Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Are the Mets Indifferent to Ther Own History?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • WEB
    replied
    I'm not sure what they are not doing? Long ago the Mets had old timers day.

    People started accusing them of doing it only to sell tickets, when they stopped they are told they are indifferent to history?

    Can't win.

    Leave a comment:


  • milladrive
    replied
    Originally posted by Strawman View Post
    Actually it's bold and politically incorrect, among Mets fans! Bravo to the Wilpons! (And you never hear that from me....) - and you know, it's specifically New York and National League. This ain't Tampa, where the out-of-towners who own the Bronx team live. I think it's appropriate. I give 'em credit. My kids dig it. Plus Milla's dad looks great - Milla, what're you like 15?
    lol, I wish!! But my dad thanks you. That was taken two years ago on his 69th birthday. Plus, he's in such good shape, he still goes out sailing, and often joins in "bikathons" in the mountains of Arizona (we're talkin' anywhere from 20 to 100 miles). And here I am needing to lose 30 pounds, heh.

    Sorry for the digression.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paulypal
    replied
    Originally posted by Shea Knight View Post
    I like the Jackie Robinson Rotunda...it adds a touch of class...

    I'd have been happy if they'd named it "Jackie Robinson Field," and then have everything INSIDE the stadium be Mets-i-fied.

    But that should've been the ONLY reference to the Brooklyn Dodgers.

    As for the history of the team:

    I'd rank the teams in 5 Tiers, 6 teams a tier:

    1st Tier Teams, the Crown Jewel Six:
    Yankees
    Red Sox
    Dodgers
    Giants
    Cubs
    Cardinals

    2nd Tier:
    Athletics
    Braves
    Pirates
    Tigers
    Reds
    Phillies

    3nd Tier:
    Mets
    Orioles
    White Sox
    Angels
    Twins
    Indians

    4th Tier. in no particular order:
    Blue Jays
    Astros
    Mariners
    Marlins
    Royals
    Brewers

    5th Tier:
    Diamondbacks
    Rays
    Padres
    Nationals
    Rangers
    Rockies

    Just a rough sketch of my view, at least, of the league, taking into account WS wins and pennants and playoff wins and memorable moments and players and fields and broadcasters and so on...

    So I see the Mets as a 3rd-Tier team out of 5...

    And I think the Orioles, White Sox, Angels, Twins, and Indians are comparable; the Mets have 2 WS wins, so do the Twins (3 including the Senators) and the Angels have 1...the Angels have had more recent postseason success, while the Mets have more HOFers (1, 2 with Piazza coming up, to the Angels' 0) and so on.

    I'm just saying...those six compare "fairly" to one another, better to, say, the Yankees or Dodgers.

    Similarly, all 6 3rd-Tier teams are better historically overall than, say, the Padres.
    I guess it all depends on how you look at it. If you add market place into the equation its sort of unfair to have the Mets in the same catergory as the Twins, Indians, Orioles - or just about any other team for that matter.

    You are trying very hard to make the Mets as a less than disappointing franchise. You cant. They are a losing organization. I dont like it either but that is a the plain simple fact. You can catergorize away they just arent very good.

    If you count the last few years some of your catergory 6 teams are climbing the ladder.

    Leave a comment:


  • Blue387
    replied
    Someone on Vimeo made this. This is not bad.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shea Knight
    replied
    I DO count fan support and HOFers and how memorable and iconic the teams, players, managers, fields, broadcasters, etc. for a franchise are...

    Hence my keeping the Cubs in the Crown Jewel Six.

    The Pirates, over 100+ years, have had a terrible last 20, but before that, they've really had some of the best teams, players, and moments, and 5 WS wins...

    So they beat out the Marlins/Blue Jays/Orioles for me; Orioles have had a Pirates-like decline the last 15+ years, but as they were poor for a long stetch BEFORE the 1960s (as the Browns) I put the Pirates ahead again.

    More HOFers and WS titles put the Pirates over the Blue Jays and Marlins, as well.

    The Indians I wasn't sure of where to place, they could very will swap with the Blue Jays.

    The Marlins I rank lower because of the youth of their franchise, 2 WS titles help, hence they're being promoted to the 4th Tier, but still...

