Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

O'Malley HOF Vet Committee Finalist

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by dodger dynamo View Post
    oh, and by the way, others would disagree, but we still have a team the brooklyn dodgers and some day maybe sooner than everyone thinks or believes they may be In brooklyn again. no one really knows who's actually posting under these pseudo names, so don't be surprised someday by what you might find out. battlin bake, the dodger dynamo
    And just where is this team hiding, as far as I know the Brooklyn Dodgers died in 1957.

    Comment


    • #47
      leo d why do you start this stuff, let's not get into all that. the brooklyn dodgers still exist, they all ways will whether we get the name and history back or the team. we wouldn't be here discussing it if it weren't true. our kidnapped children should be returned, that's how I feel. would we deny a returning kidnapped child, taken against it's own will, a home. regardless of what the kidnapper(s) called the child. I hope not. battlin bake, the dodger dynamo p.s the team was and is a pawn, it's owner is responsible for the move. I know heresy, ml base ball, the teams there in, the past and current owner and a co-conspirator city moved and keeps the dodgers from brooklyn. the team it's self has no say. just as gil, duke, pee wee, erskine, podres, koufax, drysdale, labine and the rest had no say. If It was left up to them, the players, the real "team" the brooklyn dodgers, they would have stayed in brooklyn. they were taken west against their will.
      Last edited by dodger dynamo; 11-10-2007, 02:54 PM.

      Comment


      • #48
        p.s as far as chandler goes he could have simply done what judge landis had done and deny robinson entry. regardless of his personal leanings, he may not have carried the integration banner in base ball very high at least until his hall of fame selection, but he did not deny anyone entry based on color. it seems small now, but then It could have cost him everything, given where he was from and the world in which he had to exist. he may not have done great things for integration as a whole, but he didn't try to continue a despicable policy in baseball, also he wasn't involved with a dodger move. he was definitely involved in the integration of baseball, If not then why did he get punished for it. his punishment by the league for doing it, was what? it cost him his job in major league baseball, why risk that? he did it though. battlin bake the dodger dynamo p.s but we were supposed to be discussing why o'malley shouldn't be in the hall. yet you constantly want to call into question others credibility. It's only been in hundreds of books and speeches and news papers that chandler didn't keep robinson out. ok, leo d, he didn't help with integration of base ball and he kept robinson out and history is all wrong.

        Comment


        • #49
          While I stop short of Pete Hamill and Jack Newfield's ranking of Walter O'Malley close behind Hitler and Stalin on the 20th century villian list, I do put him squarely in any group photo of that confederacy.

          As for the Robinson issue, O'Malley, in the mid forties, was an integral part of the ballclub's hierarchy and, at the least, tacitly agreed with the move to integrate the Dodgers and, possibly, played a supporting role in bringing the most important of all Dodger players to the team. Branch Rickey was, certainly and assuredly, the prime mover, but he did it with O'Malley's endorsement and possible help.

          I was gone from Brooklyn when the club left so I didn't experience, first hand, the pain of the borough during the actual departure. I did, however, live through the era when what kind of a day it was going to be for a large part of the population was determined by the outcome of a baseball game. There simply never was a team/city relationship that comes within light years of the Dodgers and Brooklyn. Walter O'Malley cast that relationship asunder for the crassness of money. Hopefully, he is answering for that deed now.

          I think a protest at Cooperstown, if and when an O'Malley induction happens, is entirely within reason of free speech and, in 2007, poetic justic, given the 50 year anniversary. However, before loading up on a supply of alley apples, I would, respectfully, caution a bit of restraint: as arrest is not indictment and indictment is not conviction; neither is making it as a finalist with the Veterans Committee tantamount to induction.

