Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

On August 19, 1957.......

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

  • On August 19, 1957.......

    On August 19, 1957, 47 years ago today, HORACE STONEHAM and his Board of Directors, voted 9-1 to MOVE the NY GIANTS!

    In less than two months, on October 8, 1957, OUR BROOKLYN DODGERS would follow that lead.

    Sadly, it was the beginning of the end of NL Baseball, as WE knew it, in NYC!

    c.

  • #2
    Originally posted by DODGER DEB
    On August 19, 1957, 47 years ago today, HORACE STONEHAM and his Board of Directors, voted 9-1 to MOVE the NY GIANTS!

    In less than two months, on October 8, 1957, OUR BROOKLYN DODGERS would follow that lead.

    Sadly, it was the beginning of the end of NL Baseball, as WE knew it, in NYC!

    c.
    In the mid-1950's when it became apparent that Stoneham didn't have the money to finance a privately owned stadium, Hall-of-Famer Bill Terry entered into clandestine negotiations with Horace to purchase the financially troubled franchise. Terry, a self made millionaire , was certain that he would be able to put a group of investors together that could make an offer that Stoneham couldn't refuse. If Terry had pulled off the deal, his plan was to keep the Giants in New York & have them play in Yankee Stadium until the Flushing Meadows project was completed. Unfortunately, Terry was a little too public about the negotiations & an embarrassed Stoneham quickly broke them off. And the rest as they say is history.

    Comment


    • #3
      It was a sad day in baseball history indeed. If everything turned out right and the City of New York was willing to save the team, I think the Giants and Dodgers would have stayed. New York City would have had three Major League teams that would set it aside and make them stand alone. The greediness of Stoneham took it's way. And from what I read, O' Malley enticed Stoneham to move to the west coast keeping the rivalry alive. I think it's really sad for NY Giants fans. We haven't won a championship since we moved. The Dodgers faired very well. I guess the Giants are jinxed. Imagine the Giants moving back to New York. Hey look what happened to the Oakland Raiders. They returned back home after staying like 13 years in Los Angeles. That's a dream anyway. The sister team Mets are their team now with a piece of Dodger and Giant engraved in them forever. Sad!

      Comment


      • #4
        The master plan is to get the Giants back to New York. Forget the Dodgers. An earthquake or plate tectonics will eventually reduce them to rubble. Then we'll move the Mets to Brooklyn, and all will be almost well again.

        Comment


        • #5
          If that is going to happen, I'm all for it! New York still embrasses the Giants. Many people like myself are just as mad when they moved that dreadful day in 1957. And yes forget the Dodgers! (no offense DODGER DEB!) It's all for fun!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by GiantsFan
            It was a sad day in baseball history indeed. If everything turned out right and the City of New York was willing to save the team, I think the Giants and Dodgers would have stayed. New York City would have had three Major League teams that would set it aside and make them stand alone. The greediness of Stoneham took it's way. And from what I read, O' Malley enticed Stoneham to move to the west coast keeping the rivalry alive. I think it's really sad for NY Giants fans. We haven't won a championship since we moved. The Dodgers faired very well. I guess the Giants are jinxed. Imagine the Giants moving back to New York. Hey look what happened to the Oakland Raiders. They returned back home after staying like 13 years in Los Angeles. That's a dream anyway. The sister team Mets are their team now with a piece of Dodger and Giant engraved in them forever. Sad!
            I thought that there was a movement to move the Giants back east in the late 1970's when they were experiencing ownership troubles. I remember that the buzz was that they wanted to build a baseball only stadium at the Meadowlands. I'm sure George would've fought that tooth & nail.

            "You Can't Go Home Again" --Thomas Wolfe

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by GiantsFan
              If that is going to happen, I'm all for it! New York still embrasses the Giants. Many people like myself are just as mad when they moved that dreadful day in 1957. And yes forget the Dodgers! (no offense DODGER DEB!) It's all for fun!
              None taken, GiantsFan!

              NYC is still the only ML city that did, and could still, support three ML teams. When you look at the state of most teams in cities that fought tooth and nail to get them you have wonder, out loud, WHY? Most of these cities and their fans do NOT have what it has always taken to support a ML team, through thick and thin. Enough time has passed, along with many "experiments" for ML Baseball to now get REAL and re-establish teams in places that truly LOVE BASEBALL!

