Two things: Whenever I've heard the FO talk they are careful to talk about upgrading their pitching as a whole, rather than specifically targeting starters. I appreciate that mindset because the bullpen did need work...but now it's the rotation. If he said that, that's good to hear, but it needs to happen. Maybe I'm wrong and I said something along the way that indicates I blame them personally for something, but my issues are all rooted in skepticism. They, ownership included, were adamant about their intentions. It seems odd to me that in November, when Darvish is slated by most to get 6 years and closer to 200M, that you'd balk at 5/100ish. What changed? Did they think in November that 5/110 was going to do it? If so, that seems....naive? If they were prepared to be in the 150+ neighborhood, why balk now? What they said, relative to what they did, opens a wide door for questioning. I think that's fair. What I don't think is fair is to just dismiss this disappointment and start making excuses for it. Somewhere along the lines the rhetoric didn't match the action and we do have a right to be upset about that. Personally, I was never of the notion we would sign Darvish, but comments in the wake of the signing by the FO and some here have been frustrating. I love many parts of this team right now and am pretty bullish on their chances. This market seems ripe to capitalize. I grant there is still time....but it's ticking fast.