          Let's wait and see if, to paraphrase Menken, "you'll never go broke underestimating the taste of baseball people", O'Malley is, indeed, accorded an honor that has been deprived of many more deserving people before him. If, against all decency and good judgement, this injustice occurs, let's then limber up our throwing arms and vocal cords and consult maps for the route to upstate New York in July. It's simply something that needs to be done.
          After 1957, it seemed like we would never laugh again. Of course, we did. Its just that we were never young again.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by The Real McCoy View Post
            While I stop short of Pete Hamill and Jack Newfield's ranking of Walter O'Malley close behind Hitler and Stalin on the 20th century villian list, I do put him squarely in any group photo of that confederacy.

            As for the Robinson issue, O'Malley, in the mid forties, was an integral part of the ballclub's hierarchy and, at the least, tacitly agreed with the move to integrate the Dodgers and, possibly, played a supporting role in bringing the most important of all Dodger players to the team. Branch Rickey was, certainly and assuredly, the prime mover, but he did it with O'Malley's endorsement and possible help.

            I was gone from Brooklyn when the club left so I didn't experience, first hand, the pain of the borough during the actual departure. I did, however, live through the era when what kind of a day it was going to be for a large part of the population was determined by the outcome of a baseball game. There simply never was a team/city relationship that comes within light years of the Dodgers and Brooklyn. Walter O'Malley cast that relationship asunder for the crassness of money. Hopefully, he is answering for that deed now.

            I think a protest at Cooperstown, if and when an O'Malley induction happens, is entirely within reason of free speech and, in 2007, poetic justic, given the 50 year anniversary. However, before loading up on a supply of alley apples, I would, respectfully, caution a bit of restraint: as arrest is not indictment and indictment is not conviction; neither is making it as a finalist with the Veterans Committee tantamount to induction.

            Let's wait and see if, to paraphrase Menken, "you'll never go broke underestimating the taste of baseball people", O'Malley is, indeed, accorded an honor that has been deprived of many more deserving people before him. If, against all decency and good judgement, this injustice occurs, let's then limber up our throwing arms and vocal cords and consult maps for the route to upstate New York in July. It's simply something that needs to be done.
            Thank you, Judge, for making a case WE can all live with.

            Let US all hope that the wisdom of those voting does not allow this injustice to actually happen. However, as you state, if it does, WE are all ready to protest and "take them on", because, "it's simply something that needs to be done".

            c.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by dodger dynamo View Post
              leo d why do you start this stuff, let's not get into all that. the brooklyn dodgers still exist, they all ways will whether we get the name and history back or the team. we wouldn't be here discussing it if it weren't true. our kidnapped children should be returned, that's how I feel. would we deny a returning kidnapped child, taken against it's own will, a home. regardless of what the kidnapper(s) called the child. I hope not. battlin bake, the dodger dynamo p.s the team was and is a pawn, it's owner is responsible for the move. I know heresy, ml base ball, the teams there in, the past and current owner and a co-conspirator city moved and keeps the dodgers from brooklyn. the team it's self has no say. just as gil, duke, pee wee, erskine, podres, koufax, drysdale, labine and the rest had no say. If It was left up to them, the players, the real "team" the brooklyn dodgers, they would have stayed in brooklyn. they were taken west against their will.
              Did you read the times article? Ask DD, where the Brooklyn Dodgers are, I don't think she'll say L.A. You very seldom post facts, just fairy tales, and just work on your writing skills, frankly your a bore. IMHO

