Announcement

Collapse

Updated Baseball Fever Policy

Baseball Fever Policy

I. Purpose of this announcement:

This announcement describes the policies pertaining to the operation of Baseball Fever.

Baseball Fever is a moderated baseball message board which encourages and facilitates research and information exchange among fans of our national pastime. The intent of the Baseball Fever Policy is to ensure that Baseball Fever remains an extremely high quality, extremely low "noise" environment.

Baseball Fever is administrated by three principal administrators:
webmaster - Baseball Fever Owner
The Commissioner - Baseball Fever Administrator
Macker - Baseball Fever Administrator

And a group of forum specific super moderators. The role of the moderator is to keep Baseball Fever smoothly and to screen posts for compliance with our policy. The moderators are ALL volunteer positions, so please be patient and understanding of any delays you might experience in correspondence.

II. Comments about our policy:

Any suggestions on this policy may be made directly to the webmaster.

III. Acknowledgments:

This document was based on a similar policy used by SABR.

IV. Requirements for participation on Baseball Fever:

Participation on Baseball Fever is available to all baseball fans with a valid email address, as verified by the forum's automated system, which then in turn creates a single validated account. Multiple accounts by a single user are prohibited.

By registering, you agree to adhere to the policies outlined in this document and to conduct yourself accordingly. Abuse of the forum, by repeated failure to abide by these policies, will result in your access being blocked to the forum entirely.

V. Baseball Fever Netiquette:

Participants at Baseball Fever are required to adhere to these principles, which are outlined in this section.
a. All posts to Baseball Fever should be written in clear, concise English, with proper grammar and accurate spelling. The use of abbreviations should be kept to a minimum; when abbreviation is necessary, they should be either well-known (such as etc.), or explained on their first use in your post.

b. Conciseness is a key attribute of a good post.

c. Quote only the portion of a post to which you are responding.

d. Standard capitalization and punctuation make a large difference in the readability of a post. TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS is considered to be "shouting"; it is a good practice to limit use of all capitals to words which you wish to emphasize.

e. It is our policy NOT to transmit any defamatory or illegal materials.

f. Personal attacks of any type against Baseball Fever readers will not be tolerated. In these instances the post will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the personal attack via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue personal attacks will be banned from the site.

g. It is important to remember that many contextual clues available in face-to-face discussion, such as tone of voice and facial expression, are lost in the electronic forum. As a poster, try to be alert for phrasing that might be misinterpreted by your audience to be offensive; as a reader, remember to give the benefit of the doubt and not to take umbrage too easily. There are many instances in which a particular choice of words or phrasing can come across as being a personal attack where none was intended.

h. The netiquette described above (a-g) often uses the term "posts", but applies equally to Private Messages.

VI. Baseball Fever User Signature Policy

A signature is a piece of text that some members may care to have inserted at the end of ALL of their posts, a little like the closing of a letter. You can set and / or change your signature by editing your profile in the UserCP. Since it is visible on ALL your posts, the following policy must be adhered to:

Signature Composition
Font size limit: No larger than size 2 (This policy is a size 2)
Style: Bold and italics are permissible
Character limit: No more than 500 total characters
Lines: No more than 4 lines
Colors: Most colors are permissible, but those which are hard to discern against the gray background (yellow, white, pale gray) should be avoided
Images/Graphics: Allowed, but nothing larger than 20k and Content rules must be followed

Signature Content
No advertising is permitted
Nothing political or religious
Nothing obscene, vulgar, defamatory or derogatory
Links to personal blogs/websites are permissible - with the webmaster's written consent
A Link to your Baseball Fever Blog does not require written consent and is recommended
Quotes must be attributed. Non-baseball quotes are permissible as long as they are not religious or political

Please adhere to these rules when you create your signature. Failure to do so will result in a request to comply by a moderator. If you do not comply within a reasonable amount of time, the signature will be removed and / or edited by an Administrator. Baseball Fever reserves the right to edit and / or remove any or all of your signature line at any time without contacting the account holder.

VII. Appropriate and inappropriate topics for Baseball Fever:

Most concisely, the test for whether a post is appropriate for Baseball Fever is: "Does this message discuss our national pastime in an interesting manner?" This post can be direct or indirect: posing a question, asking for assistance, providing raw data or citations, or discussing and constructively critiquing existing posts. In general, a broad interpretation of "baseball related" is used.

