Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Don't you get sick and tired of the so called Brooklyn memorabilia?

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by webmaster
    So much has been said about the type of items, the quantity of items, and those items which are spinoffs (a modern trend I believe that plagues each time - even my daughter has a pink t-shirt with a Marlins logo on it), but was is the best item you have / own? Which of the 30 shirts in your closet is your favorite and if you don't like some of those 30 shirts anymore please just send me a PM and I'll send you my address so you can get rid of those yucky ones.
    I would like some of those yucky ones you now have in your closet. In fact, I would like to see some of those yucky ones restored to this thread.

    Regarding the yucky ones remaining in my closet, even the ones that are shredded I cannot get rid of; I managed to preserve a Brooklyn Dodger Bum logo on one and will take it to a tailor some day and have it sewn onto a navy blue sports jacket. I am not kidding.

    Comment


    • #32
      As far as Dodger memorabilia is concerned: in QUANTITY, I rank somewhere around last place, but for decades I've had an item that no one has mentioned yet. It's heavier than a T-shirt, lighter than a sweatshirt, 3/4 length sleeves in royal blue, center area in white - the kind a player might wear under a uniform jersey...and in that center area are the words "PROPERTY OF BROOKLYN DODGERS." It's lasted for decades because I hardly wear it, although when I do it attracts plenty of attention. It was available briefly during the time "Property Of....." became something of a fad, beginning with college kids pilfering those gym shirts announcing ".....University of [Whatever] Athletic Department." There was a company that advertised in one of the sports magazines which would make up such garments for any team you wished. If you saw someone in those days wearing "Property Of Sheboygan Redskins" or "Property Of New York Rovers," that was Fat Frank Losquadro, our neighborhood bookie and jailbird. (Being gifted with wit as well as discretionary income, he also had one that said "Property Of Fat Frank Losquadro.")
      But once again, I am digressing.
      Was there actually such a Brooklyn Dodgers shirt? Was it strictly novelty memorabilia, or were the guys on the team issued this kind of priceless apparel to wear? I've never seen a photo of one, but that (like much of what I say) doesn't prove a thing.
      What have you heard?
      pb::

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by jaykay
        As far as Dodger memorabilia is concerned: in QUANTITY, I rank somewhere around last place, but for decades I've had an item that no one has mentioned yet. It's heavier than a T-shirt, lighter than a sweatshirt, 3/4 length sleeves in royal blue, center area in white - the kind a player might wear under a uniform jersey...and in that center area are the words "PROPERTY OF BROOKLYN DODGERS." It's lasted for decades because I hardly wear it, although when I do it attracts plenty of attention. It was available briefly during the time "Property Of....." became something of a fad, beginning with college kids pilfering those gym shirts announcing ".....University of [Whatever] Athletic Department." There was a company that advertised in one of the sports magazines which would make up such garments for any team you wished. If you saw someone in those days wearing "Property Of Sheboygan Redskins" or "Property Of New York Rovers," that was Fat Frank Losquadro, our neighborhood bookie and jailbird. (Being gifted with wit as well as discretionary income, he also had one that said "Property Of Fat Frank Losquadro.")
        But once again, I am digressing.
        Was there actually such a Brooklyn Dodgers shirt? Was it strictly novelty memorabilia, or were the guys on the team issued this kind of priceless apparel to wear? I've never seen a photo of one, but that (like much of what I say) doesn't prove a thing.
        What have you heard?
        When will you be posting a photo of your "Property of Brooklyn Dodgers" shirt? And is there any company today that is selling such a shirt? Also, is there any truth to the story that you were once caught wearing a "Property of Fat Frank Losquadro" shirt? I would like one of those, too.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by donzblock
          When will you be posting a photo of your "Property of Brooklyn Dodgers" shirt? And is there any company today that is selling such a shirt? Also, is there any truth to the story that you were once caught wearing a "Property of Fat Frank Losquadro" shirt? I would like one of those, too.

          Answers are:
          Never
          Not a chance
          No

          But see PM for exciting offer. Anything to make you happy again.
          pb::

          Comment


          • #35
            The Dodger retro uniforms last year never existed

            Originally posted by 55 chmps
            I believe that the Dodgers had Brooklyn even on their home jerseys in 1941. I think last year, the LA Dodgers wore throwback uniforms from '41 that said Brooklyn on the front.
            The home uniforms with "Brooklyn" on them the Dodgers wore last year never existed. In 1941 only the road uniform had the script "Brooklyn."