              As I have said on OUR Forum, I still think that the best move Fred Wilpon could make is move the METS to BROOKLYN. THAT would be a stroke of genius considering what he would gain instantly with OUR "B" on his hat....and all that would come with it!

              If Wilpon didn't make that happen, Frank McCourt could then have the best of both worlds. He got a real deal buying the Dodgers from that Murdoch group, who couldn't tell baseball from soccer. Not only did he wind up with the Franchise, but he got the Chavez Ravine, the Vero Beach Dodgertown facility......AND he got that huge parcel of land next to the Chavez Ravine, where he wants to build a football stadium. In a few years, after he establishes his "power base" among the owners, the genius "move" would be packing up the Dodgers and coming back to BROOKLYN, still leaving him with all that LA land. WE also discussed on OUR Forum that a new ballpark could be built in Coney Island (Brooklyn), facing the Atlantic Ocean, with plans for plenty of parking space and public transportation feeding into the area.

              As for the GIANTS, I don't know enough about their owners and situation. Their ballpark is new, and depending on the deal they signed to get it, could keep them in SF for years to come. After Bonds retires.....I wonder just how much interest in Baseball will endure in the Bay area. In 1957, the Big "O" made sure HE kept the "gold mine" (LA) for himself and gave the ??? (SF) to Stoneham. Here again, SF fans seem to NEED a winner to support the Giants....what happens when Barry is no longer the attraction?

              IMO, NYC and ML Baseball is ready for some sensible moves. Of couse, the best move they could make is getting rid of "Bud-Lite", who has approved some of the worst moves Baseball has ever seen.

              IT'S TIME!!!!

              c.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by GiantsFan
                It was a sad day in baseball history indeed. If everything turned out right and the City of New York was willing to save the team, I think the Giants and Dodgers would have stayed. New York City would have had three Major League teams that would set it aside and make them stand alone. The greediness of Stoneham took it's way. And from what I read, O' Malley enticed Stoneham to move to the west coast keeping the rivalry alive. I think it's really sad for NY Giants fans. We haven't won a championship since we moved. The Dodgers faired very well. I guess the Giants are jinxed. Imagine the Giants moving back to New York. Hey look what happened to the Oakland Raiders. They returned back home after staying like 13 years in Los Angeles. That's a dream anyway. The sister team Mets are their team now with a piece of Dodger and Giant engraved in them forever. Sad!
                Giantsfan, Stoneham wasn't greedy. He had a valid reason for moving, his team was losing money. The other rotund gentleman( I use the term loosely) from Brooklyn had no valid reason to move. His team was making money every year.
                Lets get Eddie Basinski elected to the Polish Sports Hall of Fame.
                www.brooklyndodgermemories.com

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by tonypug
                  Giantsfan, Stoneham wasn't greedy. He had a valid reason for moving, his team was losing money. The other rotund gentleman( I use the term loosely) from Brooklyn had no valid reason to move. His team was making money every year.
                  I agree with you Tony. Stoneham was losing money because he couldn't get white fans up to Harlem for night games anymore. Towards the end, people in the box seats were being robbed during games. No one is going to attend a game, especially a night game, when the club can't even guarantee your safety INSIDE the ballpark. In addition, all of the Giants home games were on free TV. I can definitely understand why their attendance plummeted when the team was struggling. The only counter argument to Stoneham's decision is that it has been well documented that the Yankees were willing to lease Yankee Stadium to the Giants for an indefinite period of time. Stoneham's critics argue that he could've done this until the Flushing Meadow Project was completed in Queens. However, to Stoneham it must've seemed easier just to pull up stakes & move to some virgin territory where a grateful city would build him a publicly financed stadium.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Greenpeach
                    Towards the end, people in the box seats were being robbed during games.
                    With all due respect, I'd like to see some documentation on that. References?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      After O'Malley turned down the Flushing Meadow(Shea Stadium) site, it was offered to Stoneham. He turned it down, because Queens was Dodger territory, and he was concearned that he wouldn't have a large enough of a fan base. As far as the criminal activity , I never saw any of it. My Dad took my brother and me to many games at the Polo Grounds and we never felt threatened. Yankee Stadium has never been in paradise, I have never heard any negative comments about the Stadium. The same reason was given for the Dodgers moving. Dodger Stadium in LA is not an area where you want to spend much time after a game, but that was a reason given for leaving Ebbets Field.
                      Lets get Eddie Basinski elected to the Polish Sports Hall of Fame.
                      www.brooklyndodgermemories.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by westsidegrounds
                        With all due respect, I'd like to see some documentation on that. References?
                        Sure, here you go Westside.