              Comment


              • #52
                you've got a real problem, leo d. you need to practice your human relationship skills. don't think I don't know why you attack my writing, you'd be very surprised to know the many reasons why I don't care about your opinion. I write nothing here for no other reason except to express my views. yet you always seem to have a problem with that. look, I don't care If I get kicked off the forum, brooklyn baseball ended in 1957, however I feel the brooklyn dodgers are being held hostage in la. disagree with me, I don't care, but that's how I feel. If you leo d or jackie 42 are content with that ok go live in the past. believe there are no dodgers that their never coming back, believe it's done, finished. I don't care what you think. I make several truthful statements regarding three of the people, commonly and widely acknowledged for helping integrate baseball and you seem to feel your personal mission is to change history or try and disprove it, at least if It proves me wrong. when did I say a.b was a great liberal, fighting the good fight?. I never said that. you slyly take these shots believing your smarter than other people. I know what your up to. here are some facts for you, the dodgers left brooklyn and the entire brooklyn dodger team the players, the bats, the balls, the logos everything, continued on and the team continues to play, they even still own the rights to brooklyn merchandise. however, right or wrong that it is and I believe it's a big wrong, the dodgers still play. even our brooklyn players continued to play as a dodger team, were gil and the rest impostors? so for this reason, I feel the brooklyn dodgers still exist, I believe It, many don't. until all is returned, the name logos and such or the team itself is rightfully returned, I feel my dodgers are being wrongly held by a city that participated in a kidnapping. the thread was o'malley In the hall of fame?, not all of your personal nonsense.
                Last edited by dodger dynamo; 11-10-2007, 05:59 PM.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by MATHA531 View Post
                  I don't begrude LA getting major league baseball but to call the slime ball a visionary.....if he were a true visionary he would have sold the team to local interests and started an expansion team there or at the very least, and while this would have hurt too but we would have gotten over it, he should have left the name and traditions, colors and logo of the team in Brooklyn the way Art Modell had the decency to do in Cleveland, called his team the Hollywood Stars or something and then in 1962 when expansion came to the National League, the Brooklyn Dodgers could have been reborn as an expansion team and while there would be a 4 year break in their record book, the records and everything associated with the Brooklyn Dodgers would be in this area where it belonged.
                  Whoa there, lets not call Art Modell decent. I live in Cleveland and bleed brown and orange. He was backed into a corner because the courts wouldn't let him move as well as league sentiment. Art Modell actually grew up a Dodgers fan and was more than willing to do to Cleveland what O'Malley did to Brooklyn. That being said I got a lot of anger for saying to people that the Dodgers move was worse since we got another team, with the same name, that plays in the exact same spot as the old Browns. The residual hatred for Modell stems from the fact that the Ravens are consistently better than the Browns and they won a title in 5 years while we are still waiting. Every once and a while his name does advance to the Hall of Fame finalists what he has going against him is that when the debate occurs its the rep from the city where you spent most of your career that presents your case, so in Modell's case it has to be a rep from Cleveland, that dooms him everytime.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Let's not split hairs...I didn't call Modell decent, at least I don't think so...I do understand the pain but at least as you said, you still have your team, you still have your history...I don't think I've seen the Ravens claim the Cleveland Brown history so in that sense, it's more or less like he sold out to local interests and took a job with another organization at least that's the net effect.

                    Had O'Malley had the decency to leave the Brooklyn Dodger history and everything in Brooklyn and then in 1962 when the NL expanded the Brooklyn Dodgers would have been reborn, while true it wouldn't have been the same then now 50 years later, we would still have Dodger history and a Dodger franchise worth much more than the Hollywood Stars or whatever.

                    I might not feel as bitter as I do towards O'Malley if he had done that.

                    Just must note, there were a couple of things that might have happened 50 years ago that would have been irksome but on the whole a solution that would have been acceptable. Namely, Bob Moses did offer O'Malley essentially the same deal the Mets currently have at Shea Stadium, a deal that most consider one of the sweetheart leases in sports and in historic restrospect, it was the perfect solution.....Shea is located in a perfect location for all the fans of Long Island (and do remember Brooklyn is part of Long Island, the boundaries between Brooklyn, Queens, Nassau and Suffolk are totally arbitrary lines with the exception of a small portion where the Newtown Creek is located...other than that other than a change in the names of some streets, you hardly ever know when you'lve left Brooklyn and entered Queens or left Queens and entered Nassau...a Dodger Stadium in any of those location, while certainly not as desirable as Brooklyn, would have been okay...

