Just How Embarrassing Is It Really?

[johncap]

All-Time Records..............W.......L .......%....Avg Annual Attendance
Phillies........................8,853-10,029....469.............940,335
Cubs..........................10,044-9,527....513.............999,465
Red Sox.......................8,540-8,026.....516...........1,237,915

Note there is a disparity in the attendance because the Cubs almost were playing in the Civil War days while the Red Sox didn't come into existence until 1901....

[Steve Jeltz]

For this sorry franchise, the Phils aren't embarrased at all. The Phillies offices probably have a trophy somewhere recognizing their 10,000th loss. The Phillies should hang banners in their park honoring all of the 100 loss clubs of the past, like other teams honor their past championship clubs.

What the Yankees, Celtics, and Canadiens are to winning, the Phillies are to losing. No other team in the history of any sport, professional, college, little league, comes close to matching the Phils noxious stench and utter futility.

[johncap]

For this sorry franchise, the Phils aren't embarrased at all. The Phillies offices probably have a trophy somewhere recognizing their 10,000th loss. The Phillies should hang banners in their park honoring all of the 100 loss clubs of the past, like other teams honor their past championship clubs.

What the Yankees, Celtics, and Canadiens are to winning, the Phillies are to losing. No other team in the history of any sport, professional, college, little league, comes close to matching the Phils noxious stench and utter futility.


I'd say you summed it up succinctly. And people wonder why we are the way we are here....

[Steve Jeltz]

Update: The Phils record is now 8,853-10,030. I blame the umps for the 10,000 plus losses.

[donzblock]

Don't blame Manuel: "There's not a darned thing wrong with him."

[MSUlaxer27]

All-Time Records..............W.......L .......%....Avg Annual Attendance
Phillies........................8,853-10,029....469.............940,335
Cubs..........................10,044-9,527....513.............999,465
Red Sox.......................8,540-8,026.....516...........1,237,915

Note there is a disparity in the attendance because the Cubs almost were playing in the Civil War days while the Red Sox didn't come into existence until 1901....


Phils started in 1883 so that would impact their average annual attendance as well.

The Phillies have not been one of the more successful franchises to be sure, however they are still in Philadelphia. They won the NL/AL battle over a slightly more (at times) successful franchise. In all other instances the winner was the more successful team (Cards over Browns, Sox over Braves). So of the other doormat franchises...Senators, Boston Braves, Browns...they still survive and appear to be turning things around. For the 1st time since 1938 they have their own stadium (the vet nor shibe/mack weren't built for them). Yes they've lost 10,000 games...but look at it this way...they've been able to play in close to 20,000 MLB games...few other franchises can say that.

In interest of full disclosure, I am a Met fan but know baseball history.

[johncap]

Phils started in 1883 so that would impact their average annual attendance as well.

The Phillies have not been one of the more successful franchises to be sure, however they are still in Philadelphia. They won the NL/AL battle over a slightly more (at times) successful franchise. In all other instances the winner was the more successful team (Cards over Browns, Sox over Braves). So of the other doormat franchises...Senators, Boston Braves, Browns...they still survive and appear to be turning things around. For the 1st time since 1938 they have their own stadium (the vet nor shibe/mack weren't built for them). Yes they've lost 10,000 games...but look at it this way...they've been able to play in close to 20,000 MLB games...few other franchises can say that.

In interest of full disclosure, I am a Met fan but know baseball history.

Wow, a positive spin on 100+ years of brutal futility. A few corrections of your perception....

The Phillies didn't win a battle to saty here. Most fans WERE A's fans. The Phillies were a total out and out joke from the late teens until after WWII almost without exception. Connie Mack owned, operated and managed the A's and every time he developed a great team — at least three times — he was forced to sell off the players to keep afloat. Neither team was greatly supported in the early '50s and the A's opted out rather than losing a battle of sorts to the Phillies.