                        "There were some vague attempts to induce the Giants to stay. The Polo Grounds was creaking after all those busy years, and the neighborhood outside, to put it kindly, was deteriorating. "There were times." Lee Allen once remarked, "when the Giants couldn't guarantee their box-seat customers safety from armed robberies during night games." Nor was attendance particularly helped when a Giant fan was killed during a game by a sniper's bullet fired from a nearby Harlem rooftop."

                        "The Giants of The Polo Grounds" by Noel Hynd pg. 380

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by tonypug
                          After O'Malley turned down the Flushing Meadow(Shea Stadium) site, it was offered to Stoneham. He turned it down, because Queens was Dodger territory, and he was concearned that he wouldn't have a large enough of a fan base. As far as the criminal activity , I never saw any of it. My Dad took my brother and me to many games at the Polo Grounds and we never felt threatened. Yankee Stadium has never been in paradise, I have never heard any negative comments about the Stadium. The same reason was given for the Dodgers moving. Dodger Stadium in LA is not an area where you want to spend much time after a game, but that was a reason given for leaving Ebbets Field.
                          My Dad & I went to a game at Yankee Stadium in September of 1973, and we personally witnessed a gang of Puerto Rican youths strip a Dodge in broad daylight that was parked right across the street from the stadium. Dozens of people witnessed this event, but no one said or did anything about it. It was pretty sad. I've seen games at Tiger Stadium & the old Comiskey Park, but I 've always thought that the old Yankee Stadium in the late 60's & early 70's was in the most dangerous neighborhood. I haven't been back to the stadium in 20 years so I don't know if the neighborhood has improved at all.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Greenpeach
                            Sure, here you go Westside.

                            "There were times." Lee Allen once remarked, "when the Giants couldn't guarantee their box-seat customers safety from armed robberies during night games."
                            I'm afraid - with all due respect to the very colorful Lee Allen, a great storyteller - that that's not good enough.

                            I mean, think about it. What are we supposed to be picturing, some guy with a stocking over his head moving from box to box, saying "OK, just fill up da bag wit yer valuables & nobody gets hoit"?

                            How about the vendors - did they scramble to get ahead of the armed robbers, so they could sell their hotdogs while the patrons still had money?

                            Hey, I'll bet the armed robbers sure kept people from moving down to the "good seats" late in the game!

                            ........................

                            I was thinking of something more factual, like maybe one of the New York papers might have, oh, run a story about armed robberies taking place inside the Polo Grounds during ballgames. That's really not something they'd have saved for a slow news day ...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by westsidegrounds
                              I'm afraid - with all due respect to the very colorful Lee Allen, a great storyteller - that that's not good enough.

                              I mean, think about it. What are we supposed to be picturing, some guy with a stocking over his head moving from box to box, saying "OK, just fill up da bag wit yer valuables & nobody gets hoit"?

                              How about the vendors - did they scramble to get ahead of the armed robbers, so they could sell their hotdogs while the patrons still had money?

                              Hey, I'll bet the armed robbers sure kept people from moving down to the "good seats" late in the game!

                              ........................

                              I was thinking of something more factual, like maybe one of the New York papers might have, oh, run a story about armed robberies taking place inside the Polo Grounds during ballgames. That's really not something they'd have saved for a slow news day ...
                              I see my friend, so if you don't like the message you just disparage the messenger. You must be quite active in politics. Quite honestly, I could care less what you believe. I just made a statement & backed it up with a legitimate reference. That is far more then you do most of the time. If you're so inclined Westside do your own research to refute the premise of my initial post.

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X