Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Today is the 41st anniversary of the 1969 Mets clinching the NL East

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    596

    Today is the 41st anniversary of the 1969 Mets clinching the NL East

    Today is the 41st anniversary of the 1969 Mets clinching the NL East.I was on you tube recently and I
    stumbled upon this.On you tube if you type in 9 24 69 you will get all of the home runs the Mets hit in
    the Mets clinching NL East win against the Cardinals.You will also get the game ending double play hit
    by Joe Torre with the Cardinals as the Mets win and clinch the National League East.But you will also
    get the entire Mets postgame celebration as well.You will see Lindsey Nelson in the press box
    describing the celebration on the field with the players and fans.Then you will see Lindsey Nelson and
    Ralph Kiner in the clubhouse in a champagne celebration interviewing almost every Mets player
    including some September callups along with Gil Hodges and all of the coaches and GM Johnny Murphy
    as well.Bob Murphy was on radio at the time so unfortunately you don't see him in the celebration.
    Lindsey Nelson,Ralph Kiner,and Bob Murphy would each do 6 innings on tv and 3 innings on radio.
    And in the top of the ninth Ralph Kiner would head downstairs to get ready to do Kiner's Korner.
    This is something that I never saw before and I would imagine unless you saw it when it happened
    41 years ago today no one else has seen it either.This was a real treat for me.I really enjoyed it.
    It was a lot of fun to watch.We always see the 1969 World Series stuff and that's great but we never
    see the 1969 NLCS or much of the 1969 regular season so like I said to me this was a real treat.
    Another thing I saw on you tube that was interesting was Tom Seaver's first game in the major
    leagues but unfortunately you see Seaver's first game with no audio.It was Thursday April 13,1967.
    It was the second game of the season and the Mets beat the Pirates 3-2 at Shea.Seaver pitched
    5 1/3 innings and gave up 2 runs and got a no decision.But you tube only shows the game until
    Seaver is taken out and unfortunately you don't see the rest of the game.Chuck Estrada got the win.
    Ron Taylor got the save.The attendance for Seaver's first game in the major leagues was 5005.
    When you watch the game on you tube you see a ton of empty seats including in the field boxes on
    the third base side and the first base side.If we only knew then but I know that's easy to say now.
    The first game of the season that year was on Tuesday April 11,1967 when the Mets lost to the
    Pirates 6-3 at Shea.Don Cardwell was the starting and losing pitcher.The attendance was 31,510
    so thankfully no one had to get frostbite when trying to get opening day tickets in the middle of the
    winter.(lol)Ironically both Cardwell and Seaver had an E.RA of 3.38 after their first game that year.
    So I hope everybody enjoys the watching.I am sure you will also feel it was a real treat.
    "You don't give up any runs,we'll guarantee you
    at least a tie." ~ Grote to Koosman

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    709
    Great video and memories!
    Just call me a sports fan.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles County
    Posts
    1,522
    That...is simply awesome.

    These are names I didn't have the priviledge to grow up with, just read about ande see old videos of...but enver that much, never so much as that...

    And you know, even so early on in the video it reminds me of why I LOVE the Mets, why I've always loved them...

    I started watching them after Piazza was traded from the Dodgers to the Marlins (I was so angry I've never forgiven them, not only did they TRADE my baseball hero when I was just really starting to love baseball and Little League and catching and even the Dodgers, they not only trade him but trade him to a team I'd not only never heard of but was all the way in Florida and was this dinky, nothing team compared to the Dodgers, and I couldn't watch Piazza play, no one televised the Marlins on ESPN) and then to the Mets (I was starting to wonder if he'd play for every team in the league, but I came to be happy enough once I got to see Mike again because hey--the Mets were a notable team and I knew where New York was it seemed cool, but most importantly of all I got to see Mike again since the Mets were in the pennant race against the Cards and Braves, so more games to watch Mike!)

    I remember there was this book in my school library, "Sports Greatest Little Guys" or something like that, it was all about these great underdog stories, I remember Spud Webb was in there (don't ask me why I remember that little tidbit) but also the story of the 1960s Mets leading up to 1969.

    And since I was one of the tiniest kids in class and actually had a lot of health problems, I kind of liked that story in that book, a team of little guys winning.

