|
|
| Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? (1181375) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 5 of 5 |
||
|
| (1182201) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sat Oct 20 20:29:48 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Oct 20 18:21:29 2012. Ebbets Field was beyond renovation. I went to the last game played there and the neighborhood was really bad! As sad as the occassion was, I left Ebbets with mixed emotions. O'Malley was right in trying to find a new home for the Dodgers. Sadly, it was not in Brooklyn or anywhere in the City! |
|
|
| (1182202) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Sat Oct 20 20:36:49 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by chud1 on Sat Oct 20 11:28:30 2012. Yea, like Wagner was totally unaware that O'Malley was was flying back and forth from NYC to LA! He couldn't have been that stupid, unless Robert Moses really pulled the wool over his eyes! |
|
|
| (1182206) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Sat Oct 20 20:56:45 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by merrick1 on Sat Oct 20 18:30:55 2012. Dumont actually kind of morphed into what became known as Metromedia - it never had the capital to keep up with ABC/CBS/NBC, plus there were not enough affiliates around for four big networks in the 50's. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1182219) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Oct 20 22:13:20 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Gene B. on Sat Oct 20 17:14:31 2012. You have to remember what the thinking was in the late 1950s. It's only been in the last 30 years or so that people have realized the importance of mass transit and why LA now has train lines it didn't have back then. |
|
|
| (1182220) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Sat Oct 20 22:16:22 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. Actually, LA Is a Lakers town first (it's the only city other than where the NBA is the only big pro team where the NBA is the big team). People in LA live and die with the Lakers before anyone else.The Dodgers are second by a considerable margin, followed by USC and UCLA football, then the Kings (now that they've won the Stanley Cup), then Angels, Clippers, Ducks and somewhere at the bottom is the NFL. There's a reason the NFL has not had a team in LA since the Rams and Raiders left after the 1994 season. |
|
|
| (1182234) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Lou From Middletown NY on Sun Oct 21 00:02:33 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:08:19 2012. Actually, the reason O'Malley started looking for a bigger ballpark is because he was getting beat at the time by the Braves, who started drawing 2 million a year in Milwaukee. Plus, his numbers were going down every year, and he was afraid that they would be able to spend more on their farm system, as they were packing them County Stadium, a bigger ball park than O'Malley's small, antiquated ballpark in a declining neighborhood.Funny how channel 9 became the Mets station from day one. As has been said, many works about this whole thing, and here is a couple more - Roger Kahn, who wrote the classic Boys of Summer wrote a book about the 1947-1957 era called...of course, The Era, he gives a lot of the gory details. Also, the Pete Golenbock history of the Mets, Amazin', has a nice history of the Giant/Dodger move, and how Bill Shea and Branch Rickey got MLB to expand. Bill Shea was one helluva guy, and had much more to do with New York sports than just the Mets. Did you know he basically put together the deals that created the Nets, Jets and Islanders? Pretty well....amazing! |
|
|
| (1182242) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by mcorivervsaf on Sun Oct 21 01:10:59 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sat Oct 20 14:56:34 2012. Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. Everyone has to find a reason to blame Walter O'Malley, but that is just short-sighted. Back then, not too many people knew what was going to happen, until it was announced that the team would move. He tried to keep the Dodgers in Brooklyn, but he had no choice. Once L.A. let it be known that they wanted an MLB team, they gave him a big reason to leave: a lot of land, and space in Chavez Ravine. By the way, I did look it up! Attendance was declining at Ebbets Field, contrary to what you may have claimed! Most of those loyal fans had moved out to Long Island, and they had difficulty going to a game, by car! Not to mention the lack of parking spaces outside Ebbets Field! 750 parking spaces? Not enough!The reason that O'Malley chose Atlantic & Flatbush for the new site of the ballpark, was because the LIRR terminated there! All those fans didn't have to drive there, because public transportation would provide them the accessibility: bus, subway, or railroad. I understand that many fans at the time were very angry, and upset, with the loss of their team, but people really need to check their own emotions at the door! It was a business decision, and O'Malley, who was unable to convince Robert Moses to put the new ballpark in Downtown Brooklyn, where it should have been, decided to leave. Not only did he leave, but he took the Giants with him. Again, what's done is done. |
