MACHANATIONS

It appears that the veneer has finally eaten away and the A's clubhouse has been revealed for what it is.


The A's have had issues for years, particularly evasive issues in the clubhouse. The ridiculousness of the traditional media has allowed the creation of three A's teams; the A's you see on the field, the A's you read and hear about with the media, and the actually Oakland A's.


Ken Macha's time was done some time in the middle of the 2003 season. He was out after last season and brought back. Now, it looks like he might be out again.


[quote]Macha's relationships with a number of players have been the source of Bay Area stories for several seasons. Macha almost didn't return to the A's after last season, but was later rehired.[/quote]


Is it easier to get rid of the players or get rid of the manager? If you get rid of the manager, does a member of the coaching staff simply become an extension of the former regime? If you hire from the outside - do you have to fire the entire coaching staff?


This facade, this debate over this Ken Macha, might be the last hurrah of the Billy Beane experiment. The A's are at the point that they might have to be destroyed to save themselves. Has it really been this bad? Were the A's this season just a mirage? Were they winning in spite of themselves? How did it get bad this fast?