Da Cubs need to suspend Zambrano for the year and then find a sucker who can take him of their hands. If some team was stupid enough to take Milton off the Cubs, they can do the same for Zambrano.

You can't bring Zambrano back after this. Enough is enough. His temper tantrums grown quite old going back to his feud with Barrett. He also hasn't won and he hasn't lived up to his generous contract. His time ran its course long time ago. He needs to be shown the door.

This team needs to cleanse many losers off the organization.

Carlos need to be made an example of how things are going to change under Tom Ricketts. The Cubs can't bring him back. Not after what happened on Friday. Truth be told, his days should have numbered after a lousy season last year with the Gatorade tantrum.

If Da Cubs bring Zambrano back, then they are sending a message things are going to remain the same.

Davud Haugh isn't kidding when he said to me he's not going to change his approach when I called him out. If anything, I am happy he is not. This gives me an opportunity to make fun of him when I email him all the time. Today, he writes about how Carlos Zambrano and the Cubs need to make up.

Why? Zambrano has been a failure for that organization, and the Cubs can't bring him back after this episode. What Zambrano need is a trip to a psychiatrist. This guy needs psychiatric help like yesterday. He has no business being on the field let alone being in the streets. He's a dangerous person to society let alone in the ballpark. Playing baseball is not what Z needs at his point of his career.

As for Haugh's column, I received his email this afternoon. This is what he wrote when I called him out for his fluff pieces. Anyone can email Haugh to verify what I wrote.

Here is what he wrote and I will break it down:

"Readers think anytime columnists praise a manager it's a puff piece. Tiresome. All you want is the attack. What a negative culture sports fandom has become. When you start quoting Mariotti, you lose me. Being fair means sometimes being complimentary. That's my approach and it's not going to change.

Thanks for reading.

DH"

David is missing the entire point here. Ozzie is not going to get praised for beating NL teams that are fighting for a spot in the 2011 MLB Draft. It's one thing for him to get props for beating AL Central rivals or the Yankees and the Red Sox or good NL teams, but it's another for a manager to get praised to beat teams he's supposed to beat.

The Chicago Tribune columnist thinks it's tiresome. Why is it tiresome? Fans want to read the truth not what sounds good. It's one thing to write fluff pieces about the Blackhawks. They deserve it, but when I read Haugh write crazy fluff pieces like how Bruce Weber is a great coach or how Kyle Orton deserves an extension for outdueling Gus Frerotte in a shootout at Soldier Field two years ago
(he actually wrote that two years ago) or how Lovie is misunderstood as coach (this one made me laugh too hard), I wonder about his credibility as a sports columnist.

How are Chicago sports fans going to get smart when columnists write fluff piece? It influences them to be stupider. That's one thing I love about Jay Mariotti, Greg Couch and Mike Downey. Those three made you think. The columnists today don't do those things. Most of the writers here are fluff.

Heck at this blog, I see too much fluff around here. Fortunately, I am around to call spade a spade. I can sleep well at night knowing I tell it like it is.

One thing I love about reading NY papers. They rip people all the time when they deserve it. The way it should be.

The former NFL columnist (Haugh) talks about what a negative culture sports fandom has become. David has to realize one thing. This is not high school sports, and even then high school sports kids deserve to be savaged if they don't get it done for their teams. If atheltes want the exposure that comes with playing sports, they better expect the criticism that comes with it when it comes with playing sports. This goes to high school kids. When I was in high school, I experience high school stars getting entitlement and special treatment, and that's fine because they help the school to make fundraising money, but again they need to deal with the criticism when they fail.

As for Mariotti, I am not sure why I lost Haugh. Jay had a great work ethic from his time at the Sun-Times. He wrote everyday. He was always on top of things. He is the only one that is not afraid to expose Jerry Reinsdorf as frauds and his colleagues as lazy people.

Being fair means being complimentary. Sure. I am all for it, but again, I am not sure why Ozzie and Bruce Weber for deserving praises. What has either of those two won?

David Haugh isn't kidding when he said to me he's not going to change his approach when I called him out. If anything, I am happy he is not. This gives me an opportunity to make fun of him when I email him all the time. Today, he writes about how Carlos Zambrano and the Cubs need to make up.

Why? Zambrano has been a failure for that organization, and the Cubs can't bring him back after this episode. What Zambrano need is a trip to a psychiatrist. This guy needs psychiatric help like yesterday. He has no business being on the field let alone being in the streets. He's a dangerous person to society let alone in the ballpark. Playing baseball is not what Z needs at his point of his career.

As for Haugh's column, I received his email this afternoon. This is what he wrote when I called him out for his fluff pieces. Anyone can email Haugh to verify what I wrote.

Here is what he wrote and I will break it down:

"Readers think anytime columnists praise a manager it's a puff piece. Tiresome. All you want is the attack. What a negative culture sports fandom has become. When you start quoting Mariotti, you lose me. Being fair means sometimes being complimentary. That's my approach and it's not going to change.

Thanks for reading.

DH"

David is missing the entire point here. Ozzie is not going to get praised for beating NL teams that are fighting for a spot in the 2011 MLB Draft. It's one thing for him to get props for beating AL Central rivals or the Yankees and the Red Sox or good NL teams, but it's another for a manager to get praised to beat teams he's supposed to beat.

The Chicago Tribune columnist thinks it's tiresome. Why is it tiresome? Fans want to read the truth not what sounds good. It's one thing to write fluff pieces about the Blackhawks. They deserve it, but when I read Haugh write crazy fluff pieces like how Bruce Weber is a great coach or how Kyle Orton deserves an extension for outdueling Gus Frerotte in a shootout at Soldier Field two years ago
(he actually wrote that two years ago) or how Lovie is misunderstood as coach (this one made me laugh too hard), I wonder about his credibility as a sports columnist.

How are Chicago sports fans going to get smart when columnists write fluff piece? It influences them to be stupider. That's one thing I love about Jay Mariotti, Greg Couch and Mike Downey. Those three made you think. The columnists today don't do those things. Most of the writers here are fluff.

Heck at this blog, I see too much fluff around here. Fortunately, I am around to call spade a spade. I can sleep well at night knowing I tell it like it is.

One thing I love about reading NY papers. They rip people all the time when they deserve it. The way it should be.

The former NFL columnist (Haugh) talks about what a negative culture sports fandom has become. David has to realize one thing. This is not high school sports, and even then high school sports kids deserve to be savaged if they don't get it done for their teams. If atheltes want the exposure that comes with playing sports, they better expect the criticism that comes with it when it comes with playing sports. This goes to high school kids. When I was in high school, I experience high school stars getting entitlement and special treatment, and that's fine because they help the school to make fundraising money, but again they need to deal with the criticism when they fail.

As for Mariotti, I am not sure why I lost Haugh. Jay had a great work ethic from his time at the Sun-Times. He wrote everyday. He was always on top of things. He is the only one that is not afraid to expose Jerry Reinsdorf as frauds and his colleagues as lazy people.

Being fair means being complimentary. Sure. I am all for it, but again, I am not sure why Ozzie and Bruce Weber for deserving praises. What has either of those two won?