I'm not picking on you with this response, but it seems indicative of many of the threads. To sort of combine them, the argument seems to be "Well, they have to do SOMETHING, so let's try this." I understand the sentiment, but either one makes a good move or a bad move - it doesn't switch from one to the other just because the Twins stink. Certainly, we wouldn't praise a move that that we think is a bad move just because it is "something." We wouldn't say the Twins should ditch Buxton because it's "something." It's a bad move, whether the Twins are bad or not bad. I don't know how firing Gardy is any different. If you think he's a good manager (and thus, difficult to replace) then not firing him is a good move. If you don't, it's a bad move. But firing him just because you don't know what else to do seems silly. It's as likely to be a step in the wrong direction as it is in the right direction, right?