Baseball Fever is not a promotional environment. Advertising of products, web sites, etc., whether for profit or not-for-profit, is not permitted. At the webmaster's discretion, brief one-time announcements for products or services of legitimate baseball interest and usefulness may be allowed. If advertising is posted to the site it will be copied by a moderator and/or administrator, deleted from the site, then sent to the member who made the post via a Private Message (PM) along with a single warning. Members who choose to not listen and continue advertising will be banned from the site. If the advertising is spam-related, pornography-based, or a "visit-my-site" type post / private message, no warning at all will be provided, and the member will be banned immediately without a warning.

It is considered appropriate to post a URL to a page which specifically and directly answers a question posted on the list (for example, it would be permissible to post a link to a page containing home-road splits, even on a site which has advertising or other commercial content; however, it would not be appropriate to post the URL of the main page of the site). The site reserves the right to limit the frequency of such announcements by any individual or group.

In keeping with our test for a proper topic, posting to Baseball Fever should be treated as if you truly do care. This includes posting information that is, to the best of your knowledge, complete and accurate at the time you post. Any errors or ambiguities you catch later should be acknowledged and corrected in the thread, since Baseball Fever is sometimes considered to be a valuable reference for research information.

VIII. Role of the moderator:

When a post is submitted to Baseball Fever, it is forwarded by the server automatically and seen immediately. The moderator may:
a. Leave the thread exactly like it was submitted. This is the case 95% of the time.

b. Immediately delete the thread as inappropriate for Baseball Fever. Examples include advertising, personal attacks, or spam. This is the case 1% of the time.

c. Move the thread. If a member makes a post about the Marlins in the Yankees forum it will be moved to the appropriate forum. This is the case 3% of the time.

d. Edit the message due to an inappropriate item. This is the case 1% of the time. There have been new users who will make a wonderful post, then add to their signature line (where your name / handle appears) a tagline that is a pure advertisement. This tagline will be removed, a note will be left in the message so he/she is aware of the edit, and personal contact will be made to the poster telling them what has been edited and what actions need to be taken to prevent further edits.

The moderators perform no checks on posts to verify factual or logical accuracy. While he/she may point out gross errors in factual data in replies to the thread, the moderator does not act as an "accuracy" editor. Also moderation is not a vehicle for censorship of individuals and/or opinions, and the moderator's decisions should not be taken personally.

IX. Legal aspects of participation in Baseball Fever:

By submitting a post to Baseball Fever, you grant Baseball Fever permission to distribute your message to the forum. Other rights pertaining to the post remain with the ORIGINAL author, and you may not redistribute or retransmit any posts by any others, in whole or in part, without the express consent of the original author.

The messages appearing on Baseball Fever contain the opinions and views of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of Baseball Fever, or of the Baseball Almanac family of sites.

Sincerely,

Sean Holtz, Webmaster of Baseball Almanac & Baseball Fever
www.baseball-almanac.com | www.baseball-fever.com
"Baseball Almanac: Sharing Baseball. Sharing History."
See more
See less

HBO 2007 Documentary on Brooklyn Dodgers, "The Ghosts Of Flatbush"

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Steven Gallanter View Post
    It is politically incorrect to cite "white flight" but that is a major factor in the departure of the Dodgers. My father, who was not a baseball fan, was born in Crown Heights in 1927. He went to college, got drafted, returned and finished school, married, got a professional job and moved to Long Island. He never looked back.

    The generation born in the 20's had passed the age where live attendance at Dodger games was a regular event. TV had become common and was draining fans while the cable TV goldmine would have to wait until the 80'.s. The word 'gentrification' was 30 years in the distance. Pete Hamill's A DRINKING LIFE details the many sociological changes brewing in the Brooklyn of the 50's.

    Oh yeah, the Dodgers used to be the Superbas. They moved to Brooklyn's Washington Park in 1899. Ebbets Field was built by greed and abandoned by greed.

    stevegallanter.wordpress.com
    ....which brings us around to the idea that, if you're a supporter of Robert Moses (let me make it clear, Robert Moses was one of the most despicable human beings who ever lived in my opinion but it's wrong to blame him about the theft of the Brooklyn franchise) was absolutelyh corrct. The best location for the Dodgers was and would have been Flushing Meadows, home of the soon to be announced 1964 World's Fair with ample parking, at the confluence of three highways linking Long Island with varius parts of the Metropolitan area, a subway station and a LIRR station within the complex.

