|
|
| Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line (1181375) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 4 of 5 |
||
|
| (1182006) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Fri Oct 19 22:32:10 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Oct 19 19:55:26 2012. LOL..but yet in another,you clearly stated "race" was a factor..Which is it,Chris..? Commonly known factors behind some of Moses's motivations were racial..such as constructing huge towers for public housing knowingly such an environment would be a negative impact of the neighborhood in the shadow of such lumbering structures..as well as the people who lived inside them. Even built a housing development in Manhattans East side that did not admit any African Americans as owners/tenants. Moses also built his roads as "parkways" with low level overpasses to discourage "day trippers" on buses from using them..and to keep non whites off Long Island..which in and of itself is ridiculous..due to the fact that there were other means to reach townships out there ..[ie the lirr and other avenues roads highways] Moses willingness to ram rod highways through predominately urban areas settled by Latino's and blacks..while avoiding politically connected areas lends credence to his racism..while such areas like Bay Ridge were unavoidable if the Narrows Bridge was to be built.. Moses had issue with what he considered "slums"..which could be anything from a depressed nab..to a row of well maintained brownstones..it didnt matter to him..if it was "in his way" it was gone. until Jane Jacobs had enouge of his destruction and "urban renewal projects" in the guise of LOMEX/CROSS BROOKLYN EXPRESSWAY/BUSHWICK EXPRESSWAY..and others that would have torn out the heart of whole neighborhoods.. So..tell me..which was it? |
|
|
| (1182012) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by FYBklyn1959 on Fri Oct 19 23:14:52 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by Jackson Park B Train on Fri Oct 19 19:45:42 2012. The "owners" should be merely contract managers/operators like Veolia/Herzog etc.Maybe not :( 
|
|
|
| (1182018) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Fri Oct 19 23:47:27 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by FYBklyn1959 on Fri Oct 19 23:14:52 2012. Beat me to it. +∞² |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1182042) | |
What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Oct 20 04:12:58 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Oct 19 14:59:36 2012. |
|
|
| (1182043) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Sat Oct 20 04:14:18 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by MATHA531 on Fri Oct 19 18:20:08 2012. The tickets may have been like bus transfers, with a scale of hours printed on it, and the end torn off at the hour it was issued. That would mean it had to be used within an hour or so of the time it was issued, at least if it was inspected when collected. I'm not sure it really was, though. I know the tickets were dropped into one of those old-fashioned "ticket choppers". I used the ticket-based transfer there (161 Street) once, as a child with my parents. It was apparently instituted in 1948, when inter-divisional transfers were first established in conjunction with the fare increase from 5 cents to 10 cents. |
|
|
| (1182048) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Ian Lennon on Sat Oct 20 06:38:07 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by Edwards! on Fri Oct 19 13:17:55 2012. That would be the MD-11. |
|
|
| (1182049) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Ian Lennon on Sat Oct 20 06:40:25 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by FYBklyn1959 on Fri Oct 19 10:07:10 2012. I stand corrected. I didn't think there were any of them left. |
|
|
| (1182051) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Sat Oct 20 07:26:43 2012, in response to What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Oct 20 04:12:58 2012. Where would they have played? |
|
|
| (1182057) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 08:56:57 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Catfish 44 on Sat Oct 20 07:26:43 2012. The location of Shea Stadium......in complete hindsight, on this one issue (and few others), Moses was probably right. Given what was happening to the Dodger fan base to which O'Malley wished to appeal i.e. they were moving to pursue the American dream of owning their own home with a two car garage out to at first nearby Nassau County, Flushing was the perfect location. As I've said, this business that they couldn't be called the Brooklyn Dodgers is absolute poppy you know what. If O'Malley did not have the totally immoral offer from the Los Angeles City Council, he would gladly have taken the Flushing Meadow location. The "boundary" between Queens and Brooklyn is totally artificial, simply based on the way some Dutrch towns were