|
|
| (1182247) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Sun Oct 21 01:23:43 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Oct 17 07:23:47 2012. Interesting but true. |
|
|
| (1182254) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Sun Oct 21 01:58:35 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by mcorivervsaf on Sun Oct 21 01:10:59 2012. Yes attendance was declining but of course everybody has to throw out 1957 as it became apparent midway through the season that it was a lame duck season. Actually, what apparently had happened was that in 1956 when the Dodgers unexpectedly came from behind and won the NL pennant on the last weekend of the season, the Dodgers went to Japan after the World Series and on the way home, stopped off in LA where O'Malley was taken on a helicopter ride over Chaveez Ravine and reportedly told LA city officials at that time he was coming and not to be concerned as he still had a season to play in Brooklyn to make all the arrangements. Of course he lied to the people in Brooklyn throughout the early part of 1957 that there was still time to do something but he was a goner.The only thing to add is to check the attendance of other teams at the same time. They were all declining. Baseball had reached its heights just after the war. The country in many areas was suburbanizing. People were leaving the inner cities throughout. Dodger attendance in 1957 was third in the NL and was still over 1,000,000 the nagic number for acceptability at the time. And revenue wise, the Dodgers were still making more money than Milwaukee despite the attendance differential and the Braves were the only team outdrawing the Dodgers in the National League. Since the fan base were moving in droves to Long Island, wasn't Flushing Meadows a much more viable location? The big question still remains if LA had not made that totally immoral offer to O'Malley, would he have accepted the Flushing Meadow site? And of course 20/20 hindsight shows clearly (as the Mets later proved) that it would have been a complete success. And whether you just want to throw out the eminent domain argument, as Barclay Center has shown there would have been years and years of litigation over the use of Title I funding to condemn land for a ball park to benefit an entity already making more money than they knew what to do with! |
|
|
| (1182277) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by BrightonExpBob on Sun Oct 21 11:57:11 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 20 18:29:51 2012. I remember the 1958 Season when some company ran bus charters from NYC to Phillies games when both the Giants and Dodgers were in town for about $25.00, you got a round trip ticket, reserved seat and a hot dog and a soft drink. There were 2 or 3 pick up spots in Brooklyn and Manhatten and the busses were usually sold out. Dont know about after 58 cause I was already in LA |
|
|
| (1182283) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Sun Oct 21 13:06:29 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by BrightonExpBob on Sun Oct 21 11:57:11 2012. .....and also what happened is that channel 9 with lots of time to fill signed a deal with the Phillies to televise 75-80 Phillie games into New York...and channel 13 of all stations began televising Cardinals and Pirates games involving the Dodgers and Giants.Both of these turned out to be 1 year duration as the Yankees threatened to begin televising Yankee games into Philadelphia. |
|
|
| (1182290) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Oct 21 15:23:58 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Sun Oct 21 13:06:29 2012. Channel 13 at the time was a commercial station. |
|
|
| (1182298) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by merrick1 on Sun Oct 21 16:38:51 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Oct 21 15:23:58 2012. Channel Thirteen is celebrating their 50th anniversary. I guess that means they became a Public Broadcasting station in 1962. |
|
|
| (1182361) | |
Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Oct 22 02:44:54 2012, in response to Re: Polo grounds shuttle was to be connected to Lenox Line, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed Oct 17 13:54:51 2012. That's true, but it is something to look at for the future. Given how much has changed in recent years, it may at some point be viable to do something there as noted in other posts below. |
|
|