                    But I digress...my apolgies to you and I do agree the theft of the original Brown franchise is one of the infamous moments in sports along with what happened to Baltimore with the Colts, but one would have to agree that both Baltimore and Cleveland have been made whole while Brooklyn has never gotten its baseball club back (even if they were to play in Queens!_

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by MATHA531 View Post
                      But I digress...my apolgies to you and I do agree the theft of the original Brown franchise is one of the infamous moments in sports along with what happened to Baltimore with the Colts, but one would have to agree that both Baltimore and Cleveland have been made whole while Brooklyn has never gotten its baseball club back (even if they were to play in Queens!_
                      How has Baltimore been made whole? The Colts name and history are in Indiana.

                      Since you mention that a new Dodgers team would possibly been playing in Queens anyway, isn't the Colts situation pretty much what happened in NY? The original team moves away taking their name and a new team with a new name takes over in your area? (Except that to make Baltimore whole they stole someone else's team)

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by MATHA531 View Post
                        Let's not split hairs...I didn't call Modell decent, at least I don't think so...I do understand the pain but at least as you said, you still have your team, you still have your history...I don't think I've seen the Ravens claim the Cleveland Brown history so in that sense, it's more or less like he sold out to local interests and took a job with another organization at least that's the net effect.

                        Had O'Malley had the decency to leave the Brooklyn Dodger history and everything in Brooklyn and then in 1962 when the NL expanded the Brooklyn Dodgers would have been reborn, while true it wouldn't have been the same then now 50 years later, we would still have Dodger history and a Dodger franchise worth much more than the Hollywood Stars or whatever.

                        I might not feel as bitter as I do towards O'Malley if he had done that.

                        Just must note, there were a couple of things that might have happened 50 years ago that would have been irksome but on the whole a solution that would have been acceptable. Namely, Bob Moses did offer O'Malley essentially the same deal the Mets currently have at Shea Stadium, a deal that most consider one of the sweetheart leases in sports and in historic restrospect, it was the perfect solution.....Shea is located in a perfect location for all the fans of Long Island (and do remember Brooklyn is part of Long Island, the boundaries between Brooklyn, Queens, Nassau and Suffolk are totally arbitrary lines with the exception of a small portion where the Newtown Creek is located...other than that other than a change in the names of some streets, you hardly ever know when you'lve left Brooklyn and entered Queens or left Queens and entered Nassau...a Dodger Stadium in any of those location, while certainly not as desirable as Brooklyn, would have been okay...

                        But I digress...my apolgies to you and I do agree the theft of the original Brown franchise is one of the infamous moments in sports along with what happened to Baltimore with the Colts, but one would have to agree that both Baltimore and Cleveland have been made whole while Brooklyn has never gotten its baseball club back (even if they were to play in Queens!_
                        No you are right, the Browns fans were made whole, the only residual bitterness stems from the fact that the Ravens have a Super Bowl and we don't, and until this year we have only had one good season. I have long argued in Cleveland that the Brooklyn situation was much worse than what we went through. Looking at other team moves over time either there was a better replacement team or the market that was abandoned was incapable of supporting the team. Like I talked about in the "alternate history" thread I think the Dodgers in Brooklyn would be a more financially valuable than the Dodgers in LA.

                        I wonder how it would have played out if they did go to Queens, and kept the Brooklyn name. With this being Shea's last year I would bet the replacement would have been back in Brooklyn. I think it may have been ok and certainly better than LA, but growing up in NY I always Brooklyn has a different character and flair than Queens does.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by metfan13 View Post
                          How has Baltimore been made whole? The Colts name and history are in Indiana.

