of the Mets) commented on the Mets situation (before Willie got fired.) He said that the teams were very similar (both often being red-headed stepchild in their respective city) except with one difference. Williams said neither he nor Guillen cared at all what the fans thought, but the Mets did, and that was a big reason why they had problems. So true.
PS - RIP George Carlin. In tribute here is link to greatest sports bit in history. http://youtube.com/watch?v=YphEUa5LPjM&feature=related
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:47 pm
You know, JD, that’s an interesting take on the situation, and I suspect we will never REALLY know what Manuel was thinking when he made the statement; hell, HE might not even know what his true meaning, or motives, were, at the time. You know how sometimes you just talk off the top of your head and only later realize what you probably meant? Well, that’s what I’m talking about.
I truly do not think Manuel would be dumb enough to attack Mets fans head on, let alone infer that they are “pieces of shit,” as it were, though he might not mind tweaking the fan base a little and firing up the players at the same time.
Personally, I don’t care what Jerry Manuel says about Mets fans; for one, we all know that many of the fans who attend Shea are corporate drudges (and yes, I use the term “drudge” deliberately, lol), and for two, well, I don’t really let what anyone who doesn’t know me says affect me; I barely let the thoughts of those who DO know me affect me or what I do, lol. So cowboy up, fans….!!!!!
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:54 pm
I do kind of agree that it was an open-ended allusive statement that could be read the way JD has read it. But that is why it is a brilliant comment. Manuel is fooling around. He has a forgiving smile on his face. He doesn’t want to hear boos, but he has some sense about how to make them hurt less and look sillier. He has no desire to insult. But it is a playful poke. And yes, Deb, I do think he is at the same time making fun of the whole media circus.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Manuel is indeed turning out to be every bit the character that BV was, in his own unique way. This, imo, can be nothing short of great for the team, or nothing short of very bad for the team, depending on the way it’s perceived and handled. In this case, I’m thinking it’s going to be very good for the team, even though I did not care for the “gangsta” stuff, as I made very clear here last week, lol.
The only thing is, the team is what it is, and unless other changes are made, I see the Manuel influence being what it is — only one influence. Sure, an important one, but just one.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:56 pm
I just sigh when I see all the New York Posts on the subway. It makes me so sad and mad to see how many people are paying to have their chains jerked day after day.
June 23rd, 2008 at 6:04 pm
I would only add that I have often read that fans really don’t want to know what pro athletes think of them. Although there are exceptions, the pro atheletes often can’t stand them and are disdainful of them, and don’t trust them. It has only gotten worse as salaries and ticket prices go up. Like many extremely wealthy folks, athletes have healthy paranoia about their safety and cult of personality status. Fans in turn have a ridiculous sense of entitlement as prices go up. Add to that that fans communicate with each other and athletes differently. Blogs, call in radio, message boards, etc didn’t exist for the most part 25 years ago - all you had were columnists and a mob mentality at the ballpark.
I think the only profession that gets publicly slammed as much are politicians, and even there the conversation is different and a little more fragmented. (In other words, liberal or conservative talk radio or TV usually cocoons its own adherents and preaches to the already converted.) Whereas talk radio and message boards are broader, and uglier.
From the perspective of the athlete, its some fat, out of shape jerkoff calling them “human garbage” on the radio, or a guy who barely got out of high school who can’t add 2 and 2 together nevertheless assuming he’s smarter than a GM with 2 MBA degrees. And athletes, unlike politicians, aren’t seeking office or looking to get legislation passed - they want to hit the ball and strike people out. And they know the attitude of most fans is “what have you done for me lately”, particularly in towns like NY, Philly, and Boston. (St Louis - different story). With the anominity the internet provides, it has never been worse.
The end effect of that is as a general matter, even when things go well pro athletes are skeptical and indifferent to fans. If the fans really get antagonistic, it gets really ugly. The challenge for a manager is how to channel it. That is precisely what Manuel is trying to do. (Also, by making outrageous comments he takes some pressure off his players because the focus is on him. That worked wonders for Pinella with the Cubs last season after the dirt kicking incident). And I applaud him for it. Ballplayers should be like musicians, and be selfish in a good way. Do your thing because it is pleasing to you, and don’t worry about what the fans think. Usually if its good, the fans will come to you anyway.
JD
June 24th, 2008 at 4:36 am
I don’t read the Post because it is a tabloid in the worst sense of the word. IMHO opinion, it is just a bit more credible than the Star or National Enquirer, but not by much. It doesn’t surprise me that they would twist what Jerry said out of context.