laid out inm the 17th century.For years and years, the leases the Mets signed to play at Shea Stadium were considered the most advantageous in baseball and while some might point at how Shea Stadium was allowed to deteriorate in the late 19970's, much of that was because of the loss of interest in the Mets by the Payson family after the elder Ms. Payson passed away. We can now be pretty certain it would have worked very well and resolved all the perceived problems. As far as Atlantic/Flatbush, it was never to be. Do not, as some idiots do, compare putting a 17.5k seat arena there with putting a 65k baeball only park. The Ratner proosal was carefully drawn up to include a housing portion to circumvewnt eminent domain laws. The fact of the matter it was pretty clear the city could not condemn the land for O'Malley because of the eminent domain laws. O'Malley had to know that so it is very possible his whole thing about Atlantic/Flatbush was just to try to save his place in history and not look like the greedy carpetbagger he was. Just look how long it took to clear all the juydicial obstacls to building Barclay Center where at least a case could be made it wan't simply to benefit a private entity (even though, of course, it is). So...no LA offer, a lot of grumbling, but the Dodgers end up in Flushing Meadow still making lots and lots of money and probably playing in a state of the art ballpark say called Citi Field patterned after the late Ebbets Field today. |
|
|
| (1182069) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Sat Oct 20 10:50:55 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 08:56:57 2012. If it wasn't taken by eminent domain how did the land where the stadium would have been built come to be vacant? Until the malls were built starting in the mid 1990's there was nothing there but a big hole in the ground. |
|
|
| (1182070) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Fisk ave Jim on Sat Oct 20 11:13:33 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Oct 19 16:13:27 2012. O'Malley was considered the main reason for the Dodgers goin west, back then anyway. Moses & Wagners role in the re-location did'nt come out until later. One of the sites I remember hearing about the possible new Ebbets field location was in the Red Hook area, but that was shot down because planners envisioned a shopping center in that area & that idea was shot down.O'Malley was quoted as saying If I were to move my team to Flushing, might as well move to Los Angeles. Talk about arrogance In 1958, story goes that you ask anyone in Brooklyn who were the 3 most hated men on the plannet, the answer you'd get would be Afolf Hitler, Josef Stalin & Walter O'Malley, maybe not neccessarily in that order. |
|
|
| (1182071) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Sat Oct 20 11:21:42 2012, in response to What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Oct 20 04:12:58 2012. If the Dodgers had never moved the Pacific Coast League would have become a 3rd major league. In 1956 the PCL had the following teamsLos Angeles Angels Seattle Rainiers Portland Beavers Hollywood Stars Sacramento Solons San Francisco Seals San Diego Padres Vancouver Mounties So you would have had Seattle, San Francisco and San Diego with teams and LA with two teams, basically what you have today. Vancouver has an NHL team and Portland and Sacramento have NBA teams. So they might have been able to support major league baseball. |
|
|
| (1182073) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Larry,RedbirdR33 on Sat Oct 20 11:24:35 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by MATHA531 on Fri Oct 19 18:20:08 2012. When the 9th Avenue El was discontinued south of 155 Street two free transfer points were established on June 12, 1940. One was at 155 Street and 8 Avenue and the other was at 161 Street and River Avenue. Both transfer points used tickets. The tickets did carry a restriction that they were valid only for use on the IND south of the transfer point and on the IRT north of that point. This restriction was never enforced.On August 17, 1961 new escalators and passageways were opened at 161 Street permitting in-house transfers and the use of paper transfers was discontinued . Larry, RedbirdR33 Source: Rapid Transit Transfers by Mr Bernard Linder, NYD Bulletin February 1980. |
|
|
| (1182074) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Sat Oct 20 11:28:30 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by Fisk ave Jim on Sat Oct 20 11:13:33 2012. u forgot one hated man also. mayor robert wagner.chud1 |
|
|
