O' Malley kept the attendance low?

[Yankeebiscuitfan]

I heard some rumours that Walter O' Smelley did everything to keep the attendance low as possible.

It is said that the ticket office didn't answer phone calls, that the best seats were not sold.

Can someone of you confirm this?

[EdTarbusz]

This sounds like conspiracy theory BS. Keeping attendance low, would have taken money out of the Dodgers coffers.Ebbets Field had more to do with keeping attendance low than O'Malley did.

[willisraverchk77]

It is said that the ticket office didn't answer phone calls, that the best seats were not sold.


Said by whom?

[EdTarbusz]

Said by whom?

Damon Rice in Seasons Past for one. I think that Golenbock brought it up in Bums, too.

[Brian McKenna]

Not this subject specifically - but I'm hesitant to believe Golenbock on many matters. He seems to print an awful lot of unsubstantiated rumors.

[willisraverchk77]

... I think that Golenbock brought it up in Bums, too.

Golenbock I would take with a grain of salt. I tried to read his book on Bobby Allison and the Alabama Gang, but it was so full of inaccuracies and errors I gave it away to Goodwill before I even made it to chapter 3.

[Yankeebiscuitfan]

Not this subject specifically - but I'm hesitant to believe Golenbock on many matters. He seems to print an awful lot of unsubstantiated rumors.

So do I . That is why I am asking.

IMO he was a SOB, but I can't believe he would do something like this.

[DODGER DEB]

Not this subject specifically - but I'm hesitant to believe Golenbock on many matters. He seems to print an awful lot of unsubstantiated rumors.


On the subject of Golenbock you and I are in total agreement, bkmckenna.

Reading through his books makes me see red......because I was actually there, and, for the most part, know the truth. I don't think he has ever checked a rumor before he called it a fact, and then tried to "sell it".

c.

[Yankeebiscuitfan]

On the subject of Golenbock you and I are in total agreement, bkmckenna.

Reading through his books makes me see red......because I was actually there, and, for the most part, know the truth. I don't think he has ever checked a rumor before he called it a fact, and then tried to "sell it".

c.

So in this case DD, what is the truth?

[DODGER DEB]

So in this case DD, what is the truth?

I don't believe there is any truth to it, YBF.

Anyone who knew the Big "O", and how he operated, would ever entertain the thought for one second that he turned away any $$$$$$. The truth is just that simple!

c.

[Yankeebiscuitfan]

I don't believe there is any truth to it, YBF.

Anyone who knew the Big "O", and how he operated, would ever entertain that the thought for one second that he turned away any $$$$$$. The truth is just that simple!

c.

Even if that could be the reason for him to move to LA and make more money over there?

[donzblock]

That O'Malley was a sly dog, always looking for the perfect hydrant or tree or grove full of mulch.

[EdTarbusz]

Not this subject specifically - but I'm hesitant to believe Golenbock on many matters. He seems to print an awful lot of unsubstantiated rumors.

I have to agree. I would double check any claim that he makes. Bums printed some obvious lies about the move to LA.

[Yankeebiscuitfan]

That O'Malley was a sly dog, always looking for the perfect hydrant or tree or grove full of mulch.

I don't get it. Probably because I don't know what the word mulch means. I can't find it in a dictionary either.

[penncentralpete]

I don't get it. Probably because I don't know what the word mulch means. I can't find it in a dictionary either.

Main Entry: mulch
Pronunciation: \ˈməlch\
Function: noun
Etymology: perhaps irregular from English dialect melch soft, mild
Date: 1657
: a protective covering (as of sawdust, compost, or paper) spread or left on the ground to reduce evaporation, maintain even soil temperature, prevent erosion, control weeds, enrich the soil, or keep fruit (as strawberries) clean
— mulch transitive verb

[jaykay]

Speaking of attendance, rather than of O'Malley or Golenbock...

