How do you think your life would have different?

[Shotgun Shuba]

If the Dodgers had stayed, how do you think your lives would have been different? Would you have been the same person you are today? Less cynical? Would sports itself be different? Did that first shocking moment that cemented the idea that adoration for a team was not enough send the sports world spiraling towards oblivion? All of these 50 years later, what do you think?

[MATHA531]

If the Dodgers had stayed, how do you think your lives would have been different? Would you have been the same person you are today? Less cynical? Would sports itself be different? Did that first shocking moment that cemented the idea that adoration for a team was not enough send the sports world spiraling towards oblivion? All of these 50 years later, what do you think?

Shotgun...this is a question that is impossible to answer. Nobody knows on a personal level what would be different.

I do know that studies done by the Smithsonian in the 1960's unequivacbly show the theft of the franchise from Brooklyn was a major factor nationally in the loss of interest in baseball and helped pave the way for the NFL to become the real national pastime.

As for me personally, while I feel it is incumbent on me to participate in debates about this as we must never forget or forgive. I understand that I am just about in the last generation of people who have a concept of what Brooklyn Dodger baseball meant, anybody younger than me (I was 11 in 1957) probably has little knowledge or understanding of just what happened and people are beginning to buy in to the propaganda espoused by certain elements in the imposter Los Angeles National League baseball organization that the prime culprit was Robert Moses, that the fat slob was "forced" to move the franchise...all of this a last ditch effort by these people (Vin Scully and Tom Lasorda come to mind) to see the fat slob get into the Hall of Fame before they pass from the scene (something I am sure will probably happen 10 or 20 years down the line when our voices are stilled) but the reality is that I don't give it one thought 99.9% of the time and I really doubt extremely that in the long run my life would be one bit different whether they stayed or left.

[musial6]

I wouldn't have killed my first wife. She supported the move to L.A.

[strummer]

Babe Ruth may have saved baseball from the shame and disenfranchisement of the fans with the Black Sox scandal; and Jackie Robinson and night baseball may have saved baseball from the growing disinterest and suburbanism after WWII, but nothing has saved baseball or changed the minds of fans from the increased cynicism first brought about by the move of the Brooklyn Dodgers. That event can be pointed to as the start or restart of fans being disallusioned with the people who run the game and the adoption of the continuing idea that the whole thing is business and run for the money, not the fans.

If the Dodgers had not moved, some other team would have. I don't think things would have stayed the way they were. The overriding ambition and greed of the owners would have been manifested by other events and the fans would feel as they do now. Keeping the Dodgers in Brooklyn would not have changed things; it would have only delayed by a few years the fans being aware of the owners' desires in running the game.

[MattM]

If the Dodgers had not moved, some other team would have. I don't think things would have stayed the way they were. The overriding ambition and greed of the owners would have been manifested by other events and the fans would feel as they do now. Keeping the Dodgers in Brooklyn would not have changed things; it would have only delayed by a few years the fans being aware of the owners' desires in running the game.

Keeping the Dodgers in Brooklyn probably wouldn't have stopped the owners from taking advantage of players, and eventually the players taking advantage of owners. Had O'Malley decided to stay, he would have been the hero of Brooklyn. I also believe that people still would have been moving away from Brooklyn and out to Long Island, that's just urbanization.

If the dodgers decided to stay, and history didn't change, they would have won more championships (59, 63), and Sandy Koufax would be in the hall as a Brooklyn Dodger.

[EbtsFldGuy]

Don't think my life would have been different, except that there'd be no need for my devotion to the MEMORY of the Brooklyn Dodgers.

Brooklyn sure would have become different, though, as it has. We've debated on other threads whether Ebbets Field would have survived to this day. I say yes, but only with major infusion of resources of many kinds.

Hard question: would fans have traveled from Long Island and NJ to the Flatbush of today?

Again, I say yes, but maybe not in the numbers who go to Yankee Stadium.

[Shotgun Shuba]

Ebbets Field would not have been able to survive the "plastic fantastic" era and would have been destroyed long before the Retro phase arrived. I think the parking problem and low capacity was really annoying to O.