    What it comes down to is O'Malley wanted desperately a big handoot from the taxpayers of the City of New York.
    Last edited by MATHA531; 03-25-2012, 01:50 AM.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by EdTarbusz View Post
      You're right that I'm looking at the situation from afar, but I don't think I'm looking at biased reporting. I think the anti-O'Malley stuff out there is the biased reporting. Virtually everything I;ve read about Ebbets Field is that it was antiquated and poorly maintained. It was described as being out-dated when Larry MacPhail was running the team. He was already consideriing the possiblity of moving the Dodgers out of there in 1940. I don't know if the Atlantic/Flatbush project was, but I doubt that without a parking garage to go along with it that O'Malley was probably more interested in fans arriving by train than by car (which was probably another negative about it as far as Robert Moses was concerned).

      I think two factors caused the Dodgers to leave: O'Malley didn't think the Dodgers would be able to keep up with the Braves and that O'Malley was disatisfied with Ebbets Field. I think the City of New York probably could have done more to ensure the Dodgers stay in Brooklyn but that it wasn't important enough.

      I think it is easy to shrug your shoulders at eminent domain and Title I laws in New York during that period because Robert Moses had little trouble getting around them when he supported a project. If he were a supporter of the Dodgers building a new ballpark in Brookly that it would have gotten done.
      It's one thing to use eminent domain to build a project such as a highway or a school or a hospital and yes one can always quibble about a location. It's another to use it to build a privately owned baseball park for a large family owned business that was making a mint! Also, there is little question there woiuld have been taxpayer suits up the gazoots that would have delays the project for a decade or more. If you don't believe it, do a google search on Ratner, Bruce A. where the Atlantic Yards project has a pretense of building housing within it (whether or not that's a smokescreen to get around the eminent domain laws and use Title I funds is another story).

      And of course, as it turned out, O'Malley was quite wrong about Milwaukee but even so, while Milwaukee attendance was better than that of Brookyn (and consistantly the only team in the NL whose attendance surpassed that of Brooklyn consistantly), their television market and television rights were selling for a fraction of the money O'Malley was raking in from the Dodgers very rich radio/television package, much more so than even the Yankees.

      Perhaps the poster after you was more corrct O'Malley was a racist but then again the Shea Stadium location would have resolved that situation to everybody's satisfaction except his. Like I say, I hate to be a defender of Robert Moses and in many many instances what he did was deplorable but at the same time, it's hard to imagine the Metropolitan NYC region without the bridges and tunnels and highways he built. The argument is not that these could have been done better but that they were done at all given political realities.

      But as I've said before, what is too bad is that the AL had scheduled a meeting to approve the transfer of the St. Louis Brown to Los Angeles and it would have passed. Too bad the meeting was scheduled for 08 December 1941....so Admiral Yamamoto and Emperor Hirohito probably deserve more blame for the theft of the Brooklyn franchise than Moses!
      Last edited by MATHA531; 03-25-2012, 01:51 AM.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by MATHA531 View Post
        . It's another to use it to build a privately owned baseball park for a large family owned business that was making a mint! Also, there is little question there woiuld have been taxpayer suits up the gazoots that would have delays the project for a decade or more. If you don't believe it, do a google search on Ratner, Bruce A. where the Atlantic Yards project has a pretense of building housing within it (whether or not that's a smokescreen to get around the eminent domain laws and use Title I funds is another story).

        But as I've said before, what is too bad is that the AL had scheduled a meeting to approve the transfer of the St. Louis Brown to Los Angeles and it would have passed. Too bad the meeting was scheduled for 08 December 1941....so Admiral Yamamoto and Emperor Hirohito probably deserve more blame for the theft of the Brooklyn franchise than Moses!
        This is where I think that Brooklyn Dodgers are talking out of both sides of their mouths. On the one hand they say the Dodgers weren't able for Federal help because they are privately owned (a legitimite veiewpoint, in my opinion) but then say the same francise was stolen from Brooklyn when that same private owner decides to move to a better situation for homself and his team (this is not a legitimite viewpoint, in my opinion).