When I read what Jerry said about the fertilizer, I never interpreted it as him calling the Mets fans pieces of shit. I thought he was being philosophical and saying that the ballplayers can become better ballplayers by learning how to handle all the distractions, good and bad, that come their way, either at Shea or away. If they can do this, they can bloom and blossom into the best players they can be, and in the process become successful and win a championship. Basically I saw it as an impetus to spur them along.
I agree with you Dana, that I think Jerry Manuel is going to be good for the team, and get the best out of it. Whether they can get to the playoffs is still up in the air, but I already see more of a spark in them than before. I think Jerry is a combination of Gil Hodges’ no nonsense, common sense approach, and Bobby Valentine’s quirkiness, with a little bit of Davey Johnson thrown in. Not a bad combo in my book.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Oh he was totally goofing on the press. He was practically goading them and laughing all the way. Good for him. It shows the absurdity of all of it - and I agree that the main audience was his players. He was showing them that rather than be a victim of silly press, he could get the upper hand by outsmarting them. It’s all a joke and now they can just ignore it and play baseball. And even though they lost last night, they showed some good signs - gritty play by Beltran and not giving up till the end. No matter what happens over the rest of this long season, I’m enjoying watching baseball again. Thanks Jerry.
June 24th, 2008 at 10:54 pm
“I think Jerry is a combination of Gil Hodges’ no nonsense, common sense approach, and Bobby Valentine’s quirkiness, with a little bit of Davey Johnson thrown in. Not a bad combo in my book. ”
Well, Jerry Manuel is a good man and baseball man, but I for one am not about to annoint him the second coming of Hodges, Johnson, or Valentine by a long shot. Nothing about his history with the Chicago White Sox remotely supports that hypothesis. If anything, it suggests that concerns that he’d be Randolph Redux aren’t coming out of thin air. Why?
1) Although he got the White Sox to take the division and go to the playoffs in 2000, they got swept by the Mariners, and many believe that Manuel’s flaws as a tactician underscored the loss.
2) Was lousy at platooning and bullpen management. He was particularly slammed for how he handled Foulke.
Here is a link to an article that recently ran in the NY Sun discussing Manuel’s managerial flaws rather specifically. http://www.nysun.com/sports/historically-manuel-is-a-bad-choice/80380/
And here are his managerial stats from 1998-2003. http://www.baseball-reference.com/managers/manueje01.shtml
They suggest that he’s good at 2d and 3d place finishes. Now, that can of course change, and he’s got more $ to work with in NYC, but people are right to be skeptical.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Oh that Jerry is such a kidder, an idiot of a manager, but such a happy one. I thought as the bench coach he would have it all figured out and would turn things around on a dime. But no Salty Parker is he, no Jerry the kidder, laughing at the NY Post. Probably still reads the Sun Times. Wake up Met fans, your team is still playing below .500 ball, Tony B still has free run of Los Mets clubhouse. Meanwhile Wally Backman is still managing in Joliet IL, Playing for Peanuts. Three time minor league manager of the year. While Los Mets continue to be Lost Mets.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Dear HappyJack, while you’re here. Exactly what of any use does that petititiononline.com site do? Does anyone with any real influence on anything ever pay attention to it?
June 25th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
HappyCrack - surely you are joking. Do you really think the same ownership that found Anna Benson too offensive would go ahead and hire the volatile Wally Backman? - I am not saying that I am for or against Wally - I know I loved him as a ballplayer. But, the ownership of this team does not like any sort of controversy. The last thing they are going to do is go looking for it in Wally Backman. Furthermore, what business do you have bashing Jerry Manuel when the man has been managing for a week. Could we give the guy a month before we jump to conclusions. Its hardly Jerry’s fault that his starting pitcher decided to throw BP last night. Or that his star third baseman would botch a routine play that led to his ace serving up a high fastball to Felix Hernandez. The manager can not throw and catch and hit. I am coming to the awful conclusion that we just don’t have the talent. When your lineup consists of Endy Chavez, Trot Nixon, Carlos Delgado, Damian Easley and Fernando Tatis….you are always in trouble. Don’t get me wrong I love some of these guys(Chavez, Easley) as individual players off the bench. But these are not every day guys and they have put in this position because we don’t have a healthy roster. The fact of the matter is that this team needs to get healthy and younger. I am afraid that will take time, particularly since we have very little to trade at the deadline.
I was so optimistic prior to the Seattle series and now I am back to thinking that I will need to find a team to root for in September and October. I am thinking the Cubs are my choice(not that I am giving up on my team, but, I like baseball and want to be able to watch with interest through October). I like Sweet Lou and who can’t get excited about them finally winning the WS. In ‘03 and ‘04 I rode the Sox wagon for the same reason(and they were playing against the yankees). But they are no longer the lovable losers. They seem more like the yankees every day.