Branch Rickey is said to have once said (I don't have the exact quote at hand) that the best way to keep attendance high is to have the team finish second every season. This means, of course, that the team doesn't finish second the season after finishing first - which would be a letdown - but never finishes first. Sort of like a perpetual "Wait 'til next year."

I think I've heard that one before.

[MATHA531]

I have to agree. I would double check any claim that he makes. Bums printed some obvious lies about the move to LA.


And Ed, just what were some of those "lies"?

[kramer_47]

I don't think he tried to hold attendence down, lets face it the neighborhood was getting bad. People started moving out to the "burbs" or to other safer neighborhoods in Brooklyn, alot of people were afraid to go to Ebbets field at night. There was no parking you usually had to walk blocks if you drove there or walk from the train and the area around the park just wasn't what it use to be. I still blame O'M for moving but he saw the writing on the wall and a chance to get a ball park in a safe area with plenty of parking and he jumped at it with $ in his eyes. Put yourself in O'M shoes what would you have done in the same situation.

[LeoD]

I don't think he tried to hold attendence down, lets face it the neighborhood was getting bad. People started moving out to the "burbs" or to other safer neighborhoods in Brooklyn, alot of people were afraid to go to Ebbets field at night. There was no parking you usually had to walk blocks if you drove there or walk from the train and the area around the park just wasn't what it use to be. I still blame O'M for moving but he saw the writing on the wall and a chance to get a ball park in a safe area with plenty of parking and he jumped at it with $ in his eyes. Put yourself in O'M shoes what would you have done in the same situation.

I lived in the Neighborhood until 1972, and found it safe to walk the era, people who don't know what their talking about believe as you do.

[kramer_47]

I lived in the Neighborhood until 1972, and found it safe to walk the era, people who don't know what their talking about believe as you do.

Alot of people living in the neighborhood are in denial and are the last to find out that the neighborhood is shot. People that lived in the good neighborhoods like Sheepshead Bay, Gravesend, Bensonhurst etc all knew that area around Ebbets Field was shot in the 1960's.

[LeoD]

Alot of people living in the neighborhood are in denial and are the last to find out that the neighborhood is shot. People that lived in the good neighborhoods like Sheepshead Bay, Gravesend, Bensonhurst etc all knew that area around Ebbets Field was shot in the 1960's.

In other words you know better then I do what the neighborhood was like I lived in.

[kramer_47]

In other words you know better then I do what the neighborhood was like I lived in.
I'm just saying that sometimes when people live in the neighborhood they don't always see it getting bad because they lived there through many good years. I was in or near your neighborhood alot and my father's work wasn't far away from there, you did have to be careful there in the 1960's.

[LeoD]

I'm just saying that sometimes when people live in the neighborhood they don't always see it getting bad because they lived there through many good years. I was in or near your neighborhood alot and my father's work wasn't far away from there, you did have to be careful there in the 1960's.

The 60s were just like the 50s, very little change.

[kramer_47]

The 60s were just like the 50s, every little change.

You moved out of there in 1972 and it probably wasn't an overnight decision, all the neighborhoods above you starting with East New York and coming south towards you were already getting bad for years. So it was only natural for your area to fall also, I admit the city help this along, all the good neighborhoods from the 1920's-1940's becoming crime ridden.

[kramer_47]

The only person in my family who carried a gun was my uncle who was NYPD, we didn't need a gun we walked our streets any hour of the day with no problem. Maybe I was wrong if your father was carrying a gun in the 1920's maybe the neighborhood was starting to go bad then, why carry a gun if the neighborhood is good.

[metfan13]

This conversation has taken an odd turn.

[DODGER DEB]

This thread has gotten waaaaay off topic. I have deleted threads that were both offensive and personal. I strongly suggest that everyone, return to the topic of this thread...and I do mean, everyone!

