Gibbons removes name from Pirates' manager hunt
John Gibbons has pulled out of the running to become the Pirates' next manager.
Thursday, a Pirates source confirmed Gibbons withdrew from further consideration. Gibbons will return as the Kansas City Royals' bench coach in 2011.
Gibbons did not return a phone call last night from the Tribune-Review.
Gibbons, 48, interviewed with the Pirates on Oct. 11, a week after John Russell was fired. Earlier this week, Gibbons told the Tribune-Review he "was kind of hoping I'd get considered" for the job.
Although he managed in Toronto from 2004-08, this was the first time Gibbons had interviewed for a skipper's job. He was the Blue Jays' bench coach and was promoted after manager Carlos Tosca was fired.
After going 305-305, Gibbons was fired midway through the 2008 season.
"Once you've had the opportunity to do that (manager) job, there's no question you always want to keep doing it," Gibbons said earlier this week. "So, we'll see, with the Pirates. These jobs are hard to come by. If it doesn't happen, I can still look back and say I had one opportunity to manage in the big leagues. That's pretty good."
Gibbons is the second candidate to drop off the Pirates' list. Eric Wedge, who was the first person they interviewed, on Monday was hired by the Seattle Mariners.
Dale Sveum, Ken Macha, Bo Porter, Jeff Banister and Tosca remain under consideration. Wednesday, Huntington told the Tribune-Review the Pirates are mulling other possible candidates.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.