| (1182081) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 11:51:30 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by Fisk ave Jim on Sat Oct 20 11:13:33 2012. ....actually Robert Moses made his position quite clear in a Sports Illustrated articvle in August 1957...you can find it on line by doing a google search on Walter O'Malley and Robert Moes.Moses goes through the whole problem of what he considered to be the Atlantic/Flatbush location, blames the Brooklyn fans for not attending the games (this is always interesting...through 1956 Brooklyn attendance led the National League and fell to third, quite undertandbly, in 1957 but was still always over 1,000,000 wjocj at tjhat time was considered the bellweather...draw 1,000,000 or more and attendance was fine...draw less and you were in trouble). Of course Dodger attendance always had to be understood in the context of the fact every home game (and 2/3 of the road games excluding the 11 in New York) were available on free like in free television (cable did not exist. O'Malley had looked into the possiblity of switching Brooklym ga,es tp [au tv but the technology was still more than a decade away). Moses then goes into how it would have cost the city $10,000,000 to prop up a private enterprise by condemning the land at Atlantic/Flatbush. He then goes on to the virtues of the stadium (eventually to be Shea Stadium) at Flushing Meadow. You can read the article and draw your own conclusions. But besides this, as noted, we lived then and still to a large degree, live in a Manhattan centric city and why should taxpayers in the Bronx, Staten Island and Manhattan support an enterprise for the betterment of the borough of Brooklyn. The only ally O'Malley had on the Bord of Estimate was the Brooklyn Borugh President who, by the end, had realized it was a hopeless cause. Where the questions come in is what would have happened if O'Malley dos not have the LA offewr in his pocket and I will give the devil his due to a small degree. I don't think Walter set out to move the team. Walter was trying to get as good a deal as possible in Brooklyn but, I do believe, once he had the LA offer, the team was probably gone short of kissing his feet and giving in to his every wish which in hind sight was probbly impossible. The example of the Barcley Center shows there would have been law suits up the gazoots on the eminent domain question. Could they have been won? Maybe but was Walter willing to wqait 10 years to resolve the issue. He had sold Ebbets Field and made it quite clear the Dodgers would not be playing there past 1960 no matter what. Of course, besides the usual bad guys we all know now such as Moses, Wagner and as I noted Admiral Yamomoto, add to that Warren Giles President of the National League and Ford C. Frick, Commissioner of baseball and a closet Yankee fan. When the National League in May 1957 at a meeting in Chicago voted to allow the transfer of the two NYC NL franchise, Giles responded in his best Marie Antoinette masnner, "Who needs New York?" Mr. Frick, charged with supposedloy acting in the best interests of baseball, responded when asked about the kids (like me) who were big Dodger fans, responded, "Le4t them eat cake...no it was let them root for the Yankees." But I digress. The Dodgers should have been moved at the time to the location of Shea Stadium, the 1964 World Fair would have been awesome and they should still be playing there today. |
|
|
| (1182100) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Oct 20 12:46:42 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 11:51:30 2012. Ebbetts Field was always a crappy venue, and by 1955 the surrounding neighborhood was getting crappy alongside it. It was notorious for bad night game lighting, a sloping outfield due to the settling of the garbage that it was built upon, and had not been well maintained since before WWII. It's public address system dated to 1930, it's revenue collection system was just as old. The field never drained properly, rain would pool in the outfield even in a mild drizzle. It's plumbing was notoriously bad, sometimes Dodger players would shower in nearby fans houses instead of hoping there would be hot water on a particular day. |
|
|
| (1182104) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 12:54:52 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Oct 20 12:46:42 2012. ....nobody is saying, at least not me, that EF shouldn't have been replaced (although adherents of Fenway Park and Wrigley Field might disagree_. I certainly don't think O'M should have remained at EF indefinitely! |
|
|
| (1182107) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Oct 20 12:58:58 2012, in response to What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Oct 20 04:12:58 2012. There would be no Mets, of course. My guess is that they would have gotten a new ballpark somewhere in Brooklyn in the 1960's. Basically Shea Stadium on another location. The Giants would still have left, but I doubt they would have went to California by themselves. Minneapolis? Houston? LA would have one team (Angels) and SF would probably have gotten a 1962 expansion team (the one NY got). Would be interesting what their name would have been. It would also be nice to think Vin Scully would have remained in Brooklyn for his entire career, but he's on record as not liking to live in NYC and would have probably moved west to do play by play for an expansion team. Given that the Dodgers left Brooklyn as a pretty good team with a stacked farm system, it would have probably led to many more Subway Series, especially in the early 60's. Imagine those late 70's/early 80's Dodger teams in Brooklyn, battling with the Yankees. Except for a couple years in the 90's and 2000's, the Yankees and Mets have rarely been post-season contenders at the same time, and practically never before the late 90's. Had the Yankees/Dodgers rivalry remained in New York, it would most definitely have been more intense than Mets/Yankees. |