Thank you.

c

[LeoD]

The only person in my family who carried a gun was my uncle who was NYPD, we didn't need a gun we walked our streets any hour of the day with no problem. Maybe I was wrong if your father was carrying a gun in the 1920's maybe the neighborhood was starting to go bad then, why carry a gun if the neighborhood is good.

That was a joke, but you knew that.

[Aa3rt]

Perhaps this is "old news" to many of you BROOKLYN faithful, however I found this write up in The Baseball Hall Of Shame, Volume 2 by Bruce Nash and Allan Zullo.

From the chapter The Rear End Of The Front Office "Walter O'Malley BROOKLYN-Los Angeles, N.L. 1951-70"

"Walter O'Malley was one of the tightest of the tightwads in baseball. Even though he had deep pockets, he made Scrooge look like Santa Claus with a blank check.

The Dodger owner displayed his greedy side for all to see in 1962. When he built Dodger Stadium, he deliberately eliminated drinking fountains to boost sales of beer and soft drinks. On Opening Day, April 10, 1962, one thirsty reporter noted ruefully that the only two drinking fountains in the $22 million stadium were in the dugouts.

To this revelation, O'Malley, through a spokesman, replied that there were 221 cold water faucets in 48 bathrooms in the stadium. But, as Los Angeles Times columnist Jim Murray pointed out, 'Who wants to hang like a sloth from the wall to get a drink of water?'

The City Health Department intervened, directing O'Malley to place 11 drinking fountains in the stadium's preferred seating areas and two in the bleachers.

O'Malley stuck it not only to the fans but also to the tenants, the Los Angeles Angels, a new expansion team that played at Dodger Stadium from 1962-65. Angels owner Gene Autry, who counted O'Malley as a good friend, discovered to his dismay that kindly old Walter was cheating him.

An Angel accountant noticed that while the rich and successful Dodgers were drawing 76 percent of the customers into the stadium, O'Malley was charging the Angels for 50 percent of the toilet paper used in the ball park.

Before long, Autry's accountant came up with proof that O'Malley was billing the Angels for fictitious items like "cleaning office windows" when in fact the Angels front office worked out of windowless rooms in the stadium basement.

On still another day, Autry learned that he was paying for the care and watering of the stadium grass when his club was at home. Autry, who was also in the hotel business, told a reporter, 'I'd have a hell of a time getting people who rent my rooms to water the posies. That's the responsibility of the landlord.'

So Autry took his team and ran off to Anaheim, where the folks built him a shiny new stadium that he didn't have to share with a cheapskate.

Autry need not have taken O'Malley's stinginess personally. Walter's own players were victims of his skinflint ways. Like other owners in championship years, O'Malley rewarded his teams with rings as World Series momentoes. Whenever the Dodgers won again, their boss gave them new rings-but only after he first collected the old ones."

If this writeup can be believed, it sounds like Mr. O'Malley would do almost anything for the almighty dollar. Turning away revenue does not sound like it was in the makeup of this curmudgeon.

[EdTarbusz]

And Ed, just what were some of those "lies"?

That O'Malley demanded free land from NYC, that Dodger Stadium was a go before the Dodgers moved, that the land that Dodger Stadium was on was offered to O'Malley free of charge, for starters.

[MATHA531]

That O'Malley demanded free land from NYC, that Dodger Stadium was a go before the Dodgers moved, that the land that Dodger Stadium was on was offered to O'Malley free of charge, for starters.

Really...seems to me all three of these are truths.....although the second might be subject to some debate as ultimately a referendum was necessary (I do understand that he swapped Wrigley Field for the land at Chavez Ravine but that was hardly equal value, now was it)...as far as the first, isn't that what happened...he demanded the City of New York seize land from the Pennsylvania Railroad and hand it to him using powers of eminent domain that were illegal under New York law? You know better?