        I've read some contemporary newspaper articles about the Browns in December, 1941. I'm not conviced that the AL would have OKed move even if the war didn't intervene because of travel times and tradition. Even if the Browns made to LA in the 1940s I think the Dodgers still would have moved in the 1950s. Possibily to Texas.

        If keeping the Dodgers in New York and moving them to Queens was a priority they would have found a way to sell the land to O'Malley so he could have the privately owned stadium that he wanted.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by MATHA531
          What are you going to dispute?
          I'm not going to get into a dispute with you at the moment, if only because I'm a bit too busy with current issues to refute someone's longtime precepts on the topic. Like I said, it'd be like proselytizing (a huge waste of time), and you seem to have all the knowledge on it, perceiving most opposing perspectives as false "dogma," no matter what anyone says to the contrary.

          One point, though: Can anyone name a time in professional baseball in which greed did not play a part? I didn't think so.

          That the Dodgers were not the biggest money maker in baseball during this period? That Dodger attendance was not over 1,000,000 which was the acceptable okay point at that time? That every Dodger game was not on free television? That to condfemn the private property O'Malley wanted to condemn in violation of NY's eminent domain laws would not have cost the taxpayers of NYC $10,000,000 in 1957?
          And please don't put words in my mouth. Thanks. ...But no, it wouldn't've cost the NYC taxpayers $10M. Hell, even if it did, it would've paid for itself within a few years. Much like the bridges and tunnels that were supposed to stop collecting tolls after paying for their construction. Instead, anyone who uses them (especially Long Islanders) are still held hostage by NYC's greed and corruption.

          You want to tell me that handing over the land at Chavez Ravine was not a bad deal for the people who were living there?
          Just as bad as, in fact worse than, it was for those who once lived in the path of the Cross Bronx Expressway, the BQE, the LIE, or even the Trail of Tears and manifest destiny. Please. A few people in Chavez Ravine were inconvenienced for the greater good.

          ...it's hard to imagine the Metropolitan NYC region without the bridges and tunnels and highways he built.
          But like all people with absolute power, he went too far. Moses hated people, but he loved the public. For a guy who never drove a car in his life, he never catered to those who also didn't. If he'd had his way, it'd be hard to imagine today a Greater NYC without a Cross Manhattan Expressway, another bridge from Oyster Bay to Rye, and yet another from Port Jefferson to Bridgeport. And lest we forget, it was once hard to imagine lower New York without two tall twin towers.

          Originally posted by EdTarbusz View Post
          By 1956 O'Malley wasn't looking at the last 10 years. He was looking at what the next 10 years would bring and I don't think he saw his aging team and antiquated ballpark competing with the Braves. The Dodgers were involved in their last pennat race in 1956 and were drawing poorly (especially considering the size of their fan base) until the very end of the season.
          You are correct, sir.

          I think two factors caused the Dodgers to leave: O'Malley didn't think the Dodgers would be able to keep up with the Braves and that O'Malley was disatisfied with Ebbets Field. I think the City of New York probably could have done more to ensure the Dodgers stay in Brooklyn but that it wasn't important enough.

          I think it is easy to shrug your shoulders at eminent domain and Title I laws in New York during that period because Robert Moses had little trouble getting around them when he supported a project. If he were a supporter of the Dodgers building a new ballpark in Brookly that it would have gotten done.
          Can't disagree with that either.

          Originally posted by MATHA531
          ...(let me make it clear, Robert Moses was one of the most despicable human beings who ever lived in my opinion but it's wrong to blame him about the theft of the Brooklyn franchise)...
          We agree on something.

          Originally posted by EdTarbusz View Post
          If keeping the Dodgers in New York and moving them to Queens was a priority they would have found a way to sell the land to O'Malley so he could have the privately owned stadium that he wanted.
          Exactly!

          Welp, so much for not debating. I admit, I got sucked into it. I'm still short on time but long on words. Unfortunately, the former has to take precendence for now. All I'll say is we all have a right to our respective points of view.

          Finally, let's not continue with the political rhetoric. It's first and foremost important to remember that this is strictly a baseball-discussion forum. And this thread is about the HBO documentary on the Dodgers 1947-1957, not all that has or hasn't taken place since, nor lengthy diatribes about the "faults" behind HBO's research. Btw, I really would like to give away copies of it, so perhaps a discussion on why the Dodgers left NY and the greed / power / corruption / bullheadedness / et al of O'Malley and Moses can be directed to a different thread. There are many threads in this Brooklyn forum on the topic.
          "And their chances of getting back into this ballgame are growing dimmer by the batter."