    So I kept watching, and 1999--PLENTY of national games for the Mets! And Dodgers-Mets! And PLAYOFFS! I got to see Mike all the time! And I got to know who Al and Edgardo and Olerud and the rest were...those late-inning Mets/Braves battles are probably my first big game baseball memories, but I had to go to bed (damn you, late start times) and missed the end too many good games (the Seventh game of the 2001 World Series? Top of the 9th I have to go to bed, "It's the YANKEES," they say, "they'll win, now go to bed." And ten minues later...I was so happy they lost and so angry I missed it lol...)

    By 2000 I was hooked, and I'll always remember that span, 1998-2001, so fondly.

    And that's why this video really reminds me, oddly enough, of THOSE times--because the one thing I learned fast being a Met fan is you have to REALLY care, you get REALLY into it, the hurt is all the worse but the lifts are so much better--the Yankees won every year! I had to hear my Yankee-loving, "I got to watch MICKEY MANTLE win 7 World Series or so!" (7 WOULD be the right number for Mantle...) uncle joke about the Yankees winning every year so much, they won it seemed every damn time I saw them on TV--that's why I hated the Yankees and Yankee games, not just because I hated the team, but it just felt so passionless...what's the fun if you KNOW Rivera's going to shut them down in the 9th and that's it?

    Kids don't want that, they want something EXCITING at the end! They need that sense of "Will they win or lose?" and learn to handle loss! (Note to all coddling public school teachers afraid of being sued and over-protective moms with too many episodes of Oprah and Dr. Phil in their past...LET KIDS DEAL WITH IT! THEY CAN TAKE IT IF YOU GIVE THEM A CHANCE!)



    THAT'S what this video reminds me of, seeing all those fans clammoring for the Mets, all the losses and frustration now paying off...

    Not just idly cheering or acting like victory-drunken idiots like Yankee fans do, or beind dispassionate like Dodger fans, or criminal like Raider fans.

    I hated the Yankees as a kid.
    I hated the Packers as they always seemed to beat my 49ers--but that ONE TIME...Young to T.O...The Catch II--THAT was such a huge payoff after that I NEVER forgot it the way I forgot all the losses and the Pakcer wins all blurred together.
    I hated the Red Wings as a kid and growing up, but that ONE TIME the Ducks finally won, that time in the 02-03 season when they finally won a playoff series against them and moved on, I remember THAT, listening in to how they did, anticipating a sweep and getting it and I remember THAT distinctly...the losses are blurred.

    Same with the Mets, and that's why I've loved them and will always love them.

    Because they may break my heart and play like idiots and be messed up in the front office and everything else--but those fans CARE SO MUCH about their team that they'll pour onto the field and celebrate with THEIR team, all the losses are blurred memories, they hurt but it's a hurt that's almost a good sort of pain...because you know when you look back it was just one more step to THIS, this glorious moment when the little guys finally won, that magial day where everything clicks, where Steve Young almost stumbles but recovers to hit Terrell Owens who dropped passes all day long but holds onto this one even with two Packers crushing him to win the game at the very end, where J.S. Giguere plays like he's Jacques Plante and stops the Wings cold while Kariya peppers the net, that day where it's gettign late and it's almost time for bed...but then you hear the fans cheering downstairs and race back down and it's a Grand Single to win it!



    Those are our moments and memories, Mets fans--and I'll take those sort of moments and these sort of players and fans I can apparently write an entirely-too-long article on with so much passion because I HAVE so much passion than 27 cold, almost-routine wins that are so many they blur together and so lifeless that they're just catalogued and stored away in the minds of victory-drunk fans that are reasonably happy when the tema wins and pissed they didn't get their victory-fix when they lose.

    I'll take passionate and intense when they win OR lose, the most bitter herbs and the sweetsest chamnpagne--THAT'S a Mets fan, and that's this video, and that's baseball.

    And this, finally, is the end.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    5,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Shea Knight View Post
    And that's why this video really reminds me, oddly enough, of THOSE times--because the one thing I learned fast being a Met fan is you have to REALLY care, you get REALLY into it, the hurt is all the worse but the lifts are so much better--the Yankees won every year! I had to hear my Yankee-loving, "I got to watch MICKEY MANTLE win 7 World Series or so!" (7 WOULD be the right number for Mantle...) uncle joke about the Yankees winning every year so much, they won it seemed every damn time I saw them on TV--that's why I hated the Yankees and Yankee games, not just because I hated the team, but it just felt so passionless...what's the fun if you KNOW Rivera's going to shut them down in the 9th and that's it?

