The Reds did a fabulous job making Barry Larkin the heavy. You could blame the team's front office, if it had one. For 18 years of service, Larkin got an ultimatum, not a negotiation. The PR-challenged John Allen apparently asked Larkin's agent if Larkin had to be the team captain if he returned. That's a nice touch.

The Reds didn't want Larkin. That's fine. Why didn't they just come out and say it?

Give the club credit, though: You bought its pitch.

Judging from the mail since Tuesday, the local consensus is Larkin should take a hike. "Let us thank (Larkin) for fleecing Uncle Karl (sic) out of $27 million," was typical of my e-mail Wednesday. "You remember Larkin as a saint to the city. I'll remember (him) as (an) instrument of the suffering of years to come."

Not all Reds fans have turned on shortstop Barry Larkin, as these autograph seekers before Wednesday's game can attest. (Ernest Coleman photo) | ZOOM |

Is Larkin's collar not blue enough for you? Did he offend your lunchpail sensibilities by rejecting an ultimatum? Did you know the Reds will pay Juan Castro $1 million next year?

Does it matter that Larkin took below-market money in the late-90s to stay here? Or do we just blame him for his "greed" in taking $27 million the last three years?

It's a shut-up-and-play city. Always has been. But we're selective in how we enforce it. Did Boomer Esiason shut up and play? Was that before or after he sat in front of the bus?

We loved Chris Sabo. Sabes was our kind of guy, from his buzzed head to his pigeon toes. Guess what? Sabo left for more money. Nobody said a word.

Eighteen years, take a hike. Is that all it's worth now? For some, 18 years is a lifetime of being a fan. Some don't remember when Larkin wasn't the Reds' shortstop. Eighteen years of never embarrassing himself, his team or his city. Of putting up enough numbers; he's one of the five best players in club history. Larkin wasn't Pete Rose or Johnny Bench. But he was in the photo with Tony Perez. He was a better Red than either Joe Morgan or Frank Robinson. Morgan played more years in Houston than he did here; Robinson hit 262 of his 586 homers for other teams.

How easily you dismissed Larkin. How knee-jerk quickly you packed his bags. Eighteen years, take a hike.

Larkin wasn't worth $27 million? Actually, a person is worth what someone is willing to pay him. Anyone who would reject $27 million, step right up and get your halo. Otherwise be quiet or be a hypocrite.

Larkin should have taken the $500,000? Well, you know, he might have, had it been presented differently than take-it-or-leave-it. As Larkin said, "I didn't close off negotiations. There were no negotiations."

You can believe that was typical Reds management bungling, or an orchestrated effort to all but guarantee they wouldn't have to pay Larkin in 2004. Regardless, it was a bum's-rush way of dealing with anyone, let alone Larkin. Eighteen years.

How do you get to be an icon in this city?

What do you need to do?

Is Pete Rose an icon?

Yes?

What has he given back? Are there any ballparks in his name? Any hospital wings, charitable causes, golf tournaments? Larkin's charity has raised $70,000 since 1998, according to guidestar.org, a Web site that tracks such things.

"How soon they forget" was Dave Parker's reaction. "He gave his whole career to the city, was raised in the city, now when he needs the city, they're not there for him."

Larkin suggested Thursday he could still be back here next year. Why would he want to do that now? Eighteen years. Half a million dollars. Take it or leave it. Sad.