Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 214

Thread: “So, why are you so incensed that the Dodgers moved out of Brooklyn?”

  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ by way of Brooklyn
    Posts
    1,972
    Quote Originally Posted by penncentralpete View Post
    The malice and resentment was directed at one man, and though New York City Parks Commissioner and “Czar” Robert Moses has been implicated in the abduction, it was eminently clear to the populous of the borough that one man only carried that responsibility — one Walter Francis O’Malley.
    In the July 7, 1948 issue of The Sporting News, it was reported that Los Angeles County Supervisor Leonard Roach led a contingent of LA officials on a hunt for a big league ball club. They sought the St. Louis Browns and the Chicago Cubs. Although turned down this time, Los Angeles and the major leagues were growing closer and closer.

    By the time O’Malley had forced Branch Rickey out and totally taken over control of the organization after the 1950 season, it was no longer a question of if Los Angeles would become a part of major league baseball, but when, and who would be the one to nail it down.
    you can take the Dodgers out of Brooklyn, but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the DODGERS
    http://brooklyndodgermemories.freeforums.org/

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ by way of Brooklyn
    Posts
    1,972
    Meanwhile, the saga of Walter O’Malley and Robert Moses was being perpetuated in the middle fifties. O’Malley had been hinting at the need for a new stadium for the Dodgers since the late forties. He was making money in Brooklyn. In 1956 the Dodgers showed a net profit of $487,000; the Braves in Milwaukee netted $362,000. The Dodgers were recording a million-plus in attendance every season, a profitable number in that era, and were raking in $800,000 in television revenue. Still, with his decrepit old ballpark in a neighborhood with changing demographics and his ball club getting old, O’Malley wondered whether the revenues would be able to be maintained.

    In August of 1955, the Dodgers announced that they would play seven “home” games in Jersey City’s Roosevelt Stadium, a subtle hint that if he didn’t get his way, the Dodgers could wind up someplace else. Dick Young in the New York Daily News wrote that the Dodgers were “inching their way westward.”
    you can take the Dodgers out of Brooklyn, but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the DODGERS
    http://brooklyndodgermemories.freeforums.org/

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ by way of Brooklyn
    Posts
    1,972
    The authority being cited was Title I of the Federal Housing Act of 1949, allowing the city to condemn a parcel of land to be replaced by a public project or to be sold to a private developer whose construction would conform to a “public purpose.” O’Malley wanted a site at Flatbush and Atlantic avenues in Downtown Brooklyn, but Moses refused to allow the building of a ball park, as he considered it not to be in accord with the intent of the Act. The entire question of blame hinges on whether the Dodgers’ boss was sincere in his desire to obtain this piece of property.

    Some thought not. Bill Veeck has written that “They couldn’t have met his demands, of course, because if they had given him what he wanted, he’d probably have kept changing them.”
    you can take the Dodgers out of Brooklyn, but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the DODGERS
    http://brooklyndodgermemories.freeforums.org/

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ by way of Brooklyn
    Posts
    1,972
    O’Malley was then offered a site at Flushing Meadows in Queens, where the current Mets reside. He refused it, saying that Dodgers fans would know that it wasn’t in Brooklyn. Presumably, they wouldn’t notice that Los Angeles was not in Brooklyn either.

    Following the Braves, shift to Milwaukee, Veeck maintains, he made an offer to O’Malley to purchase the Dodgers with the idea of taking the club to Los Angeles. Veeck was refused, of course, but came away with an interesting supposition. “When I left his office, it was with the distinct impression that O’Malley wasn’t going to sell the club to me because he had already mapped out Los Angeles for himself. And that was four years before he moved.”
    you can take the Dodgers out of Brooklyn, but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the DODGERS
    http://brooklyndodgermemories.freeforums.org/