    Not just idly cheering or acting like victory-drunken idiots like Yankee fans do

    Those are our moments and memories, Mets fans--and I'll take those sort of moments and these sort of players and fans I can apparently write an entirely-too-long article on with so much passion because I HAVE so much passion than 27 cold, almost-routine wins that are so many they blur together and so lifeless that they're just catalogued and stored away in the minds of victory-drunk fans that are reasonably happy when the tema wins and pissed they didn't get their victory-fix when they lose.

    I'll take passionate and intense when they win OR lose, the most bitter herbs and the sweetsest chamnpagne--THAT'S a Mets fan, and that's this video, and that's baseball.

    And this, finally, is the end.
    I must say this is ridiculous stuff here.

    You call the Yankees passionless? Are you freaking kidding me? Have you ever watched a Yankee playoff or WS game at Yankee Stadium? Passionless? Stick to Reyes smile dude because you are clueless about the Yankees obviously.

    When Mariano comes into a playoff or WS game that stadium is shaking. You knock them for knowing its over. I guess you rather have Krod blowing a game or better yet Armando Benitez coming into a tight game in the 9th. Of course you would, why would you want to have the greatest closer ever to come into to close out a game. I rather not know if my pitcher is going to do it. That is just off the wall stuff.

    Its also pretty hypocritical because every year you root with everything you have for the Mets to take it all so much in fact that they sucked this year and you were still typing they can do this...they have blah blah blah and blah blah blah, but yet the Yankees really do compete every year, and you knock them for it. 27 WS victories blurred. Are you kidding me?

    Thats one good thing about the Mets - there is no blurring about WS wins. We have one in 1969 and another one CLEARLY 17 years later...and thats it. Its very clear. We wouldnt want them too close together and confuse ourselves. The Yankees on the other hand have them too blurred for me. 96, 98, 99, 2000, 09...my Lord I cant tell which is which. Thank God for Armando Benitez by the way...we didnt know if he was going to be able to close out game 1 in 2000...it was awesome not knowing...so awesome in fact that he didnt do it. That was great, but just the excitement of not knowing was enough for me. That passionless Paul O'neill had a passionless 12 pitch at bat in that game against the exciting Benitez and walked.

    Bitter herbs and sweetest champagne? Your obviously smoking one and drinking the other.
    Last edited by Paulypal; 09-24-2010 at 09:55 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    5,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Rigatoni View Post
    Today is the 41st anniversary of the 1969 Mets clinching the NL East.I was on you tube recently and I
    stumbled upon this.On you tube if you type in 9 24 69 you will get all of the home runs the Mets hit in
    the Mets clinching NL East win against the Cardinals.You will also get the game ending double play hit
    by Joe Torre with the Cardinals as the Mets win and clinch the National League East.But you will also
    get the entire Mets postgame celebration as well.You will see Lindsey Nelson in the press box
    describing the celebration on the field with the players and fans.Then you will see Lindsey Nelson and
    Ralph Kiner in the clubhouse in a champagne celebration interviewing almost every Mets player
    including some September callups along with Gil Hodges and all of the coaches and GM Johnny Murphy
    as well.Bob Murphy was on radio at the time so unfortunately you don't see him in the celebration.
    Lindsey Nelson,Ralph Kiner,and Bob Murphy would each do 6 innings on tv and 3 innings on radio.
    And in the top of the ninth Ralph Kiner would head downstairs to get ready to do Kiner's Korner.
    This is something that I never saw before and I would imagine unless you saw it when it happened
    41 years ago today no one else has seen it either.This was a real treat for me.I really enjoyed it.
    It was a lot of fun to watch.We always see the 1969 World Series stuff and that's great but we never
    see the 1969 NLCS or much of the 1969 regular season so like I said to me this was a real treat.
    Another thing I saw on you tube that was interesting was Tom Seaver's first game in the major
    leagues but unfortunately you see Seaver's first game with no audio.It was Thursday April 13,1967.
    It was the second game of the season and the Mets beat the Pirates 3-2 at Shea.Seaver pitched
    5 1/3 innings and gave up 2 runs and got a no decision.But you tube only shows the game until
    Seaver is taken out and unfortunately you don't see the rest of the game.Chuck Estrada got the win.
    Ron Taylor got the save.The attendance for Seaver's first game in the major leagues was 5005.
    When you watch the game on you tube you see a ton of empty seats including in the field boxes on
    the third base side and the first base side.If we only knew then but I know that's easy to say now.
    The first game of the season that year was on Tuesday April 11,1967 when the Mets lost to the
    Pirates 6-3 at Shea.Don Cardwell was the starting and losing pitcher.The attendance was 31,510
    so thankfully no one had to get frostbite when trying to get opening day tickets in the middle of the
    winter.(lol)Ironically both Cardwell and Seaver had an E.RA of 3.38 after their first game that year.
    So I hope everybody enjoys the watching.I am sure you will also feel it was a real treat.
    That was pretty awesome by the way. Its amazing watching fans swarm the field like that.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles County
    Posts
    1,522
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulypal View Post
    I must say this is ridiculous stuff here.