To say it's an accomplishment to have played 20,000 games with the kind of futility the Phillies have largely demonstrated is kind of like, well, I can't think of oanything quite so brutal at this moment.

The Vet WAS built for the Phillies and the Eagles.

[MSUlaxer27]

Wow, a positive spin on 100+ years of brutal futility. A few corrections of your perception....

The Phillies didn't win a battle to saty here. Most fans WERE A's fans. The Phillies were a total out and out joke from the late teens until after WWII almost without exception. Connie Mack owned, operated and managed the A's and every time he developed a great team — at least three times — he was forced to sell off the players to keep afloat. Neither team was greatly supported in the early '50s and the A's opted out rather than losing a battle of sorts to the Phillies.

To say it's an accomplishment to have played 20,000 games with the kind of futility the Phillies have largely demonstrated is kind of like, well, I can't think of anything quite so brutal at this moment.

The Vet WAS built for the Phillies and the Eagles.

True the Phillies were horrible for many, many years between their WS appearances in 1915 and 1950. If Mack might have lived a little longer the A's might have stayed in Philly a few more years. Even still the A's probably wouldn't have left if the Phillies weren't there as well (no reason to leave for their own market in KC). So in effect the Phils did win the battle. They have won a WS more recently than the Cubs and Giants (some of their contemporaries). At least a time in our lifetimes (28 vs. 100 and 54 yers respectively).

I also looked into Baseball reference and for the last ten years before the A's left the Phils out drew the A's 8.3 million to 5.8 million and in 7 of the 10 years (A's in 45,47 & 48 and never again - In fairness the A's just outdrew in 47 and Phils did in 49 probably a wash). The Phils drew 1M in 46 as well. Now 1950 helped (1.2 Mil to 300K) but it seems the balance was shifted from the A's to the Phils as the 50's opened. The Phil's getting better and the A's being horrible definitely helped the shift.

I'm not from Philly, so all I can go on is stats and I never would have thought I'd defend the Phils...still they've played in their city for 125 years which only the Cubs, Pirates, Cards and Reds can say.

The Vet was built for both the Phils and Iggles but Baker Bowl and CBP were built solely for the Phils.

[Steve Jeltz]

True the Phillies were horrible for many, many years between their WS appearances in 1915 and 1950. If Mack might have lived a little longer the A's might have stayed in Philly a few more years. Even still the A's probably wouldn't have left if the Phillies weren't there as well (no reason to leave for their own market in KC). So in effect the Phils did win the battle. They have won a WS more recently than the Cubs and Giants (some of their contemporaries). At least a time in our lifetimes (28 vs. 100 and 54 yers respectively).

I also looked into Baseball reference and for the last ten years before the A's left the Phils out drew the A's 8.3 million to 5.8 million and in 7 of the 10 years (A's in 45,47 & 48 and never again - In fairness the A's just outdrew in 47 and Phils did in 49 probably a wash). The Phils drew 1M in 46 as well. Now 1950 helped (1.2 Mil to 300K) but it seems the balance was shifted from the A's to the Phils as the 50's opened. The Phil's getting better and the A's being horrible definitely helped the shift.

I'm not from Philly, so all I can go on is stats and I never would have thought I'd defend the Phils...still they've played in their city for 125 years which only the Cubs, Pirates, Cards and Reds can say.

The Vet was built for both the Phils and Iggles but Baker Bowl and CBP were built solely for the Phils.

MSU, I commend you for doing your homework. These are all facts that you posted. But there is one person that you and johncap have missed mentioning that swung the pendulum in the Phillies favor in Philly: DuPont's Bob Carpenter.

Before Carpenter bought the Phils in 1943, the Phillies survived by the profits of selling players once they displayed an ounce of talent. In essence, the Phils were a farm club for the rest of the NL. Once Carpenter bought the team from William Cox, who was forced to sell because he bet on Phils games, Carpenter started to pour money into the Phillies, particularly after WWII. Carpenter did not need to survive with player sales and gate receipts because he had DuPont millions at his disposal to improve the Phils. The Mack family soon fell well behind since they were running, to use a business analogy, a "Mom & Pop" shop to Carpenter's Wal-Mart. Once the Whiz Kids won the pennant in 1950, the A's were forgotten and it was only a matter of time before the A's left Philly.

