Today on espn radio Nolan Ryan talked about backing Wash and his decisions and that the manager only should fill out the lineup card. That explains why Wash was so confident to go against JD's lineup wishes as Nolan had his back. Remember, Nolan is old school and does not embrace saber metrics like JD does. Remember he was not for the signing of Darvish but went along with it. Ironically, he pushed for veteran Oswalt (Ryan, as does Wash, likes veterans with past success) however that ended up being a disaster not just on the field but in the clubhouse as well, as Roy called out Wash's favoritism program.

Today Washington took full credit for overplaying his players but that, to me, was a misdirect. The issue wasn't giving the starters an extra one day off each week in September thus giving them a total of 4 games off. That would not have made any difference at all. The point, brought out by Ben and Skin in August, was that the lineup needed serious adaptation. Bench Young, move Kinsler, shake up the lineup as it was flatlining more nights than it was crushing it. The young players needed August and September to get acclimated as did Gentry and Moreland. So, it wasn't just about the young guys it was also allowing Moreland to be the full time 1B and Gentry full time CF. (He makes that catch in Oakland.)

Nolan has Washington's back so Wash will be back next year. So, here's the conflict. JD vs Wash in terms of lineup harmony between the two. Just resting Young once a week is not the answer. The answer was/is lineup adaptation to find what works and what doesn't. Will Wash embrace saber metrics or stick with his "eyeball" test? Will he keep playing favorites or will allow for the development of younger players?

My prediction. JD blows this thing up. Gone are: Hamilton, Young, Cruz, Kinsler, FA relief pitchers, maybe Andrus if right trade becomes available, and Napoli is an unknown. I sat next to a scout at a game last year and he told me the reason LAA let him go was that they felt he was too chunky and hadn't shown he had the endurance to be an everyday catcher and wasn't strong enough at 1B to justify keeping as a part time player. Incoming? Who knows?

UTB: Except for my predictions, the above material is referenced from GAC espn 1033 and dallas morning news articles. On August 7th when I wrote there was a power struggle between JD and Wash was I wrong? I had endless arguments with Guy over whether there was a power struggle between JD and Wash and now that's all they're talking about on the radio.

Grady Little managed the Boston Red Sox for two years. He took over a team that went 82-79 in 2001 and managed the team to records of:

2002: 93-69
2003: 95-67 (lost in ALCS)

Immediately after losing in the ALCS, Little was fired and replaced by Francona. In the following year, Boston won the World Series (and then did it again three years later).

This team would be fine without Wash.

For the most part, Wash is a very likable person so if there is such a "come to Jesus" meeting and Wash is on board with what the FO wants to do then I'd be okay keeping Wash for at least one more year. The thing is, there really has to be a plan that both Wash and the FO are on board with regarding the expected use of players. You can't have a winning team if both are running off in different directions and doing their own thing. If Wash isn't on board with the FO wants to do then they should get him out of there.

@ MFix:

103.3 and GAC are far, far, far from credible sources.

If you believe these things to be true, that's cool. But that doesn't make them facts. Saying "that's all they are talking about on the radio" is not proof that said topic is based in fact.

You lost my on the whole Arthur Rhodes in high leverage situations argument. Rhodes pitched for the Rangers in 32 games and was dropped after July 31st last year. He had ten holds and one blown save but mostly finished up games that they were losing badly. The games he got a decison in were mostly extra inning affairs where he was the last guy up.

You know you can look this stuff up....

UTB, for the record then you think that there wasn't a disconnect/disagreement/power struggle or whatever semantics you want to use between JD and Wash?

Do you discount Evan Grant, Ben and Skin, and Richard Durrett as they are all reporting the same thing. Are they also not credible sources?

As for Ranger's Front Office not reading this board, don't kid yourself. This is the modern day era, social media is not only observed but studied. Why? Because it is a product analysis that can determine its success or failure in terms of profitability. You don't think American Airlines management isn't reading Airline Pilot Central forums to get an idea of what their pilots are thinking? Companies now must divulge deeply into the internet to get feedback on their product and if it will be profitable or not. The product the Rangers have is their lineup and what it produces.

So the questions to be studied is what is the public's response to Wash's loyalty? What is the public's response to the lineup, individuals, prospects? All this information can determine whether a product will be profitable or in the red. There are teams that lose but lose with favored players. i.e Troy Aikman, Chipper Jones, but the public was so attached to those players that there was no way they could be benched without financial backlash. Was Young in that category? I don't think so and nor did JD. Nolan Ryan said today, he's a credible source right?, that the manager alone sets the lineup. JD had no say so but tried to force the issue with the DFA of Gonzalez. Wash became even more stubborn and the only break Young got was on paternity leave and half game in N.Y.

But Wash's program didn't work. So, the real the question is this: Will Wash embrace saber metrics or continue to embrace his "eyeball" test. I'll start a new forum where we can all vote on it.

BTW, maybe happenstance or pressure but something caused Wash to change his lineup for the one game playoff game on Friday. A move that has been begged to be made for awhile on this forum. Craig Gentry at Center Field.

Rich,

Wait a second and take a closer look doing a little more research. Wings of Joy is right. Rhodes pitched 24 innings let up 13 earned runs, and that doesn't include the ones already on base, and let up 6 homes runs and 8 walks. That's a home run every four innings and a walk every 3 innings. It wasn't clean up duty until he was finished pitching. JD makes a move for Koji and Adams to shore up the 7th and 8th innings. Why? Because Wash showed an over amount of loyalty to Rhodes and kept calling his number.

JD released Rhodes and brought in two other guys not giving Wash a choice.