    Stick to Reyes smile dude because you are clueless about the Yankees obviously.

    Thats one good thing about the Mets - there is no blurring about WS wins. We have one in 1969 and another one CLEARLY 17 years later...and thats it. Its very clear. We wouldnt want them too close together and confuse ourselves. The Yankees on the other hand have them too blurred for me. 96, 98, 99, 2000, 09...my Lord I cant tell which is which. Thank God for Armando Benitez by the way...we didnt know if he was going to be able to close out game 1 in 2000...it was awesome not knowing...so awesome in fact that he didnt do it. That was great, but just the excitement of not knowing was enough for me. That passionless Paul O'neill had a passionless 12 pitch at bat in that game against the exciting Benitez and walked.

    Bitter herbs and sweetest champagne? Your obviously smoking one and drinking the other.
    AGAIN you're mentioning that damn smile comment...dude, seriously--drop it! Really, what's your problem?

    I mean, you're always here bashing players, bashing the team...do you even LIKE the Mets, or just like to bash them and everyone who supports them?



    And to deal with the second part I quoted--you missed the point of my quote entirely, just because you win a lot doesn't make it blur, it blurs when winning almost becomes blase. The 49ers won 5 Super Bowls, tied 2nd-most of any team, were the first to win 5--but they all stand out.

    Why?

    1981--crappy team that had never won anything goes on a big run with some guy named Joe and it culminates with one of the greatest plays in football history, "THe Catch," and then 26-21 over Cincy.
    1984--now with Roger Craig and some other stars the team is fully morphed into a contender and Joe Montana outduels HOFer Dan Marino, who's hassled all day, and the 49ers win again.
    1988--the season starts terribly, looks like they won't even make the playoffs, Steve Young actually replaces Montana, but the latter comes back with Rice and leada a game-winning, 92-YD drive over Cincy.
    1989--one of the greatest teams and seasons in football history with all the greats--Montana, Rice, John Taylor, Ronnie Lott and that D--dominating, ending with HOFer Elway getting blasted in a 55-10 win.
    1994--people "like but don't love" Young and actually hate their own QB when he plays and loses to Montana in K.C. but the team rallies around Young, finally beats the Cowobys and Chargers to win.

    ALL the wins were distinct, they had different feels to them, from an underdog team to a good team to a team in turmoil that got it's act together to one of the best teams ever to Niners: The Next Generation.

    ALL different stories--Shakespeare's credited with 37 different plays, and do I say that's too many? No...because the man does such a great job that not only are they great but also distinct enough to stand out; the tragedies follow the same general act structure (ie, generally the lead character's face with a huge issue ACt I, first death is often Act III, big finale and loads of deaths to end ACT V and the play) but all the characters and stories stand out.

    I'm not coing to confuse Hamlet for Othello, or Othello for King Lear, or King Lear for Macbeth or even Macbeth for Titus Andronicus, even as close as those two plays are in some fashions.

    The characters are distinct, adn the stories are distinct.

    A Middsumer Night's Dream is a comedy but a LOT different than Much Ado About Nothing which itself is worlds away from the Merchant of Venice.

    Now, to demonstrate what I mean with the Yankees...