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by CaliforniaCajun
              The home uniforms with "Brooklyn" on them the Dodgers wore last year never existed. In 1941 only the road uniform had the script "Brooklyn."

              The uniforms that the west coast group insisted on using last year were supposed to reflect 1947. As I have stated here several times, they were told, and told, and told again, that in 1947 WE did NOT have BROOKLYN on either OUR home or road uniforms.

              You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink!

              c.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by CaliforniaCajun
                The home uniforms with "Brooklyn" on them the Dodgers wore last year never existed. In 1941 only the road uniform had the script "Brooklyn."

                The Dodgers weren't trying to create a "replica" jersey. How hard a concept is this to get a grasp on? It was a completely new design inspired by old jerseys. It was never meant to be a representation of the Dodgers home uniforms of 1947. Anyone saying otherwise is simply wrong, despite the propaganda being reported in this thread that they "screwed up" by not getting the '47 replica correct. It wasn't supposed to be a replica.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by DODGER DEB
                  The uniforms that the west coast group insisted on using last year were supposed to reflect 1947.
                  Supposed to? Actually they were "supposed" to make money (which they have and will continue to), which is why any special or alternate jersey is designed and marketed these days by any ballclub. If the Dodgers were to market a jersey that not as many people would buy but was "historically accurate" that would be a stupid business practice, don't you think?

                  -

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Elvis9045
                    Supposed to? Actually they were "supposed" to make money (which they have and will continue to), which is why any special or alternate jersey is designed and marketed these days by any ballclub. If the Dodgers were to market a jersey that not as many people would buy but was "historically accurate" that would be a stupid business practice, don't you think?

                    -
                    They were supposed to make money. Which is the only reason they celebrated the 50th anniversary of 1955, just to make money.
                    Lets get Eddie Basinski elected to the Polish Sports Hall of Fame.
                    www.brooklyndodgermemories.com

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by tonypug
                      They were supposed to make money. Which is the only reason they celebrated the 50th anniversary of 1955, just to make money.
                      Not the only reason. But can you name me a business that celebrates anniversaries without tying them into some sort of a promotion?

                      "Come celebrate (Insert company here) 50th anniversary celebration all month long! Huge savings on everything!"

                      Sears, Starbuck's, Ford, NFL, NBA, NHL... you name the business (Yes, gasp, baseball is a business) and I'll name you an anniversary promotion designed to make money.

                      The Dodgers are no different from any other MLB club in promotions. I suppose you already forgot the NFL and NBA's recent 50-year anniversaries which included tons of money making ventures including retro jerseys and other gear. But of course the Dodgers are wicked for having a director of marketing like every other pro sports team - yada yada yada.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Elvis9045
                        Not the only reason. But can you name me a business that celebrates anniversaries without tying them into some sort of a promotion?

                        "Come celebrate (Insert company here) 50th anniversary celebration all month long! Huge savings on everything!"

                        Sears, Starbuck's, Ford, NFL, NBA, NHL... you name the business (Yes, gasp, baseball is a business) and I'll name you an anniversary promotion designed to make money.

                        The Dodgers are no different from any other MLB club in promotions. I suppose you already forgot the NFL and NBA's recent 50-year anniversaries which included tons of money making ventures including retro jerseys and other gear. But of course the Dodgers are wicked for having a director of marketing like every other pro sports team - yada yada yada.
                        Elvis, Elvis, Elvis you are right about what you said, but we are talking about the Dodgers, not the other money grabbers. The whole 50th anniversary thing left a bad taste in my mouth, everybody involved had their hand out,its just a sign of the times. Some things are best celebrated in our own memories.By the way thats a great avatar, I loved watching Benny Hill.
                        Lets get Eddie Basinski elected to the Polish Sports Hall of Fame.
                        www.brooklyndodgermemories.com

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Brooklyn Memorabilia

                          I even dug up an old New York Giant fan out near Oxford on Route 10. He runs an antique store, and he used to be a "taker" in the Polo Grounds. He calls himself a "taker," not a "ticket taker." And he is loaded with stories about how the money was collected in that old park and how the Brooklyn Dodgers were regarded there.

                          DonZBOCK, would you happen to remember exactly where this antique shop is? I'd LOVE to track down this 'taker' and have a good chat with him.



                          I'm in the market for a good Brooklyn throwback jersey but I'm very picky--It can be a replica jersey, but I want Brooklyn across the front, in good condition, without overpaying. I think Mitchell & Ness should be ashamed for charging 159.00 or more for 'replica' jerseys, but they sure are getting it, aren't they?

                          Comment

                          Ad Widget

                          Collapse
                          Working...
                          X