It's interesting to see how many people vote based on his talent. What's funny about that? Are you suggesting that a manager shouldn't be judged on the teams performance relative to the talent? Should he have been expected to win 90 games back in 2003? Seems to me those that have made up their minds that Ned is bad want to have it both ways...He was bad back then - and was the reason they have been bad, but now that the players are better, so we still don't have to give him any credit, or consider him competent. If we had the 2003 roster, and were way out of the playoff chase -- with crappy players -- would Yost get a D? Silly question, but no, many here in the lunatic fringe would give him an F, desperately wanting to believe that if only we had a different manager, the team would be better. Anyway, that's not the case, we are here in 2008 with the second best record in the national league, holding the wildcard -- with good players -- and many still choose to give him less than even an average grade, pretty much for one reason -- they made up their minds long ago that he was a bad manager due to how the Brewers played with bad players, and are unwilling to look at him objectively.