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ by way of Brooklyn
    Posts
    1,972
    There were two primary reasons for O’Malley to want to build and own his own ballpark. One was parking, for which all proceeds would be his. At the Flatbush and Atlantic site, projections ranged from 2,500 parking spaces to 5,000; in L.A. he got 16,000. Another reason was television. Nobody can call the Dodgers boss a fool, and he was decidedly ahead of his time when he zeroed in on pay TV. With free television, he believed that the best approach was to air away games and black out all home games, thus buttering up the fans’ appetite when the team came home. This, he believed would increase home attendance. Brooklyn fans were already being treated to 100 televised games, all home games and the remaining, select road games. With two other teams in NYC televising games, O’Malley would not have exclusive control of the airways. His plan could not effectively be implicated in Brooklyn.
    you can take the Dodgers out of Brooklyn, but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the DODGERS
    http://brooklyndodgermemories.freeforums.org/

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ by way of Brooklyn
    Posts
    1,972
    O’Malley knew that he had every opportunity of having it all on the gold coast. Brooklyn never had a chance! There is every reason to agree with writer Dave Anderson when he said, “O’Malley would have broken through a brick wall to get his team to LA.”
    you can take the Dodgers out of Brooklyn, but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the DODGERS
    http://brooklyndodgermemories.freeforums.org/

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ by way of Brooklyn
    Posts
    1,972
    Quote Originally Posted by penncentralpete View Post
    O’Malley knew that he had every opportunity of having it all on the gold coast. Brooklyn never had a chance! There is every reason to agree with writer Dave Anderson when he said, “O’Malley would have broken through a brick wall to get his team to LA.”
    Now...........all of you younger fans (or fans who lived in mid-America during these times)...........I say enjoy all the "documentaries" and recent "tell-all" books....................but this is what happened (the above ten posts). Period.
    Last edited by penncentralpete; 07-31-2009 at 11:46 AM.
    you can take the Dodgers out of Brooklyn, but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the DODGERS
    http://brooklyndodgermemories.freeforums.org/

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    816
    Blog Entries
    1
    One quick correction...the Dodgers televised 129 games in Brooklyn, all 77 home games and 52 road games...and 11 more road games did not have to be televised as they were televised on channel 11 by the Giants (the games in New York!

    Pay television was still more than a decade away. And of course this wonderful human being showed his new fans in Los Angeles how much he loved them by ripping all the games off television. It was to be several years before any Dodger games were televised on the West Coast and even then the only games he televised were the 11 games played in San Francisco.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ by way of Brooklyn
    Posts
    1,972
    Quote Originally Posted by MATHA531 View Post
    One quick correction...the Dodgers televised 129 games in Brooklyn, all 77 home games and 52 road games...and 11 more road games did not have to be televised as they were televised on channel 11 by the Giants (the games in New York!

    Pay television was still more than a decade away. And of course this wonderful human being showed his new fans in Los Angeles how much he loved them by ripping all the games off television. It was to be several years before any Dodger games were televised on the West Coast and even then the only games he televised were the 11 games played in San Francisco.
    I meant to add a plus sign after the number 100(+). The main thrust of it was that O'Malley made $800,000 from these telecasts.
    you can take the Dodgers out of Brooklyn, but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the DODGERS
    http://brooklyndodgermemories.freeforums.org/

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    delaware
    Posts
    730
    Quote Originally Posted by penncentralpete View Post
    I meant to add a plus sign after the number 100(+). The main thrust of it was that O'Malley made $800,000 from these telecasts.
    and given the general price of tickets at the time.....that's a nice bit of pocket money...

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    delaware
    Posts
    730
    for those who want facts...800,000 1957 dollars had the buying power of 6,093,623.19 2009 dollars....given tv was in it's infancy and advertising and other sources of revenue, syndication etc... was not exploited fully....that was a huge sum for our local WOR to come up with

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    816
    Blog Entries
    1
    ....and the Dodgers television rights were worth far more than even that of the Yankees (who had to share their television outlet, channel 11, with the Giants). It was also the reason why the Dodgers were still the biggest money makers in baseball, even in 1957 the year the franchise was stolen and puts to a lie O'Malley's contention that he had to move to be able to keep up with Milwaukee.