    And I wasn't sure what to do about the Phillies--#1 in losses in MLB history, I believe, and yet, aren't they more iconic and have had more success than the Blue Jays?

    Wasn't sure, really, the 3rd Tier could easily be made up of 8 rather than 6, promoting the Blue Jays and demoting the Phillies (the Mets remaining just in the middle, really, they ARE the epitome of a 3rd-Tier, "good-but-not-glorious" team...but I'll take that easily over the teams I ranked below them any day, with the exception, perhaps, as said, of the Blue Jays.)

    Leave a comment:


  • theAmazingMet
    replied
    Interesting that a team with no WS titles in over 100 years is in the first tier. They belong in the bottom half, unless you are referring to fan support. I'd rank the Orioles (absolute powerhouse in late 60's-70's) Marlins (2 titles in 15 years), and Blue Jays (2 titles, only Canadian team) historically ahead of teams like the Phillies (first 90 years), Indians (last 60 years) and Pirates (last 20 years). Just my OP.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shea Knight
    replied
    I like the Jackie Robinson Rotunda...it adds a touch of class...

    I'd have been happy if they'd named it "Jackie Robinson Field," and then have everything INSIDE the stadium be Mets-i-fied.

    But that should've been the ONLY reference to the Brooklyn Dodgers.

    As for the history of the team:

    I'd rank the teams in 5 Tiers, 6 teams a tier:

    1st Tier Teams, the Crown Jewel Six:
    Yankees
    Red Sox
    Dodgers
    Giants
    Cubs
    Cardinals

    2nd Tier:
    Athletics
    Braves
    Pirates
    Tigers
    Reds
    Phillies

    3nd Tier:
    Mets
    Orioles
    White Sox
    Angels
    Twins
    Indians

    4th Tier. in no particular order:
    Blue Jays
    Astros
    Mariners
    Marlins
    Royals
    Brewers

    5th Tier:
    Diamondbacks
    Rays
    Padres
    Nationals
    Rangers
    Rockies

    Just a rough sketch of my view, at least, of the league, taking into account WS wins and pennants and playoff wins and memorable moments and players and fields and broadcasters and so on...

    So I see the Mets as a 3rd-Tier team out of 5...

    And I think the Orioles, White Sox, Angels, Twins, and Indians are comparable; the Mets have 2 WS wins, so do the Twins (3 including the Senators) and the Angels have 1...the Angels have had more recent postseason success, while the Mets have more HOFers (1, 2 with Piazza coming up, to the Angels' 0) and so on.

    I'm just saying...those six compare "fairly" to one another, better to, say, the Yankees or Dodgers.

    Similarly, all 6 3rd-Tier teams are better historically overall than, say, the Padres.

    Leave a comment:


  • Strawman
    replied
    Originally posted by Paulypal View Post
    JR is honored by having his number retired in every park. If the Mets had a real owner and a history to be proud of there would be no Jr rotunda- NY NL team or not. In my opinion it's a politically correct diversion by a piss-poor owner.

    Before anyone gets their panties in a bunch I get what JR did and how important it was to baseball and the country as a whole. I get it. I just don't feel it's necessary.
    Actually it's bold and politically incorrect, among Mets fans! Bravo to the Wilpons! (And you never hear that from me....) - and you know, it's specifically New York and National League. This ain't Tampa, where the out-of-towners who own the Bronx team live. I think it's appropriate. I give 'em credit. My kids dig it. Plus Milla's dad looks great - Milla, what're you like 15?

    Leave a comment:


  • Paulypal
    replied
    Originally posted by milladrive View Post
    I too think the RR is appropriate for a New York National League ballpark. No, he didn't play for the Mets, and yes, the Wilpons would rather own the Brooklyn Dodgers than the New York Mets, but I think all MLB teams should honor Robinson in some way, other than having his number dictatorially retired by all teams. And, imo, no place is more appropriate than in a New York National League ballpark.

    And I dunno, I kinda like the big 4-2. My dad does, too.

    [ATTACH]106178[/ATTACH]

    JR is honored by having his number retired in every park. If the Mets had a real owner and a history to be proud of there would be no Jr rotunda- NY NL team or not. In my opinion it's a politically correct diversion by a piss-poor owner.