Once the A's left, the Phils settled into a period of ennui and slowly began a downward descent while attendance sagged. Carpenter continued to dole out big bucks for 'bonus baby' players, the most notorious being Tom Qualters, who Carpenter chose to sign over Al Kaline, while the Whiz Kids aged. But the paramount reason for the Phils slow side back into the second division was the refusal to sign African American players until 1957. That decision set the Phillies back 20 years, IMO.

In the mid to late 1950's, Carpenter started to make noise about needing a new stadium to replace Shibe Park. As is the custom with Philadelphia's elected officials, politicians dragged their feet in negotiations over how to fund and what land to build it on, while others argued that a stadium was not needed. Carpenter grew frustrated and decided to look at other options. One of those options seems highly implausible.

I don't know the validity of this story, but I have read about this and you and johncap may be aware of this. It was somewhere during this time frame, between about 1957 and 1960, that Carpenter was supposedly contacted by NY leaders (or Carpenter contacted them) to possibly move the Phillies to NY. The Pirates and, possibly, the Reds were contacted by NY officials as well. How close Carpenter seriously contemplated moving the Phils to the Big Apple is not known. How ironic that would have been? Doubtful they would have been called the "NY Phillies". Nonetheless, the Phillies did not move and Carpenter would have to wait until 1971 for the Vet.

MSU, how do you feel about the "NY Phillies" honoring Willie Mays at Citi Field? :hide:

[MSUlaxer27]

MSU, I commend you for doing your homework. These are all facts that you posted. But there is one person that you and johncap have missed mentioning that swung the pendulum in the Phillies favor in Philly: DuPont's Bob Carpenter.

MSU, how do you feel about the "NY Phillies" honoring Willie Mays at Citi Field? :hide:

As I said I don't live in Philly, so I wasn't completely aware of the Phils history (I do know about Cox being banned and Veeck's plan to buy the Phils and stock them with Negro League players). I appreciate the history lesson, thank you.

Had the Phillies moved to New York, we'd probably be talking about retiring Richie Ashburn's number instead of Mays. But they again as we've posted on other threads you know how I feel about retiring numbers.:laugh

[MSUlaxer27]

As my name denotes I went to a certain school that has produced it's share of major leaguers...Garvey, Perranoski, Hobie Landrith (1st Mets pick ever), Gibson (Kirk, not Bob) and of course our only hall of famer, Robin Roberts...so I've always had a soft spot for that piece of Phils history.

[Steve Jeltz]

Robin Roberts is one of my all time favorite Phils, even though I never saw him pitch. He is a class act all the way and still has a geniune love of the game. Along with Carlton and Grover Alexander, Robby is one of the top 3 Phils pitchers in their history. I know Robin also played basketball at MSU and was a pretty good player.

[donzblock]

Robin Roberts is one of my all time favorite Phils, even though I never saw him pitch. He is a class act all the way and still has a geniune love of the game. Along with Carlton and Grover Alexander, Robby is one of the top 3 Phils pitchers in their history. I know Robin also played basketball at MSU and was a pretty good player.
Great pitcher, always fiddling with the tops of his socks (or maybe it was with the bottoms of his pants): he had an easy motion and pinpoint control. He gave up too many homers, but he was a workhorse who did far more than "just give you innings." And he won a huge pennant clincher in Ebbets Field in 1950, 4-1, pitching all 10 innings.

[Steve Jeltz]

And he won a huge pennant clincher in Ebbets Field in 1950, 4-1, pitching all 10 innings.