[ci11829]

I saw a lot of games at ebbits field and in 1960 I played a high school game on it. To me the dodgers and Giants attendance was not what the owners wanted, and they O AND H decided it was time to move. The games that the Giants and Dodgers played on those fields were classics.My cousin was a contestant on the knothole gang and won with Gil Hodges as guest. I have many memories of ebbits and the polo grounds, and so many battles between these two teams.:)

[MATHA531]

I saw a lot of games at ebbits field and in 1960 I played a high school game on it. To me the dodgers and Giants attendance was not what the owners wanted, and they O AND H decided it was time to move. The games that the Giants and Dodgers played on those fields were classics.My cousin was a contestant on the knothole gang and won with Gil Hodges as guest. I have many memories of ebbits and the polo grounds, and so many battles between these two teams.:)

Yes to the Giants who had basically lost their fan base and were drawing perhaps 600,000 a year.

Most assuredly no to the Dodgers....they were outdrawing all but one National League team (Milwaukee) and attendance was still over a million despite the fact they were a lame duck team from 25 May 1957 on....this does not excuse the fat slob's theft of the franchise from Brooklyn.

[EbtsFldGuy]

[QUOTE=ci11829]I saw a lot of games at ebbits field and in 1960 I played a high school game on it.

Didn't the destruction of EF begin on February 23, 1960?

Maybe you played a game in 1958 or 1959, but 1960 was not possible. By baseball season that year , EF was in rubble.

[TheBulldog]

Had the Dodgers remained in New York, I don't believe they would have remained in Brooklym. The Dodgers would have been playing in what is today Shea Stadium. The same architect that designed Dodger Stadium in La, designed Shea. The ballpark would have been the same as Shea is today. I really don't think it was possible to build a stadium in Brooklyn at that time, unless Ebbets Field was renovated.

[MATHA531]

Had the Dodgers remained in New York, I don't believe they would have remained in Brooklym. The Dodgers would have been playing in what is today Shea Stadium. The same architect that designed Dodger Stadium in La, designed Shea. The ballpark would have been the same as Shea is today. I really don't think it was possible to build a stadium in Brooklyn at that time, unless Ebbets Field was renovated.

Hard to tell...there are a couple of myths about the theft of the franchise that are often repeated and they are most assuredly myths

1. Could the team have remained at Ebbets Field for another decade? Of course they could have...Ebbets Field was no older than Fenway Park and Wrigley Field and last time I checked both are still going strong. The park was not crumbling...some renovation was necessary true but clearly they could have continued playing there for a while.

2. The other myth is Robert Moses. Moses certainly had quite a bit to answer for when he met his maker, he certainly hurt many many people. But in the case of the fat slob, he was completely correct. To the fat slob it was about land and money....he wanted his own ball park but it was the public's obligation to provide him the land at a very cheap price. If he wanted his own park and land so much, why didn't he go out and buy the land at Atlantic and Flatbush? He expected the City of New York to break New York State law, condemn the land under eminent domain and give it to him for a bargain price. NYS law prohibits the exercise of eminent domain to give private land to another private organization. The fat slob didn't even have the decency to offer the land where Ebbets Field was located to the city in exchange for the land at Atlantic & Flatbush (it is interesting to note that part of his deal to have the city of Los Angeles steal the land at Chavez Ravine was to offer in exchange the land where Wrigley Field was located but nobody ever brings this up)....

Actually, although it wasn't clear then, it is clear now that there were places for him to acquire land and build a state of the art ballpark..Coney Island were Keyspan Park is located (great mass transit facilities and the Belt Parkway nearby)...or perhaps somewhere in Nassau County where he claimed many of his fans were now living. Would it have annoyed Brooklyn fans if the team were playing in Nassau County...yes to some degree but they would have quickly gotten over it when considering the alternatives.

On all these accounts, it is clear the fat slob really never wanted to stay in the New York area. His treachery, lies and overall conduct in this sordid affair makes it clear that he was truly one of the great villains of the 20th century.

[TheBulldog]

Matha, I agree with your statements especially #2. Had he offered Ebbets Field in exchange for land there might have been a different outcome.Once O'Malley set his deadline in 1955, he was looking far beyond Brooklyn. He knew he would never get the Atlantic and Flatbush site unless he bought it privatly and he wasn't going to do that. He would have done very well at the Shea site had he gone along with the program, but of course he didn't want to share the wealth.