          Put it in the books.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Steven Gallanter View Post
            It is politically incorrect to cite "white flight" but that is a major factor in the departure of the Dodgers. My father, who was not a baseball fan, was born in Crown Heights in 1927. He went to college, got drafted, returned and finished school, married, got a professional job and moved to Long Island. He never looked back.

            The generation born in the 20's had passed the age where live attendance at Dodger games was a regular event. TV had become common and was draining fans while the cable TV goldmine would have to wait until the 80'.s. The word 'gentrification' was 30 years in the distance. Pete Hamill's A DRINKING LIFE details the many sociological changes brewing in the Brooklyn of the 50's.
            I just posted this in your blog, but I figure it can't hurt to post it here, too, as an addendum to the previous post. On the topic of getting to Atlantic and Flatbush by car, no doubt it would've been more difficult for motorists to get to Atlantic and Flatbush than it is to get to Roosevelt and the Grand Central/Whitestone.

            Of course, it would've been nothing for Moses to burrow (no pun intended) up from the Gowanus Expressway to meet back up with the BQE going north. Nor would it have been beyond his reason to dig a highway path from the Belt Parkway along Conduit to Atlantic, which would have merged with the Interborough Parkway and continued along the "Atlantic Parkway." After all, building highways was his thing.

            At the same time, getting to Atlantic & Flatbush is very easily accomplished by subway and the LIRR.

            I guess what I'm saying is Robert Moses could've easily given O'Malley what he was asking for. ...in Brooklyn. If I'd had to deal with the contemptuously condescending Moses for half a decade, I'd probably have taken my ball and gone elsewhere, too.
            "And their chances of getting back into this ballgame are growing dimmer by the batter."


            Put it in the books.

            Comment


            • #21
              Ah milladrive..Wouldn't the costs of building the egree and ingress at Atlantic/Flatbush as well as highways feeding in part of the costs to the NYC taxpayers the project woud have cost whereas the Flushing Meadows sight already has these things in place?
              Last edited by MATHA531; 03-25-2012, 01:28 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                No doubt, the site at Flushing Meadows was already in place since 1938, and it cost virtually nothing to prepare the land for a ballpark 25 years later. And I must admit, by the early 1960s, Moses was falling from grace, to which his unfinished projects can attest (Sheridan Expressway, Prospect Expressway, Clearview Expressway, Seaford-Oyster Bay Expressway, etc.).

                On the other hand, the exchanges between O'Malley and Moses began well before the Dodgers finally won in '55, when Moses was still in full control of what and what didn't get built. Did Robert care about the cost in the Bronx when he literally cut a straight deep swath through bedrock upon which neighborhoods had been generational? Did he care about the folks who once lived on Horace Harding Blvd? Looking at a map, and considering all Moses had built already, it doesn't seem like a reach to think he could've built a highway from JFK along S. Conduit and straight across the already-widened Atlantic Avenue. To this day, I wish a highway like that existed.

                I believe that, by the mid-1950s, Moses had already cost the city taxpayers plenty, and, imo, the highways I would propose would've been viewed by the city at the time as yet another Robert Moses highway-building project in south Queens and Brooklyn. Needless to say, to this day, it's a pain in the neck to get from JFK to downtown Brooklyn by car. As Ed intimated above, if Moses had felt it was important enough, those highways would've been built and O'Malley would have most likely built his dream park in Brooklyn instead of LA. Had Moses not been adamant about "Flushing or Nothing," we may be following the Los Angeles Senators and the Minnesota Giants. I'm not saying O'Malley was an innocent bystander, and sure, he could've brought the "New York Dodgers" to Queens, but the fact remains that he (and every other land owner in New York) had to get on his knees in front of holier-than-thou Moses to plead his case. Being dismissed time and again, I find it understandable why O'Malley had had enough. Even Mayor Wagner, as you know, had no power to tell Moses what he could and couldn't build. Moses had the final word for over four decades. Unfortunately, Moses wasn't greedy for money. His greed was for power.