|
|
| (1182117) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by mcorivervsaf on Sat Oct 20 13:30:29 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Oct 20 12:58:58 2012. The owner of the baseball NY Giants at that time, Horace Stoneham, was originally going to move the team to Minneapolis, until Walter O'Malley persuaded him to relocate to the West Coast. There had to be two teams in close proximity with one another, in order for the move to be successful. You can't have just ONE team on the West Coast, with the closest team nearby, being so FAR away in St. Louis.O'Malley was losing money on an old, crumbling relic. So was Stoneham. There was no way both teams would stay in NY, given the circumstances that existed at the time. Robert Moses had a lot to do with that. What's done is done. |
|
|
| (1182122) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 20 13:48:44 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Fri Oct 19 14:59:36 2012. Lol!The only reason why Blacks were "admitted"to the majors..was simple.. They had a damn good time..made money..put on a damn good show.. They were flashy..played awesomely..even beat BABE RUTH HOMERUN RECORD by more than 100 HRS..but since it was a "negro" who did it..it was never counted as "historic".. The fact of the matter is..the owner of MLB WANTED black player..for the flash flare..skills..they KNEW they would bring to the sport..but also knew of the "white extreme prejudice/selfishness" that would make so called "integration" almost impossible to accomplish.. Who was it that stood on the field with Jackie Robinson..in the face of all the "white hatred" he received in the form of "get off the field NIGGER..GET YO BLACK ASS OFF THE FIELD..NIGGER..ETC"? Who stood with him as a team mate and friend? What happen to the Negro teams..? why was the league folded? Why was the fact a black man who shattered Bab Ruth's record keep "secret"? Ruth was a bum..he couldn't pitch..couldn't field.. all he could do is hit..and even that was questionable! So..In any event..the reasoning behind baseballs tragic history..just like most tragic historic issue dealing with this country is often laid at the feet of WHITE PEOPLE..and their need to own and control others. Satchel Page..? |
|
|
| (1182125) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Oct 20 13:53:56 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by mcorivervsaf on Sat Oct 20 13:30:29 2012. I agree, nothing was going to save the Giants. One of the 3 teams was going to go, and the Giants were the weakest of the three. |
|
|
| (1182131) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 20 14:03:42 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Oct 20 12:58:58 2012. Isnt Google great? |
|
|
| (1182132) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:05:24 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by mcorivervsaf on Sat Oct 20 13:30:29 2012. Everything you say is true except one slight error...O"malley was not losing money. As a matter of fact, at the time, the Dodgers were the biggest money makers in baseball between their television rights (well here's something you might not know. There were only two independent television stations in New York to televise baseball, channels 9 and 11. Now obviousl3 into 2 doesn't go very well. As a matter of fact, the Yankees and Giants shared channel 11 for home games only. We never saw a Yankee road game except sindce the Giants played quite a few day home games, on some of those days the Yankees would trelvise a night road game but say a weekend series in Boston was not televised in NY. The Dodgers had channel 9 to themselves and thus theyu televised all home games and 2/3 of their road games with a further 11 Dodger road games at the Polo Grounds not needed to be televised. Thus we saw 140 Dodger games ever5y season on channel 9. The Dodgers were channel 9 and channel 9 was the Dodgers_. They had the right to the pre game show (Happy Felton's nmothole gamg for home games). They had the rights to the post game show (Happy Felton talks to the stars). On radio, they had the largest radio network in baseball. On their flagship, WMGM 1050 they had the rights to the pre game called Warm Up Time with Marty Glickman, Ward Wilson