"As for Ranger's Front Office not reading this board, don't kid yourself ... Companies now must divulge deeply into the internet to get feedback on their product and if it will be profitable or not. The product the Rangers have is their lineup and what it produces.

So the questions to be studied is what is the public's response to Wash's loyalty? What is the public's response to the lineup, individuals, prospects? All this information can determine whether a product will be profitable or in the red."

[Head beginning to rupture]

"Nolan Ryan said today, he's a credible source right?, that the manager alone sets the lineup. JD had no say so but tried to force the issue with the DFA of Gonzalez."

[Head exploded]

Yes. JD "forced the issue" by cutting loose the utility infielder that had a total of 54 at-bats in 4+ months of regular season action. Perfectly logical deduction.

Dude - we are on different stratospheres.

I've been watching the Rangers since 1972. We have had several good managers come through here, but rarely did they have a good team to manage. (Usually our pitching was simply not good enough). We now have had a really good team, but not a very good manager in Washinton. If we had had a good manager with this team, I suspect we would have one World Series ring, and would still be playing this year. It is a shame we are wasting the really good teams with this manager! For heaven sakes, he was a coke head! He should have been fired then. I think Michael Young saved him then, and you see Washington returned the favor to Young this year, despite Young's awful performance. Once again this cost the team! It looks like we will have to wait one more year before Nolan Ryan and the gang will fire him! What a waste!

Okay, I will make it simpler.

1) You debased my statements. Yet, when many journalist now are saying the very same things that I said you say all those journalist have no credibility. You won't even answer the question of whether you believe that there was/is a power struggle between Wash and JD. Do you think they're singing kumbaya together?

2) Marketing. Yeah, okay sure. We're back in the 50s and this internet thing is for the fringe group. Really? Is it that hard to understand?

3) Gonzalez. Good grief. Do I really need to explain this? He was the only back up infielder at 2nd, SS, and 3B. By DFA him it left only Young as the back up to those positions meaning Wash could not continue to roll out Young as the DH or else risk losing the DH spot and have the pitcher hit if 2B, SS, or 3B needed a backup. This almost happened in a game against the Yankees when Kinsler was tossed. And it did happen when Moreland ph for Soto allowing Profar to hit in the one game playoff.

Hey, if you don't like the way I write, what I say, what I opine then fine. Just say so. I could care less. But when I'm right at least have the intellectual integrity to admit that.

I agree with Gump, except that I dont think the coke incident was a good reason.

I want a new manager because Washington misplays players based on hunches. This costs the team more WAR than can be made up. Wash misplayed the following:

Hamilton in centerfield. He is better in a corner. loss of 2 WAR.
Young at DH or anywhere except against LHP. loss of 3 WAR
Cruz in the outfield where his defense is bad. should be DH. loss of 2 WAR
Gentry by using him only one third of the time. loss of 3 WAR
Ogando by starting Feldman/Oswalt instead of Ogando in the stretch run. loss of 1 WAR

He cost the Rangers the playoffs more than any other factor, loss of $25 to $50 million.
He reduced the development of next years rookies.

He acts as though he is smarter than the Sabremetricians.

What is he good at? The players reportedly like him and Mike Maddux stays here. He coddles Michael Young. He defies statistics and uses "Gut".

Washington is a liability. Wouldnt the team have performed better with Clint Hurdle or Francona? Would it have been worse? At a cost of 10 WAR and loss of playoff revenues, Washington is very expensive to keep. 10 WAR is more than Hamilton, Darvish and Cruz combined.

And Wash wasted one year of the best team the Rangers have ever had. Now what?

All I know is that I log on every day now hoping that RW has been fired. I have said for over a year now that the Rangers have won IN SPITE of RW, not because of him. We can do better. Let's get a young guy in here.

@ MFix

I really could care less what you write. I do find it odd that you continue to present your opinions and conspiracy theories as well established facts.

You started a thread titled, "Rumor Has it Even Wash and JD read our posts!" You then rambled on about how it might be possible that they read it b/c Ben and Skin read it. Sorry, but stating that "Wash and JD read our posts" and then providing no support for that statement calls into question your credibility.

When you provide no support for your assertion that "Nolan is old school and does not embrace saber metrics like JD does," it calls into question your credibility.

When you provide no support for your assertion that "[Nolan] was not for the signing of Darvish but went along with it..." it calls into question your credibility.

And your claim that, "hey, I was right about something...ergo...I have credibility" just doesn't hold up. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Just take a deep breath and relax. We are all on the same side. I just think that you will have more success engaging others on the forum if you provide support for your statements and stop making claims like "Remember, Nolan didn't want Darvish..." as if such claims are well-established facts.

When asked about Wash as a manager, Cliff Lee had it exactly right when he said in that press conference that offensively this team was hard to screw up and even he could fill out the lineup card. So for those giving Was credit for our recent playoff success, the point is that the front office, particularly JD, gets all the credit for our World Series appearances by assembling such a unique force of offensive talent and Wash has essentially been along for the bus ride. I didn't used to believe that but now I am inclined to. Add to this growing realization that Wash may actually do more harm than good for the development of Profar and Olt going forward.

It is painfully obvious that the long term, Nolan-master-plan has been to hand managerial duties of the franchise over to the Maddux brothers. Why else would Mike remove himself from consideration for the Cubs job last year and literally moments later brother Greg shows up in Arlington as a 'Special Consultant'? Why not just go ahead and implement that plan? JD can and should get all the credit for our recent success and Wash should get little to none. I loved Wash for changing the culture here when it needed changing but that ship has sailed and it is time for the Maddux era. Let's just do it.