Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Sure seems like he'd be next to pay the price should things not turn around. I dunno if that makes his whacking any more likely, but you know. there are very few jobs like this in the world, it seems like to not have the absolute best guy there is a terrible waste. This is true. But I guess everyone has a different idea of what a manager's role is, so it's hard to judge who is doing a better job than the next guy. To me, a manager should be good at: 1. In-Game Strategy (substitutions, lineups): Rojas seems bad. Not the worst ever, but not good. 2. Clubhouse Management: I think he's good here. Never heard any complaints about him losing the clubhouse. 3. Just be a smart guy (Stay on top of analytics. Think on the fly. Know your opponent, be creative. Call this the Bobby Valentine intangible.): Rojas seems not quite as sharp as you'd like. 4. Argue with the Umps: When it's not reviewable, go out and get in their face. Demand a huddle/discussion. Ask for help. If you've burned your challenge, go out and demand that they do an umpire review. Show some fire. Most of the time it may not make a difference, but every once in a while, it will. Umpires are human. They should know if they go against you, you're going to get an earful. Also, at the very least, your team can see you are competing and not just rolling over. 5. Be Good with the Press: Rojas is just ok. 6. Don't be a creepy sexual predator: New criteria. Added after the Calloway era.