                As for the exits and entrances, they would have most likely been the usual short exit and even shorter acceleration ramps he'd been designing in the city for years (unlike Long Island, Westchester, SW Connecticut, and Niagara Falls, which had, for the most part, enough land to build those dreaded clover-leaves we all despise [and are still too short]). Anyone who's ever driven to the Brooklyn courthouses knows that for Moses, egressions and ingressions were trivial matters. One look at the FDR Expressway, the Cross Bronx Expressway, or that monstrosity of an interchange with the Van Wyck, Grand Central, Jackie Rob, Queens Blvd, Main Street, and Union Turnpike, and it becomes evident that getting on and off were the least of Moses' design issues. Either that, or he was on some serious medications, heh.

                However, to return to your original point in the above post, you're right, the Northern Blvd bypass was much easier to build than the highways I would've advocated. As well, as I hinted earlier, it's much easier to get to Flushing from both NYC airports than it would've been (and still is) to get to downtown Brooklyn. So, in that regard, I'll agree that Flushing was a good choice, especially since air travel quickly became the transport of choice (rather than the trains and buses). Ironically enough, that same jet age made it possible for teams to routinely travel to and from the west coast.

                Btw, I didn't know that fact about the meeting that would've taken place were it not for WWII. That, imho, is a truly fascinating fact!
                "And their chances of getting back into this ballgame are growing dimmer by the batter."


                Put it in the books.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by milladrive View Post

                  Btw, I didn't know that fact about the meeting that would've taken place were it not for WWII. That, imho, is a truly fascinating fact!
                  The AL meetings did take place a few days after Pearl Harbor. The convential wisdom is that the AL teams would have OKed a Browns move to LA except for the war. Newspaper accounts from the period don't make it sound like such a slam dunk though. It sounds like may have been a topic that would have been studied to death, and in the pst war period the Browns made two well publicised attempts to move to LA but the PCL put up so many roadblocks that moving to LA would been a bad financial move for the Browns. Even if the Browns had moved to LA I think the Dodgers may have moved there as well, especially if the Browns continued being a bad team.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by milladrive View Post
                    No doubt, the site at Flushing Meadows was already in place since 1938, and it cost virtually nothing to prepare the land for a ballpark 25 years later. And I must admit, by the early 1960s, Moses was falling from grace, to which his unfinished projects can attest (Sheridan Expressway, Prospect Expressway, Clearview Expressway, Seaford-Oyster Bay Expressway, etc.).

                    On the other hand, the exchanges between O'Malley and Moses began well before the Dodgers finally won in '55, when Moses was still in full control of what and what didn't get built. Did Robert care about the cost in the Bronx when he literally cut a straight deep swath through bedrock upon which neighborhoods had been generational? Did he care about the folks who once lived on Horace Harding Blvd? Looking at a map, and considering all Moses had built already, it doesn't seem like a reach to think he could've built a highway from JFK along S. Conduit and straight across the already-widened Atlantic Avenue. To this day, I wish a highway like that existed.

                    I believe that, by the mid-1950s, Moses had already cost the city taxpayers plenty, and, imo, the highways I would propose would've been viewed by the city at the time as yet another Robert Moses highway-building project in south Queens and Brooklyn. Needless to say, to this day, it's a pain in the neck to get from JFK to downtown Brooklyn by car. As Ed intimated above, if Moses had felt it was important enough, those highways would've been built and O'Malley would have most likely built his dream park in Brooklyn instead of LA. Had Moses not been adamant about "Flushing or Nothing," we may be following the Los Angeles Senators and the Minnesota Giants. I'm not saying O'Malley was an innocent bystander, and sure, he could've brought the "New York Dodgers" to Queens, but the fact remains that he (and every other land owner in New York) had to get on his knees in front of holier-than-thou Moses to plead his case. Being dismissed time and again, I find it understandable why O'Malley had had enough. Even Mayor Wagner, as you know, had no power to tell Moses what he could and couldn't build. Moses had the final word for over four decades. Unfortunately, Moses wasn't greedy for money. His greed was for power.

                    As for the exits and entrances, they would have most likely been the usual short exit and even shorter acceleration ramps he'd been designing in the city for years (unlike Long Island, Westchester, SW Connecticut, and Niagara Falls, which had, for the most part, enough land to build those dreaded clover-leaves we all despise [and are still too short]). Anyone who's ever driven to the Brooklyn courthouses knows that for Moses, egressions and ingressions were trivial matters. One look at the FDR Expressway, the Cross Bronx Expressway, or that monstrosity of an interchange with the Van Wyck, Grand Central, Jackie Rob, Queens Blvd, Main Street, and Union Turnpike, and it becomes evident that getting on and off were the least of Moses' design issues. Either that, or he was on some serious medications, heh.

