Red Sox name Co-GM's

[erik316wttn]

For the love of......

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2256622

 

Who here thinks that within a year, there will be conflicting opinions/irreconcilable differences and one will be forced out by the other? That whole thing is just asking for a public blowup.

[burnt out cubbie fan]

GM by committee!

[WrigleyField 22]

Thats as ridiculous as rotating between 10 different managers!

[CardsFanInChiTown]

Interesting, well they've done an OK job so far...

[Mark Priors Calves]

Thats as ridiculous as rotating between 10 different managers!

 

That's ridiculous. No organization, with any self respect and desire to win, would even consider that.

[coolpoppa]

I have to admit, this is one of the more odd ideas I've seen in baseball in awhile. I just don't see it working out, but there are some positives here....being a GM of a major franchise is very involved and the simplicity of having two doing the job and the ability to take on more tasks may, in theory, be a good idea. The problem is, in a position with the authority that a GM has, it is hard to imagine two people, having equality in the decision making, agreeing to the degree where things are productive long term. All in all, I think it's a bad idea, but an interesting experiment.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

All this means is that Lucchino is calling the shots.

[Tim]

I have to admit, this is one of the more odd ideas I've seen in baseball in awhile. I just don't see it working out, but there are some positives here....being a GM of a major franchise is very involved and the simplicity of having two doing the job and the ability to take on more tasks may, in theory, be a good idea. The problem is, in a position with the authority that a GM has, it is hard to imagine two people, having equality in the decision making, agreeing to the degree where things are productive long term. All in all, I think it's a bad idea, but an interesting experiment.

Baltimore has been using co-GM's for at least a year now.

[JC]

I have to admit, this is one of the more odd ideas I've seen in baseball in awhile. I just don't see it working out, but there are some positives here....being a GM of a major franchise is very involved and the simplicity of having two doing the job and the ability to take on more tasks may, in theory, be a good idea. The problem is, in a position with the authority that a GM has, it is hard to imagine two people, having equality in the decision making, agreeing to the degree where things are productive long term. All in all, I think it's a bad idea, but an interesting experiment.

Baltimore has been using co-GM's for at least a year now.

 

I think one of those clowns got "downsized" recently.

 

Co-GMs is a terrible idea. The only way it makes sense to me is if each has clearly delineated roles that preclude them from stepping on each other's toes. It seems like a recipe for disaster.

[NCCubFan]

I think one of those clowns got "downsized" recently.

Mike Flanagan and Jim Beattie were effectively acting as co-GM's for a couple of seasons (although I don't think either one actually had the title of GM). Beattie recently left, although I don't recall if he was fired or left on his own.