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    delaware
    Posts
    730
    Add to that the Giants leaving and if you wanted to see Nl baseball in New York...you'd go to the dodger games...which would boost revenue...my guess a lot of giant fants would have come out to see mays and co...face the brooklyn dodgers too. battlin bake the dodger dynamo...ps. some old giant fans would have come out to root for anybody facing the dodgers...

  14. #39
    Just one thing, Moses didn't and couldn't prevent a ballpark from being built at Atlantic and Flatbush. For instance O'Malley could hasve bought the land in a private sale.Moses wasn't going to use Title I to be used because he didn't thing building a ballpark for a private business fell under the definition of Title I. Right now the same battle is going on over whether a new arena will be built for the New Jersey/Brooklyn Nets. In one of the other threads her Buczilla posted a letter to SI putting in his own words what he thought O'Malley was pulling. Perhaps that post could be put here as well. That short essay says a whole lot.
    Lets get Eddie Basinski elected to the Polish Sports Hall of Fame.
    www.brooklyndodgermemories.com

  15. #40
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Long Island NY
    Posts
    3,216
    After careful research, and by reading these threads I have come to the educated conclusion that O'Malley was a thieving, conniving, little twerp. Think I already knew it, but I'm just throwing it out there!

    I also discovered through geometric logic that a duplicate copy of the key to the wardroom icebox DID exist, Ah, but the strawberries!

    Sorry, a bit too many libations tonight, felt like quoting the great Bogie!
    Last edited by theAmazingMet; 07-31-2009 at 09:25 PM.
    unknown brooklyn cabbie " how are the brooks doin"
    unknown fan "good they got three men on base"
    unknown brooklyn cabbie "which one?"

  16. #41
    A good libation is good for the soul.

    O'Malley didn't do things on the spur of the moment. He gave careful thought to something before he did it. The move to LA was a well thought out plan, many years in the making. Certain things happened, to put it in motion when he did.
    Lets get Eddie Basinski elected to the Polish Sports Hall of Fame.
    www.brooklyndodgermemories.com

  17. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by dodger dynamo View Post
    Add to that the Giants leaving and if you wanted to see Nl baseball in New York...you'd go to the dodger games...which would boost revenue...my guess a lot of giant fants would have come out to see mays and co...face the brooklyn dodgers too. battlin bake the dodger dynamo...ps. some old giant fans would have come out to root for anybody facing the dodgers...
    Do you think Giants fans would have become Dodger fans?

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ by way of Brooklyn
    Posts
    1,972
    Quote Originally Posted by aqib View Post
    Do you think Giants fans would have become Dodger fans?
    No. I personally do not think so. At least the older fans wouldn't. Their sons and daughters, and the next generation--yes.
    you can take the Dodgers out of Brooklyn, but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the DODGERS
    http://brooklyndodgermemories.freeforums.org/

  19. #44
    When The Dodgers played 15 games over 2 years in New Jersey, 70% of the fans were there to boo the Dodgers. These were mostly Giants fand from the days that the Giants had a farm team there. Would old Giants fans attend Dodgers games, yes. Would they become Dodgers fans, no. I speak from experience, from 1958-1961 my father took me to a lot of Yankee games, to keep my interest in baseball. I became a fan of anyone who the Yankees were playing. I am quite sure there are others that post here who were in the same situation.
    Lets get Eddie Basinski elected to the Polish Sports Hall of Fame.
    www.brooklyndodgermemories.com