and tennis star Gussie Moran.The Dodgers were making money head over heels. I don't know where this myth came from they were losing money. Nothing is further from the truth. And their home attendance led the National League every year through 1956. In 1957 with everybody knowing they were gone, they finished third in the NL in attendance but still drew over a million which, as I said earlier, was the bellweather mark. The only team consistantly outdrawing them was the Milwaukere Braves who had moved form Boston in 1953 but with, again 20/20 hindsight, we now now just how temporary that was to be. If you're a capitalist, and I'm not saying I'm not, what O'Maslley did was well within what might have been best for O'Malley and his personal fortune. But don't believe for one second the Brooklyn Dodgers were losing money. And you can look that up. |
|
|
| (1182133) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:08:19 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by mcorivervsaf on Sat Oct 20 13:30:29 2012. Everything you say is true except one slight error...O"malley was not losing money. As a matter of fact, at the time, the Dodgers were the biggest money makers in baseball between their television rights (well here's something you might not know. There were only two independent television stations in New York to televise baseball, channels 9 and 11. Now obviousl3 into 2 doesn't go very well. As a matter of fact, the Yankees and Giants shared channel 11 for home games only. We never saw a Yankee road game except sindce the Giants played quite a few day home games, on some of those days the Yankees would trelvise a night road game but say a weekend series in Boston was not televised in NY. The Dodgers had channel 9 to themselves and thus theyu televised all home games and 2/3 of their road games with a further 11 Dodger road games at the Polo Grounds not needed to be televised. Thus we saw 140 Dodger games ever5y season on channel 9. The Dodgers were channel 9 and channel 9 was the Dodgers_. They had the right to the pre game show (Happy Felton's nmothole gamg for home games). They had the rights to the post game show (Happy Felton talks to the stars). On radio, they had the largest radio network in baseball. On their flagship, WMGM 1050 they had the rights to the pre game called Warm Up Time with Marty Glickman, Ward Wilson and tennis star Gussie Moran.The Dodgers were making money head over heels. I don't know where this myth came from they were losing money. Nothing is further from the truth. And their home attendance led the National League every year through 1956. In 1957 with everybody knowing they were gone, they finished third in the NL in attendance but still drew over a million which, as I said earlier, was the bellweather mark. The only team consistantly outdrawing them was the Milwaukere Braves who had moved form Boston in 1953 but with, again 20/20 hindsight, we now now just how temporary that was to be. If you're a capitalist, and I'm not saying I'm not, what O'Maslley did was well within what might have been best for O'Malley and his personal fortune. But don't believe for one second the Brooklyn Dodgers were losing money. And you can look that up. |
|
|
| (1182134) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Oct 20 14:21:50 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Edwards! on Sat Oct 20 14:03:42 2012. Yep, can confirm or deny what you've been told in the past, which can often be wrong. To this day my mother believes Moses built the parkway bridges deliberately low to prevent buses from using them. Nothing I show her dissuades her from this belief. |
|
|
| (1182135) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Jackson Park B Train on Sat Oct 20 14:26:10 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:08:19 2012. footnote. Even after leaving to LA Dodgers games were on a "Dodgers network" in various parts of PA--I sometimes listened to them at night during HS. Sponsor Atlantic Refining Co. |
|
|
| (1182137) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by mcorivervsaf on Sat Oct 20 14:45:04 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:05:24 2012. Just to clarify, they were not making enough money, to be able to compete with the rest of the league, at the time. Their attendance numbers were nowhere near what the Braves franchise had in their first year in Milwaukee in 1953! The Dodgers were lucky enough, just to sell out the ballpark, let alone, draw a million fans! They were playing in an old, aging, Ebbets Field, that needed to replaced with a new ballpark in Downtown Brooklyn! There WAS a decline in attendance, but it wasn't anywhere near as bad as the situation at the Polo Grounds. When Robert Moses rejected O'Malley's proposal to get a new ballpark in Brooklyn, he chose to leave for the West Coast. Moses saw O'Malley's shift to L.A. as a bluff, but he was DEAD wrong. |
|
|