    Before anyone gets their panties in a bunch I get what JR did and how important it was to baseball and the country as a whole. I get it. I just don't feel it's necessary.

    Leave a comment:


  • milladrive
    replied
    Originally posted by Strawman View Post
    ...I admire the Robinson Rotunda quite a bit and think it's one thing the Wilpons got 100% right. Simply put, Jackie Robinson's the most significant National League player in New York history, and one of the most important figures in the history of sport in this town, and nationally. I'm thrilled it's there and my kids can read those words - Jackie Robinson is my son's personal hero.

    Now, I'd quibble with two design elements - the video screens are unnecessary and actually detract from the Robinson words and symbolism. They're pretty tacky. And that big 42 - which seemed like a good idea at the time - has quite frankly not worn well. It's also unnecessary.
    I too think the RR is appropriate for a New York National League ballpark. No, he didn't play for the Mets, and yes, the Wilpons would rather own the Brooklyn Dodgers than the New York Mets, but I think all MLB teams should honor Robinson in some way, other than having his number dictatorially retired by all teams. And, imo, no place is more appropriate than in a New York National League ballpark.

    And I dunno, I kinda like the big 4-2. My dad does, too.

    090923_DAD_CitiField_A42 - resized.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • Paulypal
    replied
    Originally posted by theAmazingMet View Post
    Lets face it, they are an embarrassment to New York sports fans. The only metro area team with a worse history of winning is the Nets. Thats really freakin sad.

    But what about Mookie?

    Leave a comment:


  • theAmazingMet
    replied
    Lets face it, they are an embarrassment to New York sports fans. The only metro area team with a worse history of winning is the Nets. Thats really freakin sad.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paulypal
    replied
    Originally posted by Shea Knight View Post
    Point #1 I disagree with...

    The Mets aren't the Yankees or Red Sox or Dodgers or anything, but I think they have a pretty good history, especially as an expansion team; again, they're easily the most important of the expansion teams, the one that's had the most impact on baseball...only really the Blue Jays or so can rival that a bit, and that's partially due to their taking MLB into Canada (I know the Expos came first, but they're gone now, so can't list them, plus, Canada+2 WS titles=Blue Jays win out over them even if they were still "alive.)

    In terms of their overall record...yes, overall, losers...

    But I guess they've had more significance and prominence and more memorable games and players and moments than many other teams, and all other expansion teams.

    They only have 2 WS titles, but BOTH are considered two of MLB's most memorable, the Miracle Mets in '69 and the brilliant 1986 team and all their legendary games in the postseason...

    4 Pennants--those 2 WS titles, and then, they DID come close to winning another, taking the A's to 7 games in 1973, and 2000 was a Subway Series...they lost quickly, but hey, it's one more pennant adding up to more than other expansion teams have...

    You can name Mets players easier and deeper down the line than with most other expansion teams--after Ken Griffey Jr., Jay Buhner, Randy Johnson, Edgar Martinez, and Ichiro, most baseball fans don't know many Mariners off the top of their heads...

    But everyone's heard of:
    Tom Seaver
    Gil Hodges
    Casey Stengel (yeah, he's remembered mainly as a Yankee, but we retired his #, so it seems fair to count him)
    Gary Carter
    Keith Hernandez
    Darryl Strawberry
    Dwight Gooden
    Mookie Wilson (though in fairness, again, maybe an * here, for as much as I love Mookie, most probaby know him just because of the Buckner Call by Vin Scully)
    Mike Piazza
    Jose Reyes
    Carlos Beltran
    David Wright

    And so on...you can keep going, because, while the Mets have had some rough, rough patches, and an overall losing record...when they're good, they make it MEMORABLE, they make an IMPACT on MLB history.

    Look at all the great moments in Mets history, or even just the memorable moments, that fans would be able to recall...