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ by way of Brooklyn
    Posts
    1,972
    Quote Originally Posted by tonypug View Post
    When The Dodgers played 15 games over 2 years in New Jersey, 70% of the fans were there to boo the Dodgers. These were mostly Giants fand from the days that the Giants had a farm team there. Would old Giants fans attend Dodgers games, yes. Would they become Dodgers fans, no. I speak from experience, from 1958-1961 my father took me to a lot of Yankee games, to keep my interest in baseball. I became a fan of anyone who the Yankees were playing. I am quite sure there are others that post here who were in the same situation.
    Robert: I attended many of these games at Roosevelt Stadium in both 1956 and 1957. I wouldn't put the anti-Dodger noise at 70%. That being said, it was a good 50/50. The one Dodger that got the most negative feedback was Jackie.
    you can take the Dodgers out of Brooklyn, but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the DODGERS
    http://brooklyndodgermemories.freeforums.org/

  21. #46
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Long Island NY
    Posts
    3,216
    Did the Jersey City Giants still play at the same time as the Dodgers were playing at Roosevelt?
    unknown brooklyn cabbie " how are the brooks doin"
    unknown fan "good they got three men on base"
    unknown brooklyn cabbie "which one?"

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    NJ by way of Brooklyn
    Posts
    1,972
    Quote Originally Posted by theAmazingMet View Post
    Did the Jersey City Giants still play at the same time as the Dodgers were playing at Roosevelt?
    No, they weren't. The team played in JC from 1937-1950 and were referred to many times as the "Little Giants."
    Last edited by penncentralpete; 08-02-2009 at 06:54 AM.
    you can take the Dodgers out of Brooklyn, but you can't take the Brooklyn out of the DODGERS
    http://brooklyndodgermemories.freeforums.org/

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tuscaloosa, AL
    Posts
    5,727
    Quote Originally Posted by penncentralpete View Post
    In the July 7, 1948 issue of The Sporting News, it was reported that Los Angeles County Supervisor Leonard Roach led a contingent of LA officials on a hunt for a big league ball club. They sought the St. Louis Browns and the Chicago Cubs. Although turned down this time, Los Angeles and the major leagues were growing closer and closer.

    By the time O’Malley had forced Branch Rickey out and totally taken over control of the organization after the 1950 season, it was no longer a question of if Los Angeles would become a part of major league baseball, but when, and who would be the one to nail it down.
    If the PCL hadn't thrown so many hoops for MLB to jump through so they could enter their territory, I think it would have been very likely that the Browns would have been playing in LA in 949 or 1950.

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tuscaloosa, AL
    Posts
    5,727
    Quote Originally Posted by penncentralpete View Post
    Los Angeles first began to be mentioned as a site for a baseball franchise in 1941 when Don Barnes, owner of the St. Louis Browns, requested that he be allowed to relocate his team to L.A. He believed that he had all the bases covered, including scheduling and claimed to have the necessary votes from the owners.

    His request was on the agenda at the major league meetings and was to be addressed at 9 a.m. on Monday, December 8, 1941. Events of December 7 made the move a moot point, since baseball was not even sure of playing at all in the coming season.

    Immediately following the dispatching of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, Los Angeles was back on track as a potential major league city.
    I don't believe this story because I've never seen a contemporary reference to the possibilty of a move, or any mention of it when there was a possibility of the Browns being purchased by LA interests in 1948. The story came out in 1952, when the Celler Committie was investigating baseball's anti-trust clause, specifically the fact that MLB was not represented in the west coast. I think that it was a pretty convienient time for that story to come out.

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Tuscaloosa, AL
    Posts
    5,727
    Quote Originally Posted by penncentralpete View Post

    By the time O’Malley had forced Branch Rickey out and totally taken over control of the organization after the 1950 season, it was no longer a question of if Los Angeles would become a part of major league baseball, but when, and who would be the one to nail it down.
    I think the event that really made it clear that MLB would reach LA was the move of the Braves from Boston to Milwaukee. Before this happened the PCL had been making noise since at least 1942 to become a third Major League. After the franchise shift, I believe that LA officials were no longer interested in an upgraded minor League team and wanted an established MLB team.

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

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
  •