    Does Henry VI Part 1 stand out from Henry VI Part 2 to Henry VI Part 3 in your mind? How about King John? Richard II?

    THOSE all blur together, they're forgettable...if you actually read or watch them you find they're not all that bad, they're worthy of being part of Shakespeare's canon (watch, folks, now I'm going to start being blasted for daring to like Shakespeare) but they're REALLY forgettable unless you're a rare person who's a professor of Shakespearean Histories and even for someone whose made if a good deal of their life to write on and act in and study Shakespeare, hopefully to be a professor of his works someday, I have to say--even if you LIKE those plays, and not everyone does, but even if you like them...they pretty much run together and they're not all that memorable.

    Now, let's take some Yankee wins:

    1996--yep, that stands out, first win in a long time, Jeter and a lot of his team really get their start here
    1998--YEP, ANY TIME you win 114 games in a year you're going to stand out (damn that team...)
    1999--..........what was really different or interesting here? Who sings of this win?
    2000--...yeah, but I'd say only because it was the first Subway Series in about 50 years; if the Yankees play anyone but the Mets this year's forgettable, too...actually, this is more memorable for the Mets...
    2009--we remember it NOW...will we really say "Remember the 2009 Yankees? MAN what a story, what a team!" we will with the '96 and '98 team, the '69 and '86 Mets?

    Now, to list other years here...
    1932--...um...it was a bad year of the Depression, but that doesn't have much to do with the season other than life sucked...ummmmm....what's the big story here?
    1936--...erm...why's this so special?
    1937--...same questions as above?
    1938--...ummmmm...well...well, I have this on mp3, but other than THAT...what's the great triumph here?
    1939--Gehrig's last year/WS, so that one I can concede a point to
    1941--Other than this beign the year of Pearl Harbor and the fact Mickey Owen let a ball through...?
    1943--This one gets a bit of a pass as it WAS during the war and most great players were away, but still--what's the big deal?

    1947? Yes...but just like 2000 it's the OTHER TEAM that makes it stand out, if the Brooklyn Dodgers and, more importantly, Jackie Robinson don't play, this fades into obscurity.
    1951? We remember the triumph of "The Shot Heard Round The World" between the Giants and Dodgers...this is an anti-climax if there ever was one.
    1952? This goes 7 games so there's something to remember in that, but other than this was another Yankees/Brooklyn Boys clash...?
    1956? YES, 7 games, Larsen's perfecto and the Yankees blast the Dodgers in Game 7 so badly it's memorable...also Jackie Robinson has his last at-bat here, a strikeout...sad, but memorable...
    1957? It's Yankees/Braves and 7 games, but other than that?
    1958? See above
    1961 YES, and I don't think I even need to say why*


    I could keep going, but let's deal with those--in all of that, 14 titles there, I see 5 memorable ones (1939, 1941, 1947, 1956, 1961) and two of those primarily memorable because of the other team and what they did instead of the Yankees (1941 for Mickey Owens' muff and 1947 for Jackie Robinson...just, just that WHOLE YEAR, really, is for Jackie Robinson.)

    So in 14 championships, from the 1930s to the 1960s, arguably the heyday of the Yankees, we have 3 that are memorable for great Yankee feats.

    1969 and 1986 are remembered for great Met feats, The Miracle Mets and then the 1986 Mets' great season, the 16-inning battle in Game 6 of the NLCS, and then the 7 Game Series with the Mets rallying to win from the brink of defeat in Game 6 (and the Mets had already tied it when Buckner committed his error so this is memorable for the Mets' rally and Buckner's boot, NOT just a boot a la Mickey Owens.)




    Sports is supposed to give us moments and memories to cherish, stories we can pas down to future generations because they were seemed to mean something to us.

    It's NOT about 11 titles that are mostly forgotten except for the fact they were won, it's about the 3 that seemed like TRIUMPHS.

    Call me cheesy here (and hey, with that smile and Shakespeare why not call me wrong here and you'll have a trifecta!) but sports is about triumph and tragedy, the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat, NOT cold stats and who batted what in what year and JUST the fact that you won.

    It's whether you win or lose, sir--we all die eventually, and wins and losses, most of them blur.

    It's how you play the game...and triumph.

    I'll take 1969 and 1986, triumphs that stand out and seemed so incredible, rather than stat-fest seasons and forgotten Series.