                          Since you mention that a new Dodgers team would possibly been playing in Queens anyway, isn't the Colts situation pretty much what happened in NY? The original team moves away taking their name and a new team with a new name takes over in your area? (Except that to make Baltimore whole they stole someone else's team)
                          Whlie from an unbiased view you might be right, there is something in a name. The most desirable thing, of course, would have been for the team to have stayed in Brooklyn...the second most, as it turned out but was not apparent then, would have been Flushing for the Brooklyn Dodgers...the third most would have been a team with the name Brooklyn, even though playing in Queens (much the same way as the Dallas Cowboys played in Irving, the Buffalo Bills, New York's only NFL team BTW, play in Orchard Park, the two supposedly NY NFL teams play in NJ. Queens is closer to Bklyn, just the next town over across an aritificial line than those situations I believe...of course Queens as well as Nassau and Suffolk are part of the Brooklyn Federal Court System (the Eastern District of New York is located in Brooklyn...the racketerring trial of several members of the mob from Queens washeld in what is called in the newspapers Brooklyn Federal Court). Also, and this is something you may be too young to be aware of, to further injure Brooklyn and its fans the original ownership of the Mets was given to Giant people (Ms. Payson was on the Board of Directors of the Giants)...the Mets were not meant as a Brooklyn team and I, at least, have never considered them a Brooklyn team; they are the replacement team for the New York Giants, not the Brooklyn Dodgers.

                          So yes, to a large degree, it is psychological so to speak but if you weren't there and just trying to understand it in a non detached way, you might find it very hard to understand.....
                          Last edited by MATHA531; 11-11-2007, 12:55 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by aqib View Post
                            No you are right, the Browns fans were made whole, the only residual bitterness stems from the fact that the Ravens have a Super Bowl and we don't, and until this year we have only had one good season. I have long argued in Cleveland that the Brooklyn situation was much worse than what we went through. Looking at other team moves over time either there was a better replacement team or the market that was abandoned was incapable of supporting the team. Like I talked about in the "alternate history" thread I think the Dodgers in Brooklyn would be a more financially valuable than the Dodgers in LA.

                            I wonder how it would have played out if they did go to Queens, and kept the Brooklyn name. With this being Shea's last year I would bet the replacement would have been back in Brooklyn. I think it may have been ok and certainly better than LA, but growing up in NY I always Brooklyn has a different character and flair than Queens does.

                            I do remember as an 11 year old boy as this was being done to us, there was always talk about Robert Moses wanting to re-locate the Dodgers in Flushing which the sub human slime ball made the idiotic comment, "How can I call them the Brooklyn Dodgers if they played in Queens?" And I looked at that in horror...I was just short of the age where my dad would have allowed my friends of the same age as me to hop on the B35 Church Avenue bus (unfortunately along with the Dodgers, the trolleys by then had been extinguished by other sick people) to Rogers and up the hill with the free transfer to the B49 Ocean bus...a trip of about 20 minutes. So the thought of them going to Queens, for which it would have meant the Church bus to the subway at either Nostrand Avenue or E 16th Street or the Utica bus to Eastern Parkway followed by a trip to either Times Square or Grand Central followed by a long ride on the Flushing train, a trip of well over an hour on the subway mind you, would certainly not have appealed to me and probably would have kept me from going to games by myself for another couple of years.

                            However, looking back on it in historical retrospect, Moses on this issue was absolutely right.

                            1. The complaint was that the Dodger fan base had moved to Long Island (true)...Shea Stadium is perfectly located to bring in fans from both the North and South shores of Long Island with excellent highway connections and very good access by both the LIRR and the Flushing IRT (even though not for me).

                            2. How great would it have been opening up the new Dodger Stadium at Flushing Meadow and having it run alongside the 1964 World's Fair with people from all over the world coming to see the Dodgers (sorry seeing the last place Mets was not the same thing).

                            3. Shea Stadium would not have turned into the dump it became because of the bankruptcy of the Mets....Dodger management would have seen to it that it got the proper maintenance.

                            4. When it was discovered that really a baseball park could arise in Coney Island (they have just announced plans to turn Coney Island into a theme park on the East side of Keyspan Stadium....boy how wonderful it would be in the summer if this were a major league park, the home of the Brooklyn Dodgers), perhaps instead of building a new Citi Field in the parking lots of Shea, the Dodgers could have moved there.

                            So, while obviously not quite as good a solution as a park in Brooklyn, Shea Stadium would have worked for the Dodgers and in blunt fact, was the perfect place for the Brookyn Dodgers as it turned out. Even with all the faults of New York Met mis-management, Forbes Magazines rates the value of the franchise to be, I believe, third in the major leagues behind only the Yankees and the Red Sox...imagine where the Brookyn Dodgers would be.