                    However, to return to your original point in the above post, you're right, the Northern Blvd bypass was much easier to build than the highways I would've advocated. As well, as I hinted earlier, it's much easier to get to Flushing from both NYC airports than it would've been (and still is) to get to downtown Brooklyn. So, in that regard, I'll agree that Flushing was a good choice, especially since air travel quickly became the transport of choice (rather than the trains and buses). Ironically enough, that same jet age made it possible for teams to routinely travel to and from the west coast.

                    Btw, I didn't know that fact about the meeting that would've taken place were it not for WWII. That, imho, is a truly fascinating fact!
                    Just out of curiosity, did you read the article I linked to above? The question really comes down to what one thinks are the obligations of a municipality to a sports franchise owner. I believe, and always will, the Los Angeles offer to O'Malley was totally unfair to the taxpayers of that area for a variety of reasons and quite frankly there was really not all that much NYC could have done short of giving in to Mr. O'Malley's demands that he had to own his ballpark (which was not the norm at the time as all the other franchise shiftees ended up playing in municipal owned Stadii. One also has to question whether O'Malley really thought there was much of a chance of getting his way on Atlantic/Flatbush and whether you believe in the question of eminent domain laws or not, the fact is that even if Moses had been favorably inclined to go along, the lawsuits would have held up the project for the better part of the next decade; this is very clear from what has happend with the Barclay Center project today and how long it took to clear all the lawsuits and this one, at least, had a semblance of including other things besides a privately owned arena for the Nets.

                    The reality is, as I read somewhere in one of the pro O'Malley books Ive read, when the Dodgers returning from Japan stopped off in Los Angeles after the 1956 seasson and O'Malley flew over the Chavez Ravine site, the story is he told the LA city officials he was coming and made all the moves necessary during the winter of 1956-57 yet kept lying to the Brooklyn fans to protect his gate.

                    I respectfully disagree with Ed and you on one matter. The Dodgers were in no imminent danger of ceasing to be a profitable enterprise. Their radio/tv contracts including pre and post game shows on television and on radio were bringing in lots of money and WOR-TV was not going to foresake its baseball coverge for Million Dollar Movie (a second or third run movie, the same movie, they showed every night when they didn't have a Dodger game) and Milwaukee's income because of its limited television market was never gong to equal theirs. The distressing thing was how baseball kept claiming it was a sport and deserved its anti trust exemption and there was some loyalty among baseball owners because as you probably know, after the 2 NL teams left NY, attempts were made to solicit interest from other franchises which were making a fraction of what the Dodgers had been making and their owners said sorry but we have loyalties to our home towns.

                    I still, and will always believe, that yes Moses' thirst for power played a role in this but still does not come close to that of O'Malley, of President Warren Giles of the NL who at the meeting on that fatefgul Friday evening in May 1957 when it was announced the Dodgers and Giants had been given permission to move to California, declared the NL did not need New York and of Commissioner Ford C. Frick, a closet Yankee fan who was trusted to act for the good of baseball who simply declared let them grow up to be Yankee fans. Flushing Meadows was a perfectly viable solution as would have been the later solution to the Cleveland Browns. If baseball were so intent on allowing the Dodgers and Giants to re-locate, their histories should have remained here (I for one don't get as upset as others when the Mets lay claim to NL baseball history in New York even predating the Mets although one can argue there is too much emphasis on the Dodgers and not enough on the Giants).

                    To me it will always rank, and I don't think the HBO special made that clear, as one of the darkest moments in baseball history when a fan base were told to go take a hike despite making the owner the richest owner in baseball.

                    At least, that's my opinion (without any historonics).

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by MATHA531 View Post
                      To me it will always rank, and I don't think the HBO special made that clear, as one of the darkest moments in baseball history when a fan base were told to go take a hike despite making the owner the richest owner in baseball.