| (1182139) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Oct 20 14:49:09 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:05:24 2012. You're correct. The Dodgers were profitable. The Giants were not. However, the possibility of dominating a media market almost as big as New York's and growing by leaps and bounds year by year by themselves probably led O'Malley to believe he could do better. The Dodgers dominate LA in a way no NYC team ever dominated here. Even with the Angels nearby, LA is a Dodger town. |
|
|
| (1182140) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:56:34 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by mcorivervsaf on Sat Oct 20 14:45:04 2012. Again, in all due respect, they were making more money than any team in baseball. Period. You can look that up. The only team outdrawing them in the NL at the time were the Braves but then again we now know how temporary that was. Milwaukee couldn't begin to match the Dodger revenue when it came to broadcasting rights.......their entire marketing area was cut off in the south by the Chicago teams and in the north by the great lakes. Dodger attendance had declined but then again all through major league baseball. The Yankee attendance had declined.But the Dodgers had far more revenue opportunities than did mjust about any team in baseball. Now I won't argue about Ebbets Field although I will make the side point that Fenway Park and Wrigley Field, ballparks that are older than Ebbets Field, are still going strong today. Read the sports illustrated article from August 1957. Moses did not think O'Malley was bluffing. He just felt it was an inappropriate use of Title I money to use for a privately owned baseball stadium to the benefit of one person only. Also and I don't know how well you know Brooklyn the location was absolutely wrong. The nearest highway is a mile away through cluttered city streets. Can you imagine ther traffic jams as fans were trying to get to the ballpark on a Tuesday night fighting the commuter traffic on the BQE? The country was also changing in terms of automobile as opposed to rapid transit. There would have been 3 hour delays trying to get out of the ballpark. Again, I don't mean to come across as a Robert Moses enthsiast. He was one of the most evil persons who ever lived; but on this situation he takes a fall for the entire aparatus of the NYC government, of the contempt the LA city government had for its citizens and indeed major league baseball's contempt for the Brooklyn fans. I just wish people would try to do a little research and learn the true facts of the dark period in baseball history. And I'll say one other thing Although it was hardly the only reason, if you trace the timeline of the ascending of the NFL as this country's true national pastime, it coincides to a large degree with the removal of the Brooklyn franchise. Many of the Dodger fans, seeing the contempt of mlb for them, simply turned to the NY Giants and it may not be a coincidence that 1958 marked the turning point for the NFL. Can't prove it but I throw it out as something to thik about. |
|
|
| (1182156) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 20 16:01:25 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Oct 20 14:49:09 2012. That's why LA doesn't deserve 'em. |
|
|
| (1182157) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sat Oct 20 16:09:33 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by randyo on Tue Oct 16 15:51:12 2012. Actually, it goes back to the 1903 leasing of the Manhattan els by the IRT. The former Manhattan el directors from 10 Dey Street were invited to sit on the IRT's Board of Directors. They made sure that the MER had a certain degree of autonomy within the lease. This might explain why they chose to install elevated type of third rail, even during the 1900- 1903 leasing talks with the IRT. Plus, the IRT had to guarantee a 7% return on Manhattan bonds- not bad! So, it should come as no surprise that the Manhattan el division insisted on and was allowed to extend its 6th and 9th Ave els to River/Jerome Ave's with narrower el type third rail clearances, narrow tunnel widths, and dual 3rd rail on the new elevated structure to Woodlawn. They were looking out for their own interests, in case of a serious bankruptcy by the IRT.If you are looking to see just how much influence the MER had on the IRT, look no further than the City's efforts to close the 3rd Ave el's Grand Central spur, after WWI. Despite the IRT's near bankruptcy in 1921, the MER directors managed to keep the shuttle open until its abandonment on 12/06/23, after the financial threat had passed. The reason was because the MER wanted a connection to Grand Central, in case bankruptcy proceedings forced the IRT to end the lease and spin off the MER. The MER controlled a lot of the IRT's clearance decisions and the 155St/8Ave- 162St/River connector was one of them. |
|
|