| (1182362) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Oct 22 02:53:39 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Oct 20 18:29:51 2012. That's my view on what would have happened.Another possibility is that sometime in the late 1960s, there would have been a push to build a football-only stadium in Queens for the Giants on the site of what of course became Shea Stadium (and now Citi Field). That part of the equation could also have been much different from what actually happened because if the Giants were in a new Queens stadium around 1970 or so, The Meadowlands would not exist as we would know it (you would have had the racetrack regardless as for years that was the main source of revenue for the complex). How that would have changed the NFL is anyone's guess. |
|
|
| (1182368) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Oct 22 06:04:25 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Oct 22 02:53:39 2012. The Jets were already playing in Queens in 1964. |
|
|
| (1182369) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Oct 22 07:32:16 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Oct 22 06:04:25 2012. Yes, but remember, in the scenario I wrote, the Jets would have shared Yankee Stadium with the Yanks and Giants for 1-2 years while the Polo Grounds (which was the Jets home from 1960-'63) was rebuilt into a modern (for 1964-'66), football-only stadium, which would have meant there was no stadium at Willets Point since the Jets would have been playing in a new Polo Grounds in upper Manhattan. That would have left the Willets Point site open for the Giants to take for themselves if they wanted in the late 1960s-early '70s before The Meadowlands came into play.. |
|
|
| (1182370) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Oct 22 07:38:27 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by BrightonExpBob on Sat Oct 20 18:09:36 2012. As said, what I suspect would have happened was the Dodgers would have played one season in the Polo Grounds while Ebbets Field underwent a total renovation to get it to where the Dodgers could wait out Moses and then get the stadium they really wanted at the Atlantic Yards around 1972-'73. I suspect they would have played in that stadium until the mid-late 2000s and then might very well have moved to a new stadium on the site the Cyclones stadium currently sits on while the domed stadium was torn down and replaced by the current Barclays Center OR the Barclays Center would have been built on the Coney Island site.Like I said, MANY things in all of sports might very well have been different if the Dodgers had never moved. |
|
|
| (1182371) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Oct 22 07:58:42 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Oct 22 07:32:16 2012. They would not have agreed to play at the Polo Grounds is my point. |
|
|
| (1182372) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Oct 22 08:00:03 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Oct 22 07:38:27 2012. They would not have waited out anything. There was no way any Major League Baseball was going to be played at the site of Ebbets Field past around 1960. |
|
|
| (1182373) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Mon Oct 22 08:07:07 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Spider-Pig on Mon Oct 22 08:00:03 2012. Agreed.......I still say that if there is no immoral offer from the LA city government on the table, they take the Shea Stadium site. The reality is the more you look at it, the more it becomes apparent it was the answer given what was happening to the portion of the Dodger fan base to which O'Malley wished to appeal (middle class and upper class white people). This hog wash well it's not Brooklyn was only uttered by him when he had the LA offer in his pocket and knew he was leaving (again, the deal was sealed after the Dodgers junket to Japan after the 1956 World Series when he helicoptered over Chavez Ravine and told LA city officials he was definitely coming and not to take seriously anything he said as he still had to lie to the people in NYC to protect as much of the gate as possible).I defy anybody to tell me the Shea Stadium site was not perfect and as I've said, big deal it wasn't in Brooklyn. Queens and Brooklyn are contiguous portions of the same land mass i.e. Long Island. As a matter of fact at one time you knew you hhad crossed from Brooklyn to Queens when the street signs changed from white lettering on black to blue lettering on white. Now they've even taken that distinction away. |
|
|
| (1182416) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by mcorivervsaf on Mon Oct 22 13:23:07 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Mon Oct 22 08:07:07 2012. Come on. If the Brooklyn Dodgers play their home games in Queens, Brooklyn fans would NOT come to the games. The fans were very vocal about this, when they started a rally, a few years before the move. Fans had signs saying, 'Our answer to Queens and L.A. is NO! They should stay in Brooklyn!' What was left of the diminishing fanbase, is not going to watch their beloved Dodgers in another borough, when the team should really stay where they belong! It's sacrilegious! This should be obvious, but Queens is not Brooklyn. Now don't tell me just because the Football Giants & Jets made that successful, much later, moving to the Meadowlands in N.J., no less, that the Dodgers should have done that to stay in NYC! Could you imagine the Yankees pulling out of the Bronx, and moving to New Jersey? Certainly not! |