A great pitching duel between two greats, Robin and Don Newcombe. I cannot find the boxscore or play by play, but I believe both pitchers surrendered solo homers and the game was tied 1-1 going into the bottom of the 9th. Now, what I am going to post may have some inaccuracies as I have not read about this game in awhile and my memory is sketchy about the precise details. So, correct me if I am wrong.

In the bottom of the 9th, the Dodgers got a few hits, one of them by Newcombe, and it was 1st & 2nd with one out when, I think Carl Furrillo, got a hit to center. What I will never understand is why Dodgers 3B coach Milt Stock waved, I believe it was Cal Abrams, home on Furillo's base hit. From various accounts that I have read, the Brooklyn scouting report on Ashburn was that he had a weak throwing arm. But, Ashburn, with the throw a little up the third base line, still nailed Abrams by a considerable margin. But, if Stock holds Abrams at third, Jackie Robinson comes up with the bags loaded and 1 out. A flyball or hit would have won it for the Dodgers and a playoff would have occurred. Instead it's 2 outs and Robin escapes the inning. Then Dick Sisler hits a 3 run HR in the 10th and the Phils capture the flag.

[philliesfiend55]

How can the Cubs have 10,044 wins? I thought they just won their 10,000th game as a franchise about a week ago.

[donzblock]

A great pitching duel between two greats, Robin and Don Newcombe. I cannot find the boxscore or play by play, but I believe both pitchers surrendered solo homers and the game was tied 1-1 going into the bottom of the 9th. Now, what I am going to post may have some inaccuracies as I have not read about this game in awhile and my memory is sketchy about the precise details. So, correct me if I am wrong.

In the bottom of the 9th, the Dodgers got a few hits, one of them by Newcombe, and it was 1st & 2nd with one out when, I think Carl Furrillo, got a hit to center. What I will never understand is why Dodgers 3B coach Milt Stock waved, I believe it was Cal Abrams, home on Furillo's base hit. From various accounts that I have read, the Brooklyn scouting report on Ashburn was that he had a weak throwing arm. But, Ashburn, with the throw a little up the third base line, still nailed Abrams by a considerable margin. But, if Stock holds Abrams at third, Jackie Robinson comes up with the bags loaded and 1 out. A flyball or hit would have won it for the Dodgers and a playoff would have occurred. Instead it's 2 outs and Robin escapes the inning. Then Dick Sisler hits a 3 run HR in the 10th and the Phils capture the flag.
The game was on TV, and I watched all of it. If I remember correctly, there were runners on first and second with zero outs. Snider singled hard to center. Ashburn, who had been playing shallow, either by design or luck, came up with the ball cleanly and threw home accurately.

Cal Abams was not a fast runner and should have been held up at third by Milt Stock. Abrams was out at the plate by quite a bit. Roberts proceeded to pitch out of the inning, and Stock entered the Brooklyn Dodger Hall of Infamy. Marvelous pitching by Roberts, though, after giving up that hit to Duke.

[penncentralpete]

[QUOTE=donzblock;1173635]The game was on TV, and I watched all of it. If I remember correctly, there were runners on first and second with zero outs. Snider singled hard to center. Ashburn, who had been playing shallow, either by design or luck, came up with the ball cleanly and threw home accurately.

Snider told me (at a baseball card show in the 1980's) that a pick off play was signaled for by the Phillies' catcher. Ashburn came in very shallow to back up the play, but Roberts pitched the ball instead. Richie was very shallow when Duke lined the single and made his throw to the plate to nail Abrams from very short center, hence the result.

[donzblock]

[QUOTE=donzblock;1173635]The game was on TV, and I watched all of it. If I remember correctly, there were runners on first and second with zero outs. Snider singled hard to center. Ashburn, who had been playing shallow, either by design or luck, came up with the ball cleanly and threw home accurately.