| (1182159) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Sat Oct 20 16:19:38 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:05:24 2012. Why wasn't channel 5 interested in baseball? They were independent after the demise of the Dumont network. |
|
|
| (1182160) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Oct 20 16:29:41 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by merrick1 on Sat Oct 20 11:21:42 2012. Even if the PCL had not become a 3rd major league, some of the minor league teams in that league could have become major league teams as was the case with the Padres and the Angels. |
|
|
| (1182162) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 20 16:55:13 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:56:34 2012. Many of the Dodger fans, seeing the contempt of mlb for them, simply turned to the NY Giants and it may not be a coincidence that 1958 marked the turning point for the NFL.Interestingly, the 1958 NFL Championship Game aka "The Greatest Game Every Played" was blacked out in NY due to the NFL's then policy of blacking out all home games even sellouts. |
|
|
| (1182163) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 16:55:50 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by merrick1 on Sat Oct 20 16:19:38 2012. Actually channel 5 was the flagship of a television network called the Dumont Network which, BTW, played an instrumental role in the development of televison policy for the NFL. (and also carried my favourite television show when I was a kid, Captain Video and his Video Rangers on at the same time opposite Pinky Lee and Howdy Doody on NBC). |
|
|
| (1182164) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 20 16:58:56 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by merrick1 on Sat Oct 20 11:21:42 2012. Or at least they could have moved to Phoenix and Denver.It would be interesting to see how three league playoffs would work. |
|
|
| (1182165) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 17:01:15 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 20 16:55:13 2012. It sure was but until that time, the Giants were hardly the story they were to become (also spurred on by a great episode on the 20th Century called the Violent World of Sam Huff).....again what is hard for a lot of people to understand is the resentment not only in Brooklyn but throughout the country except for the left coast about what had happened to the Dodgers and their fans. And while I am not for one suecond suggesting the rise of the NFL was a direct result of this contempt, the timeline strongly suggests it played a role as the rise of the Giants as an influence in the NY sports scene, the fact that so many of my neighbors turned to the Giants and began the obligatory treks to nearby Connecticut for Su7nday afternoon home games which were blacked out in NYC until well into the early 1970's (the Jets victory over the Oakland Raiders in the 1969 AFL championship game at Shea Stadium was also bnlacked out in NY)lends a small degree of credibility to my contention about the NFL. |
|
|
| (1182166) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Gene B. on Sat Oct 20 17:05:11 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by merrick1 on Sat Oct 20 11:21:42 2012. Are you sure that the Oakland Oaks had moved to Vancouver by 1956? I know that the PCL was listed as open classification, which was above triple A, and that it had previously applied to MLB for third major league status and was turned down. |
|
|
| (1182167) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Gene B. on Sat Oct 20 17:14:31 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:56:34 2012. I am not a fan of Moses either, but in this instance he was right. The Shea Stadium site was much more convenient for the Dodger fan base which was moving out of the city and made more sense for future growth potential on Long Island. It is interesting to note that O'Malley, for all of the largesse given to him by the City of Los Angeles, did not look into the distant future. He built his stadium on a hill overlooking the city, which precluded the Dodgers being served by direct rail rapid transit. The parking lot was designed by a descendent of the guy who designed the Titanic to be unsinkable. |
|
|
| (1182169) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sat Oct 20 17:56:34 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Oct 20 16:01:25 2012. ............................okzzzzzzz |
|
|
| (1182172) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by BrightonExpBob on Sat Oct 20 18:09:36 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by merrick1 on Sat Oct 20 10:50:55 2012. One of the places that was talked about is Coney Island where the Cyclones play. Terminal of 4 Subway Lines, Also around Floyd Bennett Field. was also talked about. The problem was there was no subway there.Or they would of played a couple of years in Jersey and torn down Ebbets Field and built a new park where Ebbets Field was, or worse, rented Yankee Stadium for a couple of years. There were plenty of rumors, for those young enough to remember back that far |