                      At least, that's my opinion (without any historonics).
                      I have a hard time that O'Malley was a rich owner while in Brooklyn. The only rich owners in the 1950s were men who were already independently wealthy. I don't think any owner whose main source of income was a baseball team was getting rich in the 1950s.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by EdTarbusz View Post
                        I have a hard time that O'Malley was a rich owner while in Brooklyn. The only rich owners in the 1950s were men who were already independently wealthy. I don't think any owner whose main source of income was a baseball team was getting rich in the 1950s.
                        Let's put it this way; he was doing quite well...after a bitter fight with Branch Rickey, he had acquired a very large chunk of the Dodgers and as noted through this era the Brooklyn franchise was the biggest money maker in baseball and again where our views diverge, there was little danger of that changing in the near future of that era thanks to that growing medium called television.

                        That hasn't changed in this country. Where do you think the bulk of NFL revenue comes from?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by MATHA531 View Post
                          Let's put it this way; he was doing quite well...after a bitter fight with Branch Rickey, he had acquired a very large chunk of the Dodgers and as noted through this era the Brooklyn franchise was the biggest money maker in baseball and again where our views diverge, there was little danger of that changing in the near future of that era thanks to that growing medium called television.

                          That hasn't changed in this country. Where do you think the bulk of NFL revenue comes from?
                          The Dodgers were making a lot of money, but they also had a big overhead mainly because their extensive farm system. They also had a lot of World Series money. With an aging lsoing the World Series money had to be a concern for club officials.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Yes, I read the thesis. Nothing like revising revisionism to create equalization.

                            The fact remains, though, that regardless of the opposition or support either "side" was receiving at the time -- Moses still had absolute power and the final word in the mid 1950s. I will continue to assert that all Moses had to do was to say yes and it would have been. I said it before I'd ever read Caro's The Power Broker, and I was still saying it long before HBO's 2007 documentary.

                            No, Moses didn't force the Dodgers to move to the city of Los Angeles, and, in fact, he eventually got what he wanted with the building of Shea Stadium, but the only thing the arguably most powerful man in NYC history had to do was approve O'Malley's constant pleas to build a new park in Brooklyn at the former engineer's adopted location.

                            Sure, driving to Atlantic and Flatbush from Long Island, as one interviewee claimed, was indeed a "shlep." It still is. However, driving to Atlantic and Flatbush was and is still easier to get to by car than it is to Bedford and Sullivan. I fully believe that the biggest mistake O'Malley made in his numerous claims to the all-powerful wholly Moses was to NOT include a request for an Atlantic Expressway through Queens and Brooklyn. It certainly wouldn't have been as major a project as was the Cross Bronx and would have affected many fewer people. In fact, Atlantic Avenue is [still wide enough for a limited access highway (thanks to the median once used for trolleys and subways). Instead, O'Malley didn't think of it, and Moses had his own ideas. And for over 40 years Robert Moses got what he wanted without any authority to whom to answer (despite whatever consensus supported his denials).

                            Imo, both were guilty of being bullheaded, but add my suggestions for the Atlantic Expressway and perhaps a spur up 3rd Avenue from the BQE -- the primary appeals I believe O'Malley failed to make -- and it just may have happened. No matter how it's sliced, though, the fact remains as is asserted in the documentary. Indeed, all Robert Moses had to do was say YES.

                            Btw, finances of "corruptorate" (my own word) figures are not my strong point. Taxes and tolls are paid, the lawmakers come up with them and the taxpayers pay them. The numbers are simply too high for me (and most of the general population) to comprehend. I do know, however, that, partly due to the New York Mets, the pendulum swung back soon enough. So, perhaps the taxes and profits gained and/or lost by all concerned in this saga shouldn't be part of the equation this many years down the road.

                            Btw, does anyone want a copy of The Ghosts Of Flatbush free of charge? Just PM me.

                            Last edited by milladrive; 04-03-2012, 01:42 PM.
                            "And their chances of getting back into this ballgame are growing dimmer by the batter."


                            Put it in the books.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              ...well,.... it looks as though some folks did......watch it ...that is.....interesting discussion.....still no conclusion.....

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Just for everyone's info, I changed the title of this thread because it's no longer available "On Demand" at HBO, and, being an HBO documentary created in 2007, I felt the new title was more appropriate.

                                Incidentally, my DVD offer is still (and always will be) open to anyone who desires a copy.
                                "And their chances of getting back into this ballgame are growing dimmer by the batter."


                                Put it in the books.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X