[EdTarbusz]

Really...seems to me all three of these are truths.....although the second might be subject to some debate as ultimately a referendum was necessary (I do understand that he swapped Wrigley Field for the land at Chavez Ravine but that was hardly equal value, now was it)...as far as the first, isn't that what happened...he demanded the City of New York seize land from the Pennsylvania Railroad and hand it to him using powers of eminent domain that were illegal under New York law? You know better?

O'Malley's master plan in New York was for the city to buy the Atlantic Avenue land and than sell it to him. Sullivan's book says that according to Caro, that Robert Moses was not above going around the rules about Title I when it suited him, whether by having a new law passed, holding a special vote or just ignoring it. I don't think the illegality arguement is really justified. I think that someone as powerful as Moses refusing to do something simply because it was perceived as being illegal is more than a little ridiculous. I haven't read Caro's book, but will when I track down a copy of it.

Dodger Stadium was definitely not a go when the Dodgers moved. The referendum wasn't until mid-season 1958. Even after it passed, there were lawsuits to prevent its building (one spearheaded by the owners of the San Diego Padres). If Dodger Stadium had been a go before the Dodgers moved, I think it would have opened before 1962. Also, according to Sullivan, O'Malley had to pay for the Chavez Ravine land. It wasn't just handed to him.

[MATHA531]

O'Malley's master plan in New York was for the city to buy the Atlantic Avenue land and than sell it to him. Sullivan's book says that according to Caro, that Robert Moses was not above going around the rules about Title I when it suited him, whether by having a new law passed, holding a special vote or just ignoring it. I don't think the illegality arguement is really justified. I think that someone as powerful as Moses refusing to do something simply because it was perceived as being illegal is more than a little ridiculous. I haven't read Caro's book, but will when I track down a copy of it.

Dodger Stadium was definitely not a go when the Dodgers moved. The referendum wasn't until mid-season 1958. Even after it passed, there were lawsuits to prevent its building (one spearheaded by the owners of the San Diego Padres). If Dodger Stadium had been a go before the Dodgers moved, I think it would have opened before 1962. Also, according to Sullivan, O'Malley had to pay for the Chavez Ravine land. It wasn't just handed to him.

Ed...there is one small mention of O'Malley in Caro's book....it was a minor issue.

If O'Malley wanted the land so badly, why didn't he buy it directly from the Pennsylvania Railroad which owned it....remember in 1956 there was no MTA...also while you might think Moses could go and pass any law he wanted, the reality is if he broke the law, there would have been multiple law suits by people screaming about this hand out to O'Malley and believe me he would have mobed anyway using the excuse nothing can be done in NY...he knew damn well the Atlantic Yards (as it's called today) was a no go from the beginning and O'Malley knew it.

[EdTarbusz]

Ed...there is one small mention of O'Malley in Caro's book....it was a minor issue.

If O'Malley wanted the land so badly, why didn't he buy it directly from the Pennsylvania Railroad which owned it....remember in 1956 there was no MTA...also while you might think Moses could go and pass any law he wanted, the reality is if he broke the law, there would have been multiple law suits by people screaming about this hand out to O'Malley and believe me he would have mobed anyway using the excuse nothing can be done in NY...he knew damn well the Atlantic Yards (as it's called today) was a no go from the beginning and O'Malley knew it.

Apparently Caro made references to Moses's business practices in getting around Title I. My reading of the situation is Moses was more important to O'Malley than O'Malley was to Moses. My belief is also that if there had been a public outcry, Moses would have shrugged and said 'so what?' Moses sounds like he was opene to the condemning of said land if the New York Board of Estimate agreed to the plan. I think the Dodgers would have remained in Brooklyn if it had been strictly a Brooklyn matter, but whether they would still be in Brooklyn, I don't know.

As far as buying the land, if that was the only land needed, than O'Malley made have been able to purchase it on his own, but he needed more land for the stadium and his parking garage and without help from city officials the cost would have been prohibitive. In Sullivan's book, he believes that if it had been strictly a Brooklyn matter, that Brooklyn officials would have probably helped O'Malley with the purchase.