|
|
| (1182428) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Mon Oct 22 14:22:34 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by MATHA531 on Mon Oct 22 08:07:07 2012. you know..thats pretty lame..regardless of how you want to spin it..BROOKLYN is BROOKLYN..QUEENS IS QUEENS.Not "Queenslyn".. So what the both are PART of the LONG ISLAND land mass..SEPARATE BORO'S..DIFFERENT COUNTIES..as different as Nassau and Suffolk.. |
|
|
| (1182442) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Catfish 44 on Mon Oct 22 15:37:25 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Edwards! on Mon Oct 22 14:22:34 2012. I agree. |
|
|
| (1182451) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by BrightonExpBob on Mon Oct 22 16:39:17 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by Wallyhorse on Mon Oct 22 07:32:16 2012. But the Football Giants still played in Yankee Stadium until 1973 or 74 when it was renovated, then what New Haven one Year and Shea One Year before they went to Meadowlands. Never new why they never went back to Yankee Stadium |
|
|
| (1182461) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Mon Oct 22 18:02:17 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by BrightonExpBob on Mon Oct 22 16:39:17 2012. yankee stadium was renovated from 1973 to 1976. da football giants played a few games before da renovation started in 1973 if memory serves me right.chud1 |
|
|
| (1182462) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Mon Oct 22 18:02:17 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by BrightonExpBob on Mon Oct 22 16:39:17 2012. yankee stadium was renovated from 1973 to 1976. da football giants played a few games before da renovation started in 1973 if memory serves me right.chud1 |
|
|
| (1182463) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by chud1 on Mon Oct 22 18:05:22 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by chud1 on Mon Oct 22 18:02:17 2012. sorry for da double post on this.chud1 |
|
|
| (1182465) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by MATHA531 on Mon Oct 22 18:27:18 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by mcorivervsaf on Mon Oct 22 13:23:07 2012. mc....I won't question you there was a lot of that at the time, absotively posilutely. But also, a lot of the fan base that O'Malley wanted to appeal to were following the American dream as the country was surbanizing. Check the attendance figues for all the teams. They were in a state of decline as the nouveau riche were leaving the inner cities for their own home in the suburbs.Yes at the beginning there might have been that attitude. But the games would still have been on channel 9; the team would still be the Brooklyn Dodgers with all the historic ties. Much of that resentment would have evaporated as fans considered just what the alternative would have been. Although it's off topic, I've had the same discussion with some of my friends about the Islanders ultimately re-locating to the Barclay Center. Of course the best solution would be if somebody would spring for a new building; but Nassau County and the town of Hempstead are broke and people in the referendum showed how little the vast majority of the populace wanted their taxes to go up. So...come 2015, it will be probably for the Islanders either Brooklyn or good bye. Some fans will say Brooklyn over my dead body. But then they'll turn on the games on MSG, see the same uniforms, the same players and realize just what the alternative would have been. Sure I agree a locaton in Brooklyn for the Dodgers was probably the best solution to the problem. But let's face it. The eminent domain laws were there and while after a long court battle, O'Malley might have prevailed if Moses were willing to fight for him, it would have taken years. The Barclay Center litigaton makes that quite clear and at least regarding Barclay Center, there is some semblance of housing involved in the plan (whether that housing will ever be built is a complete other issue). So as so many of the Dodgers fan base living on Long Island began to realize Shea Stadium or whatever it would have been called had oodles and oodles of parking, a LIRR station in the complex that resistance would have disappeared. After all, a good portion of the Mets fan base when Sheat Stadium opened were Dodger fans! There is absolutely not the slightest doubt that Queens would have worked but O'Malley was already committed to LA. |
|
|
| (1182661) | |
Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Oct 24 02:25:23 2012, in response to Re: What if the Dodgers had never moved?, posted by chud1 on Mon Oct 22 18:02:17 2012. They played ONE regular season game in Yankee Stadium in 1973 before the ballpark closed, then played the rest of that season and the next one at the Yale Bowl before all four teams famously shared Shea Stadium for 1975. |
|
|
|
Page 5 of 5 |
||