|
|
| (1182174) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Sat Oct 20 18:13:37 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Gene B. on Sat Oct 20 17:05:11 2012. 1955 was the last year for the Oakland Oaks. 1956 was the first year for the Vancouver Mounties. |
|
|
| (1182175) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by BrightonExpBob on Sat Oct 20 18:18:58 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Sat Oct 20 14:49:09 2012. LA is a Dodger town because they were there 4 years earlier. That is why the Angels moved. LA was a Ram town that is why both the Chargers and the Raiders Left, Same with the Lakers, I am suprised until last season the Clippers are still there.But if you look at LA's Major Sports history, when a team starts loosing, the people don t come, Their fans are fickle, not true fans like in New York, Boston or Chicago, who stick with their teams in the bad times as well as the good |
|
|
| (1182176) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Oct 20 18:21:29 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:05:24 2012. What I think would have happened was this:Dodgers would have played one season in the Polo Grounds while Ebbets Field underwent a complete renovation, with the Dodgers playing in a modern version of the stadium from 1959-early '70s. After Jane Jacobs blocked Moses and Lindsay became Mayor, I suspect the Dodgers would have gotten their dome at Atlantic Yards sometime around 1972-'73. The Jets would have instead of moving to Shea after the 1963 season would have played 1-2 years at Yankee Stadium (sharing it with the Giants and Yankees) or Ebbets Field (sharing with the Dodgers) while the Polo Grounds was completely rebuilt, with the Jets playing in a modern, football-only Polo Grounds beginning in 1965 or '66. In turn, while the football Giants were waiting for their new Meadowlands stadium to be built, they would join the Jets in the Polo Grounds during the time Yankee Stadium was being rebuilt while the Yankees would have played the 1974 and '75 seasons in the Dodgers ballpark. Just some thoughts. |
|
|
| (1182178) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Oct 20 18:25:36 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 12:54:52 2012. As said, what I think would have happened was that the Dodgers would have played one season at the Polo Grounds while Ebbets Field was completely renovated, and by the early '70s they would have gotten their domed stadium. |
|
|
| (1182181) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by BrightonExpBob on Sat Oct 20 18:27:45 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:08:19 2012. When they moved to LA, they only had the games from San Francisco on TV. The least amount of games of any Major league team, Came from the most in Brooklyn to the Least in LA.I lived my whole life except for the 1958 season in Dodger towns. from when I was born, to 1958 in Brooklyn then 1958-1994 in LA. went to many games. I remember in Brooklyn. The fans brought their radios, not to listen to the Dodger games, they knew what was going on. They watched the game live and listened to the Giants or the Yanks. In LA they brought their radios to listen to Vince Scully to explain to then what was going on, because they were to busy talking to their friends rather then watching the game, or did not understand what was going on. Came in 3rd inning and left in 7th inning, cause it took hours to get out of the dumb parking lot. no public transportation, except 1 bus line to downtown. |
|
|
| (1182182) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Sat Oct 20 18:28:26 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 17:01:15 2012. Actually what happened with the Giants is that with the Dodgers gone, there a bunch of sportswriters who had nothing to do, and since the Giants were in a pretty good period for them, and had some personalities that were engaging like Huff, Frank Gifford, etc, they became something those writers could work with. |
|
|
| (1182184) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 20 18:29:51 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Oct 20 18:21:29 2012. This, like much of your speculation, is completely unlikely. |
|
|
| (1182185) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Sat Oct 20 18:30:55 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 16:55:50 2012. But Dumont was gone by 1956 |
|
|
| (1182195) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 19:21:37 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Sat Oct 20 18:28:26 2012. ...which indirectly verifies what I said namely the transfer of the Brooklyn franchise helped pave the way for the transformation of the country from a baseball to football emphasis and what you describe was part of it! |
|
|
|
Page 4 of 5 |
||