    The innagural 1962 season, and just how lovable bad they were, Charlie Brown's team incarnate...
    The aforementioned 1969 campaign and win in Shea Stadium...
    The 1973 pennant...
    The 1984 season with Dwight Gooden...
    Game 6 of first the NLCS, then the World Series in 1986, both classics that will be long remembered...
    Winning the 1986 WS...
    The 1988 NLCS (albeit for sad reasons for Mets fans)...
    The 1999 series with the Braves and The Grand Single...
    The Subway Series with the Yankees in 2000...
    Piazza's 9/11 HR in 2001...
    The 2006 regular season, and sending the most amount of All-Stars of any team...
    Endy's Catch in Game 7...and Game 7 itself (again, though, sad for Mets fans)...

    The Mets have more moments spring to mind for the average baseball fan than any other expansion team...

    And not to mention in comparison to some Original 16 teams (like, say, the Cleveland Indians--good players, but want to bet a regular MLB fan, not of either Mets or Indians affiliation, would be able to name more memorable Mets players and teams than he could do for the Indians?)

    So, I wouldn't say the Mets have had a bad history at all...I know what you mean, Pauly, with the record, but still--

    4 pennants, 2 WS titles, and a host of memorable moments, legendary games, and some of the most memorable names in baseball for the 1960s, 1980s, late 1990s-early 2000s, and into 2012 (well, to be fair, until about 2009, anyway.)

    The Mets aren't a first-tier franchise, not in the top 10...

    But they're easily in the Top 20...which is pretty good, considering all the teams you'd have to put in front of them, the Crown Jewel Six, the A's and their many titles...the Braves and Phillies...the Orioles and Reds and so on...

    The Mets are about on par with the Reds and Orioles prestige-wise, I'd say, give or take...or at least somewhere between the Orioles and the Mariners.
    Something you need to consider (or I do) is that you have seen the Mets from the late 90's until now. During that period they havent been nearly as bad as the Mets I have seen. I have seen the Mets from 77-1983. You havent lived through a 7 season period like that. YOUR ABOUT TO, then talk to me about Met history, and Endy Chavez' catch - a game in which they still lost by the way.

    Top 20? Ok...so now you just called them mediocre at best. I agree.

    Now lets consider their fan base potential. When they were good they out drew the Yankees. So the fans are their waiting, but the organization is not one that delivers over a period of time. Considering its a NY Franchise with a huge fan base you cant compare them to other "expansion" teams.

    This team is by far an under achieving organization. Yes some bright spots, but they are a losing organization.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paulypal
    replied
    Originally posted by Shea Knight View Post
    Point #1 I disagree with...

    The Mets aren't the Yankees or Red Sox or Dodgers or anything, but I think they have a pretty good history, especially as an expansion team; again, they're easily the most important of the expansion teams, the one that's had the most impact on baseball...only really the Blue Jays or so can rival that a bit, and that's partially due to their taking MLB into Canada (I know the Expos came first, but they're gone now, so can't list them, plus, Canada+2 WS titles=Blue Jays win out over them even if they were still "alive.)

    In terms of their overall record...yes, overall, losers...

    But I guess they've had more significance and prominence and more memorable games and players and moments than many other teams, and all other expansion teams.

    They only have 2 WS titles, but BOTH are considered two of MLB's most memorable, the Miracle Mets in '69 and the brilliant 1986 team and all their legendary games in the postseason...

    4 Pennants--those 2 WS titles, and then, they DID come close to winning another, taking the A's to 7 games in 1973, and 2000 was a Subway Series...they lost quickly, but hey, it's one more pennant adding up to more than other expansion teams have...

    You can name Mets players easier and deeper down the line than with most other expansion teams--after Ken Griffey Jr., Jay Buhner, Randy Johnson, Edgar Martinez, and Ichiro, most baseball fans don't know many Mariners off the top of their heads...

    But everyone's heard of:
    Tom Seaver
    Gil Hodges
    Casey Stengel (yeah, he's remembered mainly as a Yankee, but we retired his #, so it seems fair to count him)
    Gary Carter
    Keith Hernandez
    Darryl Strawberry
    Dwight Gooden
    Mookie Wilson (though in fairness, again, maybe an * here, for as much as I love Mookie, most probaby know him just because of the Buckner Call by Vin Scully)
    Mike Piazza
    Jose Reyes
    Carlos Beltran
    David Wright

    And so on...you can keep going, because, while the Mets have had some rough, rough patches, and an overall losing record...when they're good, they make it MEMORABLE, they make an IMPACT on MLB history.