                            So in answer to your question, yes Flushing Meadow would have worked. And you know something, I'm not sure Atlantic Yards would have worked or have been nearly as desirable....none of O'Malley's plans included adequate parking, there is no highway access the nearest highway being the horrifically constructed and overcrowded BQE and while LIRR and NYC subway access would be outstanding, I wonder how many Long Islanders would have been happy at 2230 or later to get on an LIRR train at Flatbush Avenue for the trek back to the Island....from an environmental view point Atlantic Yards would have been a disaster. Unfortunately, giiven other realities, Coney Island was never a consideration and the only two other areas in Brooklyn I could think of with enough land to construct a ball park with adequate parking and good highway connections would have been Floyd Bennet Field (actually it would have been perfect, pre Kings Plaza but no subway connection) and the area where Starret City and Gateway Center were built (but again no subway access) so Flushing was by far the best alternative and I am quite sure would have worked both for the benefit of the citizens of Brooklyn and even for the O'Malleys.
                            Last edited by MATHA531; 11-11-2007, 07:53 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by MATHA531 View Post
                              Whlie from an unbiased view you might be right, there is something in a name. The most desirable thing, of course, would have been for the team to have stayed in Brooklyn...the second most, as it turned out but was not apparent then, would have been Flushing for the Brooklyn Dodgers...the third most would have been a team with the name Brooklyn, even though playing in Queens (much the same way as the Dallas Cowboys played in Irving, the Buffalo Bills, New York's only NFL team BTW, play in Orchard Park, the two supposedly NY NFL teams play in NJ. Queens is closer to Bklyn, just the next town over across an aritificial line than those situations I believe...of course Queens as well as Nassau and Suffolk are part of the Brooklyn Federal Court System (the Eastern District of New York is located in Brooklyn...the racketerring trial of several members of the mob from Queens washeld in what is called in the newspapers Brooklyn Federal Court). Also, and this is something you may be too young to be aware of, to further injure Brooklyn and its fans the original ownership of the Mets was given to Giant people (Ms. Payson was on the Board of Directors of the Giants)...the Mets were not meant as a Brooklyn team and I, at least, have never considered them a Brooklyn team; they are the replacement team for the New York Giants, not the Brooklyn Dodgers.

                              So yes, to a large degree, it is psychological so to speak but if you weren't there and just trying to understand it in a non detached way, you might find it very hard to understand.....
                              Yes I know all about where Mrs. Payson and M. Donald Grant came from. But that didn't stop them from giving the Mets a very Brooklyn look. The main team color was closer to the Dodgers color. Also, look at the players they brought in at the beginning. Way more Dodgers representation that Giants. And Mrs. Payson was firmly in control when Gil was hired to manage. Maybe it's only from the perspective I got with my Dad being a former Brooklyn fan, but I always felt the Mets were more descendants of the Dodgers than the Giants (even before the current owners near obsession with Brooklyn became evident in plans for the new park)

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Remember that Mrs. Payton's roots were with the New York Giants. She was the only member of the Board of Directors to vote against the Giants move.
                                That said, when the Mets were formed they went to the "Flatbush well" all to often. Billy Loes [smart enough to "just say no"], Clem Labine, Joe Pignatano, Myron Joe Ginsberg, Charlie Neal, Roger Craig, Don Zimmer, Gil Hodges, and Duke Snider [in 1963] were all names that made for good press... Good press and horrible baseball.
                                I was one of the original Met's fans who hated the "lovable looser" crap and resented the Dodger influence.
                                Thank gawd for the NY on the caps, although they bastardized that after the first year or two.
                                The Wilpon's "shrine to Ebbett's Field" turns this old Giants fan's stomach.
                                Only in Amerika.
                                ---
                                Pushing on the doors of life marked "pull."
                                Visit my blogsigpic

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X