Since Lou Piniella stepped down, the Chicago Cubs have soared to a record of 15-7 under the watch of Mike Quade, who is in the discussion of who will take over the team next year. However, that is another discussion for another day. Today, I want to focus on what several Cub fans are talking about. That is quite simply how they believe that the Cubs were screwed over my Piniella and should have fired him after the 2009 season, or at very least by the All Star break. The thinking here is that the Cubs would have been in contention, challenging the Cincinnati Reds for the division crown; if they had of ditched Piniella sooner, rather than later.

People point to how the Cubs have started playing much better since the departure of Piniella as proof that he lost the team, and they started tuning him out. I am not saying this is not possible, as there have been several times throughout the season where he has seemed less than interested in managing this team. I have cursed at him several times after post game press conferences where he has said “what am I supposed to do”, or “I am out of ideas”. When he said that last comment, I knew that the time had come to let him go. Sadly, that is not what happened. He kept his job and the Cubs continued their downward spiral into embarrassment.

The question is, would the Cubs have had a chance of competing if they had of let Piniella go earlier in the season. I am not so sure they would have been. Would a different manager of gotten Alfonso Soriano to hit higher than .260? Since Quade took over his batting average has actually declined, so I don’t think a a managerial change would have helped him at all. How about Derrek Lee and his .251 batting average? Considering he is still doing the same thing under Atlanta Braves Manager Bobby Cox, I am guessing not. His average now, is still the same as when he was with the Cubs. I know, a new manager would have gotten Aramis Ramirez to hit better than .244? Nope, like with Soriano his average has also gone down since Quade has taken over.

Some people claim, that players follow their managers lead, and conform to their personality, the thinking there being that if he is hanging his head, giving up and not caring, then the players will follow his lead. Some are under the impression that one of the main jobs of the manager is to motivate and instill confidence in their players. While this line of thinking is not completely wrong, I do not put much stock into this at all. While I can see them mimicking the personality, the motivation idea is a load of malarkey These guys are professionals, and should not need any motivation to do their jobs. If they need pep talks, to get through the day and play ball the way they are supposed to, then they do not belong in the majors.

Somehow, even with the players that are supposed to be the Cubs main contributors struggling, the Cubs have taken off and have been playing better than they have all season. While some would point to the retirement of Piniella as the impressive turn around, personally I point to the lack of any pressure to their improved play. With the season already being long since reasonably over, the pressure of ending the championship drought is gone, the monkey is already off their backs. They are free to just concentrate on playing winning baseball, nothing bad can happen if they lose. If the Cubs drop a game, so what they wont lose any sleep over a game which would not impact their chances in making the playoffs. Right now they are just playing the game for the love and fun of things. Sure, they should have been having fun all season long, but the pressure of winning does strange things to people. Especially when you are carrying 103 years of failure with you.

Maybe I am not being fair though, perhaps a change in voices is exactly what the team needed. After all, they have been playing winning baseball since Quade has come into the picture. You can not discount what has happened since the change. There is a long history of teams going on amazing runs to finish a season after a managerial change. Both the Colorado Rockies and Houston Astros are prime examples in recent memory. As are the Baltimore Orioles though, which is more often the rule than the exception. Teams generally play better for a month or so when a change is made. Unfortunately for the Cubs, and for Quade, there is not enough time left in the season to see which side of the argument the Cubs would fall. With that being the case, all any of us can really do is wonder, because neither side can be truly proven.

Yesterday, the Chicago Cubs unveiled their newest statue to Wrigley Field, and immortalized “Sweet Swinging” Billy Williams for all eternity. If Cubs President Crane Kenney is to be believed, there could very well be more statues coming to Wrigley soon. The question then becomes, who will be next? I am sure there will be several nominations for both Ron Santo and Ryne Sandberg, both of whom have been very popular Cubs and are still very involved in the Cubs organization. The ownership could not go wrong choosing either one of them, as they are all fan favorites. The only question I have, is why should they?

Yes, I am whole heartedly against the Cubs adding anymore statues to the Wrigley Field grounds, and would not have been upset if they never put up one for either Ernie Banks or Williams. They are unneeded and, in my own opinion, unwanted. In fact, you can ditch the statue for Harry Caray as well while you are at things. Granted, as Kenney said, “the fans love them” but I think they are completely unnecessary and unwarranted. What did they do, which made them worthy of having statue made for them?

Don’t misunderstand what I am saying, Banks and Williams were legendary players for the Cubs. As were both Santo and Sandberg. They are among the most popular Cubs in the long storied history of the franchise. There is no question they are worthy of being honored by the Cubs, which they were when they all had their numbers retired. They will all be remembered as long as those numbers fly on those flag poles. However, that should have been where everything ended in the honoring of the legends of the past.

Why immortalize players from the most disappointing team in the history of our franchise? Why embrace our painstaking past anymore than we have to? Why hold on and celebrate the losing culture when all you are doing is celebrating mediocrity?

Again, I am not under any circumstances calling these players mediocre. That could not be further from the truth. They are all legends and all Hall of Fame players(with the exception of Santo who should be in there already). That is not the point I am trying to drive across. The point is, the Cubs past is nothing to be proud of, celebrated or remembered.

Yes, there is an old saying which says “if you do not remember the past, you are doomed to repeat it”. That is exactly where the problem comes in with the Cubs. Our team’s culture of losing is brought up year in and year out. Every time the Cubs make the playoffs, the imaginary “goat curse” is brought up and reporters dog the players about questions about the “curse” and the drought. How has remembering the past done for the last few playoff teams? Back to back sweeps sure is a way to avoid repeating the past don’t you think? Even Derrek Lee said the pressure gets to you after a while, and brought up how you feel the burden of all 102 years on your back.

If you want to build a statue of someone, build one of a player who actually won a World Series for the Cubs, or how about three? Joe Tinker. Jonny Evers and Frank Chance are all Hall or Fame players, legends in Cubdom and are all in the Hall of Fame. You can’t retire their numbers because they didn’t wear them in those days. But honestly, I don’t want a statue of them either, but at least they have done something we could have celebrated.

In case you are wondering, no I am not against them because they are “cluttering up Wrigley” as some Cub fans have mentioned. I just don’t want to celebrate mediocre teams who accomplished nothing at all. For some reason, the 1969 Cubs (who had one of, if not the biggest collapses in baseball history) are the most beloved team in the long history of our franchise. Maybe that is because that team had a lot of great talent playing for them, but they aren’t beloved for winning anything.

The next statue I want to see put up at Wrigley Field, is of someone involved with the next Cubs team that wins a World Series. Who knows, maybe that will be Sandberg who could be the manager of that team. Perhaps they build a statue honoring all of the players on the winning team. I don’t really care who they build the statue of, as long as they wait until the Cubs win the World Series and build it for someone who won something for us.

I love Banks, he is one of the greatest players in team history, and if anyone should have gotten a statue he should have been the man. If push comes to shove, I can add in Williams (since he is already there). What set me off was the talk of more statues coming to celebrate the players from a mediocre and disappointing past.