    Heck, I'll even take 2000 over most of those Yankees titles--2000 meant something to Mets fans, to me...I doubt it means more to most Yankee fans than just one more knotch in the belt.

    Just one more knotch in the belt--THAT'S the Yankee mentality about winning World Series, and THAT'S what I'm saying I hate about them, not that they have 27, but that they treat most of their wins as just another knotch, just one more win to add to the total, NOT cherishing and caring about them the way they do about the few they do care about, like 1998 or 1961, and the Mets do with 1969 and 1986.
    Last edited by Shea Knight; 09-25-2010 at 06:44 AM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    5,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Shea Knight View Post
    AGAIN you're mentioning that damn smile comment...dude, seriously--drop it! Really, what's your problem?

    I mean, you're always here bashing players, bashing the team...do you even LIKE the Mets, or just like to bash them and everyone who supports them?



    And to deal with the second part I quoted--you missed the point of my quote entirely, just because you win a lot doesn't make it blur, it blurs when winning almost becomes blase. The 49ers won 5 Super Bowls, tied 2nd-most of any team, were the first to win 5--but they all stand out.

    Why?

    1981--crappy team that had never won anything goes on a big run with some guy named Joe and it culminates with one of the greatest plays in football history, "THe Catch," and then 26-21 over Cincy.
    1984--now with Roger Craig and some other stars the team is fully morphed into a contender and Joe Montana outduels HOFer Dan Marino, who's hassled all day, and the 49ers win again.
    1988--the season starts terribly, looks like they won't even make the playoffs, Steve Young actually replaces Montana, but the latter comes back with Rice and leada a game-winning, 92-YD drive over Cincy.
    1989--one of the greatest teams and seasons in football history with all the greats--Montana, Rice, John Taylor, Ronnie Lott and that D--dominating, ending with HOFer Elway getting blasted in a 55-10 win.
    1994--people "like but don't love" Young and actually hate their own QB when he plays and loses to Montana in K.C. but the team rallies around Young, finally beats the Cowobys and Chargers to win.

    ALL the wins were distinct, they had different feels to them, from an underdog team to a good team to a team in turmoil that got it's act together to one of the best teams ever to Niners: The Next Generation.

    ALL different stories--Shakespeare's credited with 37 different plays, and do I say that's too many? No...because the man does such a great job that not only are they great but also distinct enough to stand out; the tragedies follow the same general act structure (ie, generally the lead character's face with a huge issue ACt I, first death is often Act III, big finale and loads of deaths to end ACT V and the play) but all the characters and stories stand out.

    I'm not coing to confuse Hamlet for Othello, or Othello for King Lear, or King Lear for Macbeth or even Macbeth for Titus Andronicus, even as close as those two plays are in some fashions.

    The characters are distinct, adn the stories are distinct.

    A Middsumer Night's Dream is a comedy but a LOT different than Much Ado About Nothing which itself is worlds away from the Merchant of Venice.

    Now, to demonstrate what I mean with the Yankees...

    Does Henry VI Part 1 stand out from Henry VI Part 2 to Henry VI Part 3 in your mind? How about King John? Richard II?

    THOSE all blur together, they're forgettable...if you actually read or watch them you find they're not all that bad, they're worthy of being part of Shakespeare's canon (watch, folks, now I'm going to start being blasted for daring to like Shakespeare) but they're REALLY forgettable unless you're a rare person who's a professor of Shakespearean Histories and even for someone whose made if a good deal of their life to write on and act in and study Shakespeare, hopefully to be a professor of his works someday, I have to say--even if you LIKE those plays, and not everyone does, but even if you like them...they pretty much run together and they're not all that memorable.

    Now, let's take some Yankee wins:

    1996--yep, that stands out, first win in a long time, Jeter and a lot of his team really get their start here
    1998--YEP, ANY TIME you win 114 games in a year you're going to stand out (damn that team...)
    1999--..........what was really different or interesting here? Who sings of this win?
    2000--...yeah, but I'd say only because it was the first Subway Series in about 50 years; if the Yankees play anyone but the Mets this year's forgettable, too...actually, this is more memorable for the Mets...
    2009--we remember it NOW...will we really say "Remember the 2009 Yankees? MAN what a story, what a team!" we will with the '96 and '98 team, the '69 and '86 Mets?