    Look at all the great moments in Mets history, or even just the memorable moments, that fans would be able to recall...

    The innagural 1962 season, and just how lovable bad they were, Charlie Brown's team incarnate...
    The aforementioned 1969 campaign and win in Shea Stadium...
    The 1973 pennant...
    The 1984 season with Dwight Gooden...
    Game 6 of first the NLCS, then the World Series in 1986, both classics that will be long remembered...
    Winning the 1986 WS...
    The 1988 NLCS (albeit for sad reasons for Mets fans)...
    The 1999 series with the Braves and The Grand Single...
    The Subway Series with the Yankees in 2000...
    Piazza's 9/11 HR in 2001...
    The 2006 regular season, and sending the most amount of All-Stars of any team...
    Endy's Catch in Game 7...and Game 7 itself (again, though, sad for Mets fans)...

    The Mets have more moments spring to mind for the average baseball fan than any other expansion team...

    And not to mention in comparison to some Original 16 teams (like, say, the Cleveland Indians--good players, but want to bet a regular MLB fan, not of either Mets or Indians affiliation, would be able to name more memorable Mets players and teams than he could do for the Indians?)

    So, I wouldn't say the Mets have had a bad history at all...I know what you mean, Pauly, with the record, but still--

    4 pennants, 2 WS titles, and a host of memorable moments, legendary games, and some of the most memorable names in baseball for the 1960s, 1980s, late 1990s-early 2000s, and into 2012 (well, to be fair, until about 2009, anyway.)

    The Mets aren't a first-tier franchise, not in the top 10...

    But they're easily in the Top 20...which is pretty good, considering all the teams you'd have to put in front of them, the Crown Jewel Six, the A's and their many titles...the Braves and Phillies...the Orioles and Reds and so on...

    The Mets are about on par with the Reds and Orioles prestige-wise, I'd say, give or take...or at least somewhere between the Orioles and the Mariners.
    So in 50 years you named 10 players. Some of which were better with other teams (Hernandez, Carter, Piazza, Beltran), two of which were known for wasting their talent (Gooden, Strawberry), Mookie Wilson? One that is no longer a Met (Reyes), and one that has been destroyed (Wright)...so we are left with Seaver....who was traded. Terrific history. I am so proud.

    I said the team had some bright spots. Didnt I? They are still a losing organization. Slice it how you like. So they average a pennant every 12.50 years.......run of the mill I would say....wouldnt you? Nothing special here.....besides the fact that I root for them, but lets be honest.

    Its been 50 years, can you stop hiding behind "expansion team". If thats the tact you want to take then I can say the Marlins have as many WS in 30 less years.
    Last edited by Paulypal; 03-16-2012, 07:44 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • gtru1981
    replied
    Originally posted by Strawman View Post
    Here we part company - I admire the Robinson Rotunda quite a bit and think it's one thing the Wilpons got 100% right. Simply put, Jackie Robinson's the most significant National League player in New York history, and one of the most important figures in the history of sport in this town, and nationally. I'm thrilled it's there and my kids can read those words - Jackie Robinson is my son's personal hero.

    Now, I'd quibble with two design elements - the video screens are unnecessary and actually detract from the Robinson words and symbolism. They're pretty tacky. And that big 42 - which seemed like a good idea at the time - has quite frankly not worn well. It's also unnecessary.

    BTW, cheering the Robinson Rotunda does not mean I thought there was enough Mets heritage in the park at first - there wasn't! Even now, they could do a bit more.
    See i dissagree with you. Robinson was/is an important person in baseball history, but not to the Mets. He had nothing to do with the team and its history. I took a bunch of non-Mets fans (Soxs and Yankee fans) to Citi Field this year and they had the "WTF" look on them in the rotunda. Let the Dodgers honor him and if the Mets want to Honor him as well, let them but not a whole rotunda. The rotunda in my mind should honor and be named after William Shea or Joan Payson, two important people in Mets history.

    Leave a comment:

Ad Widget

Collapse
Working...
X