Snider told me (at a baseball card show in the 1980's) that a pick off play was signaled for by the Phillies' catcher. Ashburn came in very shallow to back up the play, but Roberts pitched the ball instead. Richie was very shallow when Duke lined the single and made his throw to the plate to nail Abrams from very short center, hence the result.
I think I have heard about that pickoff play. That could explain why Ashburn was shallow; but even if no pick-off had been signaled, Ashburn still should have been shallow. Regardless of why Richie was shallow, Stock never should have sent Abrams home. Also, Richie made a terrific throw, and Roberts still had quite a bit of pitching to do.

[penncentralpete]

[QUOTE=penncentralpete;1175293]
I think I have heard about that pickoff play. That could explain why Ashburn was shallow; but even if no pick-off had been signaled, Ashburn still should have been shallow. Regardless of why Richie was shallow, Stock never should have sent Abrams home. Also, Richie made a terrific throw, and Roberts still had quite a bit of pitching to do.

By no way did I mean to imply that the Phillies' victory was tainted in any way, shape, or form. I give credit where it's due, and the Phillies, with Roberts were the legit winners of this game and the pennant. No sour grapes grow on this vine. The Dodgers always got what they deserved (which was a lot of positive stuff!).

[Steve Jeltz]

The game was on TV, and I watched all of it. If I remember correctly, there were runners on first and second with zero outs. Snider singled hard to center. Ashburn, who had been playing shallow, either by design or luck, came up with the ball cleanly and threw home accurately.


I guess I thought Ashburn's throw was not accurate becuse because I saw a photo of Andy Seminick tagging Abrams out and Seminick appeared to be tagging Abrams a little bit up the 3rd base line. Thanks Professor for the clarification.

In a bit of irony, Milt Stock was the Phils starting 3B in 1915, the last Phillies pennant before 1950. And Dodgers manger, Burt Shotton, was a former Phils manager who led the Phils to their only winning record between 1917-1949 with a 78-76 record in 1932.

[penncentralpete]

With the score tied, 1-1, workhorse Roberts, making his fourth start in nine games due to the decimation of the Phils' pitching staff, walked leadoff batter, Cal Abrams. Pee Wee Reese singled to put runners on first and second. Duke Snider hit a line drive single to center field. Ashburn came up firing to catcher Lopata who tagged Abrams out.

"But that play still stands out more than 50 years later. Year after year, it gets bigger and bigger," Lopata recalled. Then he put things into perspective by adding, "It was really a plain, ordinary play. That's how we played ball in those days, very fundamentally."

The play at the plate staved off disaster, but only temporarily. Brooklyn runners were now on first and second with only one out. Three dangerous Dodgers were still due to hit. Roberts walked Jackie Robinson to load the bases in order to set up a force. Carl Furillo then hit a foul pop up to first baseman Eddie Waitkus for the second out before Gil Hodges flew out to Del Ennis in right for the final out. It would take extra innings to determine the pennant winner.

[penncentralpete]

Stan Lopata and the 1950 Phillies at Ebbets Field

[Steve Jeltz]

0 for 3! I thought Furillo hit the single. I thought Ashburn's throw was off target. And I thought Andy Seminick was the catcher who tagged Abrams. I will now excuse myself to gently place my palm against my forehead.

[PlayJay]

I don't know the validity of this story, but I have read about this and you and johncap may be aware of this. It was somewhere during this time frame, between about 1957 and 1960, that Carpenter was supposedly contacted by NY leaders (or Carpenter contacted them) to possibly move the Phillies to NY. The Pirates and, possibly, the Reds were contacted by NY officials as well. How close Carpenter seriously contemplated moving the Phils to the Big Apple is not known. How ironic that would have been? Doubtful they would have been called the "NY Phillies". Nonetheless, the Phillies did not move and Carpenter would have to wait until 1971 for the Vet.



True. Carpenter was contacted. He claimed that he had absolutely no interest in moving the franchise to New York. Privately, he intimated that he hated the place. Truth was, the press in New York would never have let him get away with some of the things he did down here, the boneheaded box office moves, etc.

And, yes, Pittsburgh and Cincinnati were contacted as well. Both ownerships did mull it over.