    Now, to list other years here...
    1932--...um...it was a bad year of the Depression, but that doesn't have much to do with the season other than life sucked...ummmmm....what's the big story here?
    1936--...erm...why's this so special?
    1937--...same questions as above?
    1938--...ummmmm...well...well, I have this on mp3, but other than THAT...what's the great triumph here?
    1939--Gehrig's last year/WS, so that one I can concede a point to
    1941--Other than this beign the year of Pearl Harbor and the fact Mickey Owen let a ball through...?
    1943--This one gets a bit of a pass as it WAS during the war and most great players were away, but still--what's the big deal?

    1947? Yes...but just like 2000 it's the OTHER TEAM that makes it stand out, if the Brooklyn Dodgers and, more importantly, Jackie Robinson don't play, this fades into obscurity.
    1951? We remember the triumph of "The Shot Heard Round The World" between the Giants and Dodgers...this is an anti-climax if there ever was one.
    1952? This goes 7 games so there's something to remember in that, but other than this was another Yankees/Brooklyn Boys clash...?
    1956? YES, 7 games, Larsen's perfecto and the Yankees blast the Dodgers in Game 7 so badly it's memorable...also Jackie Robinson has his last at-bat here, a strikeout...sad, but memorable...
    1957? It's Yankees/Braves and 7 games, but other than that?
    1958? See above
    1961 YES, and I don't think I even need to say why*


    I could keep going, but let's deal with those--in all of that, 14 titles there, I see 5 memorable ones (1939, 1941, 1947, 1956, 1961) and two of those primarily memorable because of the other team and what they did instead of the Yankees (1941 for Mickey Owens' muff and 1947 for Jackie Robinson...just, just that WHOLE YEAR, really, is for Jackie Robinson.)

    So in 14 championships, from the 1930s to the 1960s, arguably the heyday of the Yankees, we have 3 that are memorable for great Yankee feats.

    1969 and 1986 are remembered for great Met feats, The Miracle Mets and then the 1986 Mets' great season, the 16-inning battle in Game 6 of the NLCS, and then the 7 Game Series with the Mets rallying to win from the brink of defeat in Game 6 (and the Mets had already tied it when Buckner committed his error so this is memorable for the Mets' rally and Buckner's boot, NOT just a boot a la Mickey Owens.)




    Sports is supposed to give us moments and memories to cherish, stories we can pas down to future generations because they were seemed to mean something to us.

    It's NOT about 11 titles that are mostly forgotten except for the fact they were won, it's about the 3 that seemed like TRIUMPHS.

    Call me cheesy here (and hey, with that smile and Shakespeare why not call me wrong here and you'll have a trifecta!) but sports is about triumph and tragedy, the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat, NOT cold stats and who batted what in what year and JUST the fact that you won.

    It's whether you win or lose, sir--we all die eventually, and wins and losses, most of them blur.

    It's how you play the game...and triumph.

    I'll take 1969 and 1986, triumphs that stand out and seemed so incredible, rather than stat-fest seasons and forgotten Series.

    Heck, I'll even take 2000 over most of those Yankees titles--2000 meant something to Mets fans, to me...I doubt it means more to most Yankee fans than just one more knotch in the belt.

    Just one more knotch in the belt--THAT'S the Yankee mentality about winning World Series, and THAT'S what I'm saying I hate about them, not that they have 27, but that they treat most of their wins as just another knotch, just one more win to add to the total, NOT cherishing and caring about them the way they do about the few they do care about, like 1998 or 1961, and the Mets do with 1969 and 1986.
    This is the last time I am going to respond to anything ridiculous on this forum, but for old times sake here goes.

    As most of your posts for those that read them we all know how much you love the Mets..which is cool, but your a little off base. For every Yankee WS win there is a story for the people that witnessed them. You dismissing them as you did above just shows a bit of youth or ignorance. Or both. I have witnessed 7 of them and every one was different - just as any WS win is unique. The Yanks just happen to have the most. Have you heard of the expression "it never gets old". Well watching your team win a WS I am sure doesnt get old.

    As Met fans we have no choice but to cherish any WS appearence...they are so few and far between. Some of your stuff is just ridiculous. So after they won in 1986 I guess you didnt want them to repeat in 1987 to keep the 1986 WS special. After all if they did win in 1987 who cares right? After all the only that happend that was Black Tuesday. No big deal about winning, and then God forbid they won again in 1988...ho hum who cares just another win. So I guess rooting for a team to win multiple WS is stupid because we should keep all those WS far apart so they stay very special. This thinking is not even of this earth.

    Your actually dismissing the Yankees for being a great organization for 90 years.

    As far as your question about me liking the Mets:

    The Mets are in my blood..I will always love the Mets, but right now I dont like them at all. Not one bit. If you can understand that. For the simple reason - they as an organization do not respect their fans nor do they care about their fans. I will not support a team financially or with moral support that doesnt give me and the rest of the fan base a real team. I am way past the point in my life that I am just going to root blindly and believe - as you do - that a team that sucks is going to win anything. I have said on this forum many times that I dont love laundry. It takes more than the word Mets on a shirt to make me pay attention nowadays. Being a fan is a committment. One that I have, and many many others have given with nothing in return but a pile of b.s.. A quitting, underachieving, over paid, undermanaged organization. This is the plain simple fact - like it or not. If nobody likes it...too bad.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    5,660
    To Joe Rigatoni - I want to apologize for hijacking your thread. Your thread had nothing to do with where it ended up. I should have ignored what I read but obviously I find it difficult to let inaccurate knocks on the Yankees go.
    Last edited by Paulypal; 09-25-2010 at 07:30 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles County
    Posts
    1,522
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulypal View Post
    To Joe Rigatoni - I want to apologize for hijacking your thread. Your thread had nothing to do with where it ended up. I should have ignored what I read but obviously I find it difficult to let inaccurate knocks on the Yankees go.
    Seriously, I know they're the Yankees and all, but...they're the Yankees!

    WHY are you so quick to talk about how great the Yanks are and so quick to talk about how horrible a franchise the Mets are...and call yourself a Mets fan?!?!

    I get being objective to a point, but seriously, you sound like a self-hating Mets fan, so to speak...what is the deal?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    709
    The Yankees' 27 titles are not ho hum. The excitement and joy of winning the World Series always is there, whether it the first time or the twenty-seventh time. If the Mets won the WS last year, I would want them to do it again this year as well. I cherish any world series win, whether we win once every decade or three times in a row.
    Just call me a sports fan.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    5,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Shea Knight View Post
    Seriously, I know they're the Yankees and all, but...they're the Yankees!

    WHY are you so quick to talk about how great the Yanks are and so quick to talk about how horrible a franchise the Mets are...and call yourself a Mets fan?!?!

    I get being objective to a point, but seriously, you sound like a self-hating Mets fan, so to speak...what is the deal?
    You see your line up there "but they're the Yankees". Well obviously I dont feel that. I respect the Yankee organization a great deal. They make a ton of cash and are willing to put it right back into the organization. Comparing the way the Mets are run to the Yankees is like comparing a Ferrari and a Pinto. Thats not self hating. That my friend is just a plain simple fact.

    Unlike you I dont love anything just because I am supposed to and I always have. Those are not reasons to me. Obviously I wish the Mets were a better team and run better, but they arent.

    I am quick to point how great the Yankee org is and how pathetic the Mets are....do you know why? Because its true, and if you havent figured it out by now I look at baseball with objectivity. I dont look at the Mets with rose colored glasses because I always have been a Mets fan. You can do that and kid yourself to death. Its your call. I will never do that. If something it sucks ,,,,,it sucks. Me liking it doesnt make it not suck.

    The fact that you posted what you posted about the Yankee WS wins meaning nothing, and the Yankees are passionless just is an indicator of how clueless some Met fans can be about the Yankees. I wish the Mets had as many meaningless WS wins, and passionless moments. .
    Last edited by Paulypal; 09-26-2010 at 12:19 PM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    East of the Sun, West of the Moon
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Rigatoni View Post
    Today is the 41st anniversary of the 1969 Mets clinching the NL East.I was on you tube recently and I
    stumbled upon this. On you tube if you type in 9 24 69 you will get all of the home runs the Mets hit in
    the Mets clinching NL East win against the Cardinals.
    Why not just post the link?

    Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYHOM81SlfE
    Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pc865NM7uLU

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •