Celebrate the past, live in the present.

[Shotgun Shuba]

I love the dedication and obvious affection shown to our beloved Dodgers, but I am a little confused. It was an awful thing for the Dodgers to move but it is such a complex issue that you cannot just turn your back on the Dodger Blue. O'Malley was a greedy opportunist, but Robert Moses is the villain. One post even suggested the "Brooklyn Curse" should have been called for in 1963. What kind of person would root for the Yankees over the Dodgers of any city? I can't fault the Dodgers for leaving a declining urban area and moving toward an uncertain future. O'Malley made it work and the Dodgers thrived. I am positive most of the posters on this site don't live in Brooklyn now, if ever. Did you betray Brooklyn by leaving? No, you wanted to make a life for yourselves and the true Dodger fan would never abandon them just because of their ownership. With today's technology you could follow the Dodgers even more closely than 50 years ago. Don't live in the past, your Dodgers deserve better than that. I wish Ebbets field still stood but that is over forever, enjoy what you can still see, touch and hear. Dodgers Forever!

[Mike Nealon]

excellent point, Peter Goldenbock's Bum's book talks about the "mass exodus" of the Brooklynites out of Brooklyn. The same people who rooted for Robinson to be treated equally did so, just as long as it wasn't in their back yard. However, I disagree with the Robert Moses remark, I've said this before and I'll say it again, blaming Moses is like blaming your parents for not letting you take cookies out of the cookie jar. Do they have the power to do so? yes, do they have to? no. Moses was under no obligation to kiss O'Malley's fanny and in turn didn't. After all Moses told O'Malley, if you want the land that bad why don't you go and buy it yourself. Of course O'Malley didn't want this, he wanted Moses to look like the bad guy running in there and kicking everyone out, then turning around and selling the land to O'Malley at a wholesale discount price, something O'Malley would never have gotten on the open market. Capitalism works both ways, not just O'Malley's way!!!

[Shotgun Shuba]

You are right, there is plenty of blame to go around. The story of the Dodgers and Giants leaving is one involving a city, country and society that were changing. No city could support three ball teams. The Dodgers could not move to Nassau or Queens and still be the Brooklyn Dodgers and the temptation was just too great. As for the Giants, as Stoneham said " I feel bad for the kids, but I haven't seen many of their parents lately." To have a team you have to support them. Both teams had to go for it to work and so it happened. Besides, think of the miracle Mets never occuring, everything works out. I lived on Long Island for 30 years, but the time came to leave. Thats life.

[donzblock]

The time had not come to leave, at least not for the Brooklyn Dodgers. They simply needed a new ballpark. We have listened for a long time to the argument that suggests that Brooklyn Dodger fans are hypocrites for criticizing the move out of Brooklyn when they themselves moved out of Brooklyn. I and my fellow movers did not move out of greed. I did not move to Pennsylvania because the state gave me a sweetheart deal on real estate and built me a great new house. The differences between my move and the Dodgers' move are significant and have already been spelled out. Think about these differences and you will come up with so many that you ought to see how absurd it is to equate the two.

The curse should have been invoked in 1963, and the kind of person who would have rooted for the Yankees in 1963 is not a person who was rooting against the real Dodgers. The real Dodgers were killed at the end of 1957, and so far there has been no resurrection. Your shotgun, Mr. Shuba, is firing blanks.

[tonypug]

Many of us moved to Long Island and still came to Brooklyn for games. We went to as many games when we lived on Long Island as we did when we lived in Brooklyn and that was quite a few.

[EbtsFldGuy]

In their posts, Shotgun Shuba makes sense, and Mike Nealon adds reality.

As we have discussed on other threads at length, Ebbets Field and its environs were on a steady path downward as the 1957 season arrived. The familiar problems, perceived or real (i.e. lack of mass transit from Long Island, limited parking, concern about safety, and the aging park, among others) were causing people to stay away. While Tony Pug and some other ex Brooklynites may have come back to Crown Heights from Long Island to see a game, not enough of them did - droves of others declined to make the trip back, for the above reasons and perhaps others.

And even within the City, it was chancy to go to EF sometimes. I remember making the trip as a young boy with my Dad, who was physically handicapped, and having to park several blocks away from EF on streets that were seemingly not safe was a real disincentive for even Dodger loyalists like us. That feeling was surely not isolated.

Had the Dodgers stayed then and no changes been made, attendance would likely have continued to drop steadily. Who knows where that would have taken the team - especially with the financially restless owner that OM was? Maybe their trip to LA -or Arizona - or somewhere else was just a matter of time. Maybe not.

Sure, we all wish they were still at Ebbets Field. But that's as much a fantasy as the "Curse of Brooklyn" is folly.

The borough was changing rapidly then, and the Dodgers faced a challenge that confronted other teams years later (e. g. the Tigers, the Phillies, and the Yankees). The reality is that although NYC would later renovate Yankee Stadium twice at great cost, in the late 1950s it was not about to do that for the Dodgers in the way that OM wanted.

I believe, though, that with a stronger Mayor, and with an earlier-acting Governor, compromise could have been reached and the Dodgers saved for NYC, though perhaps not for Brooklyn.

Perhaps even the Giants could have been settled in NJ, or even co-located with the Dodgers in Queens (in what would have been the ULTIMATE co -existence compromise!). There was no place for them in Manhattan, however.

All of this would make a fine case study for an MBA program somewhere.

Regrettably, though, now we have only our memories of that wonderful time in our youth when the Dodgers gave Brooklyn and Dodger fans a kind of warm spirit that was unique, and enriched all of our lives. Thankfully, this board and our poster colleagues keep that spirit alive!

[Shotgun Shuba]

Well thought out and well said. I have promised not to talk about the move any more. I think it was inevitable that one of the NL New York teams would have to move, others disagree. That era sure was a bright spot in baseball history. I must add, however,(and I know people will scream at me) if the Dodgers or Giants decided to come back, I think there are too few people left who would even care. Most people in NY under 55 have grown up not giving a hoot about the Dodgers or Giants.

[tonypug]

Originally Posted by Shotgun Shuba

I love the dedication and obvious affection shown to our beloved Dodgers, but I am a little confused. It was an awful thing for the Dodgers to move but it is such a complex issue that you cannot just turn your back on the Dodger Blue. O'Malley was a greedy opportunist, but Robert Moses is the villain. One post even suggested the "Brooklyn Curse" should have been called for in 1963. What kind of person would root for the Yankees over the Dodgers of any city? I can't fault the Dodgers for leaving a declining urban area and moving toward an uncertain future. O'Malley made it work and the Dodgers thrived. I am positive most of the posters on this site don't live in Brooklyn now, if ever. Did you betray Brooklyn by leaving? No, you wanted to make a life for yourselves and the true Dodger fan would never abandon them just because of their ownership. With today's technology you could follow the Dodgers even more closely than 50 years ago. Don't live in the past, your Dodgers deserve better than that. I wish Ebbets field still stood but that is over forever, enjoy what you can still see, touch and hear. Dodgers Forever!

I do celebrate the past and live in the present. By choice I prefer to ignore the LA team, and root elsewhere. No one here says you can't root for the LA team, just don't come here and say we should.

[Shotgun Shuba]

I will not, trust me. Since I made that post I have decided it was wrong for me to talk about L.A., since that was never the point of this forum. I only speak Brooklynese here.

[tonypug]

Originally Posted by Shotgun Shuba

I will not, trust me. Since I made that post I have decided it was wrong for me to talk about L.A., since that was never the point of this forum. I only speak Brooklynese here.

Then I hold my hand out in peace.

[donzblock]

I would like to believe that that there is room enough for three MLB baseball teams in NYC. Put the Dodgers in Coney Island; put the Giants in Manhattan somewhere on the Hudson River waterfront; keep the Yankees in the Bronx. Move the Mets--anywhere. Or keep the Mets in Queens and have four MLB teams in the city. What the hell! Such a plan might persuade MLB to euthanize the Philadelphia Phillies so that the four NYC teams could have a convenient place for their minor league teams. Or move the Phillies to Staten Island and have 5 MLB teams in NYC. We now have a new and flexible master plan.

[Shotgun Shuba]

Originally Posted by donzblock

I would like to believe that that there is room enough for three MLB baseball teams in NYC. Put the Dodgers in Coney Island; put the Giants in Manhattan somewhere on the Hudson River waterfront; keep the Yankees in the Bronx. Move the Mets--anywhere. Or keep the Mets in Queens and have four MLB teams in the city. What the hell! Such a plan might persuade MLB to euthanize the Philadelphia Phillies so that the four NYC teams could have a convenient place for their minor league teams. Or move the Phillies to Staten Island and have 5 MLB teams in NYC. We now have a new and flexible master plan.

What did Staten Island do to deserve that?

[donzblock]

Originally Posted by Shotgun Shuba

What did Staten Island do to deserve that?

Philadelphia today does not deserve the Phillies. Philadelphians have suffered enough. However, there is a huge landfill in Staten Island that would be just perfect for the Phillies. Also, the Phillies would be able to absorb and conteract the awful smells that waft over from Elizabeth, New Jersey.

[ColtscorrAL]

I love the Brooklyn Dodgers and I love the LA Dodgers. Guess I love the Dodgers.

[donzblock]

A friend of mine has similar tastes. He loves classical music and mud wrestling.

[dreifort]

what would the Dodger fans have done if the team relocated to Queens, where Shea Stadium is today? Would you have rejected the team there also? - from reading past posts and books...Queens was not an option in the eyes of Dodger fans?

[DODGER DEB]

Originally Posted by dreifort

what would the Dodger fans have done if the team relocated to Queens, where Shea Stadium is today? Would you have rejected the team there also? - from reading past posts and books...Queens was not an option in the eyes of Dodger fans?

THAT, dreifort, would NEVER have happened!!!!

c.

[donzblock]

Originally Posted by dreifort

what would the Dodger fans have done if the team relocated to Queens, where Shea Stadium is today? Would you have rejected the team there also? - from reading past posts and books...Queens was not an option in the eyes of Dodger fans?

Had the Dodgers moved to Queens, getting them back to Brooklyn would have been a lot easier. The point, however, is not how we would have responded to Queens. The point is how we have responded to LA: that response has been clear and nearly unanimous

[jaykay]

"Brooklyn Dodgers" with their new home ballpark in Queens? Why would that have been a problem? When the New York Highlanders/Yankees moved from the Polo Grounds to their new home ballpark in The Bronx, there was no gnashing of teeth because they weren't going to be called The Bronx Yankees. As my fellow old-timers all know, Brooklyn was a city when the team came into existence, and in those more relaxed and more rational days, teams were named after the cities they called home (sometimes, when even the faintest measure of creativity was lacking, resulting in the babytalk-doubletalk of "Philadelphia Phillies," for example). The Dodgers in Queens would have still been the "Brooklyn Dodgers," I believe, and virtually all of their fans within hailing distance would have been happy enough to visit the new ballpark ( call it Shea Stadium, O'Malley Stadium, what's the difference) - closer to where they lived after moving from Brooklyn, cleaner, possessed of ample parking adjacent to the ball grounds, the team featuring Brooklyn boy Hall of Famer Sandy Koufax.....I could go on.....and who knows if some of these thoughts hadn't crossed the mind of Moses, even if he knew next to nothing about baseball.....and O'Malley's mind, too, but he had better reasons to leave than to stay.

I mean, c'mon guys and gals, if the Brooklyn Dodgers died in 1957 because the team moved to LA, would that team have died in - let us say - 1962 because the team moved to Queens? Hate Moses with all your aching heart if you must, but he never said "I want this team out of New York!" O'Malley? That's another story.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Brooklyn Dodgers playing in Queens would have exceeded the success (baseballwise, businesswise, and otherwisewise) of the Mets. What's in a name? The NFL New York Giants don't play in New York, the New York Jets don't play there either, the Detroit Lions don't play in Detroit, nor the Cowboys in Dallas, etc. and so forth, and not all of the extant examples are in football. The Dodgers might have been playing in Queens for the past 48 years, winning some, losing some, agitating for a new stadium (in Brooklyn?) - perhaps abandoned by a few of the Flatbush Faithful because the home field was no longer in what was once the city of Brooklyn. As some of you know, I gave up betting about two years ago, but all the same, I'll betcha that every Brooklyn native who tunes in to this forum now lives somewhere else. And if you want to double the stakes, I'll bet that plenty of you left before the Dodgers did.

What's that? You moved to Queens?
Then there we are.

[DODGER DEB]

Originally Posted by jaykay

"Brooklyn Dodgers" with their new home ballpark in Queens? Why would that have been a problem? When the New York Highlanders/Yankees moved from the Polo Grounds to their new home ballpark in The Bronx, there was no gnashing of teeth because they weren't going to be called The Bronx Yankees. As my fellow old-timers all know, Brooklyn was a city when the team came into existence, and in those more relaxed and more rational days, teams were named after the cities they called home (sometimes, when even the faintest measure of creativity was lacking, resulting in the babytalk-doubletalk of "Philadelphia Phillies," for example). The Dodgers in Queens would have still been the "Brooklyn Dodgers," I believe, and virtually all of their fans within hailing distance would have been happy enough to visit the new ballpark ( call it Shea Stadium, O'Malley Stadium, what's the difference) - closer to where they lived after moving from Brooklyn, cleaner, possessed of ample parking adjacent to the ball grounds, the team featuring Brooklyn boy Hall of Famer Sandy Koufax.....I could go on.....and who knows if some of these thoughts hadn't crossed the mind of Moses, even if he knew next to nothing about baseball.....and O'Malley's mind, too, but he had better reasons to leave than to stay.

I mean, c'mon guys and gals, if the Brooklyn Dodgers died in 1957 because the team moved to LA, would that team have died in - let us say - 1962 because the team moved to Queens? Hate Moses with all your aching heart if you must, but he never said "I want this team out of New York!" O'Malley? That's another story.

There is no doubt in my mind that the Brooklyn Dodgers playing in Queens would have exceeded the success (baseballwise, businesswise, and otherwisewise) of the Mets. What's in a name? The NFL New York Giants don't play in New York, the New York Jets don't play there either, the Detroit Lions don't play in Detroit, nor the Cowboys in Dallas, etc. and so forth, and not all of the extant examples are in football. The Dodgers might have been playing in Queens for the past 48 years, winning some, losing some, agitating for a new stadium (in Brooklyn?) - perhaps abandoned by a few of the Flatbush Faithful because the home field was no longer in what was once the city of Brooklyn. As some of you know, I gave up betting about two years ago, but all the same, I'll betcha that every Brooklyn native who tunes in to this forum now lives somewhere else. And if you want to double the stakes, I'll bet that plenty of you left before the Dodgers did.

What's that? You moved to Queens?
Then there we are.

YOU always could make a convincing argument, jaykay!

OK, OK, I live in Queens.....but, I moved years after 1957.

My point was that I could never see OUR DODGERS being called the "BROOKLYN DODGERS", while holdup in Queens. Just as I have a problem with calling both the GIANTS and JETS, NY teams, while residing in NJ. Call me a purist, BUT, that is the way I feel!

On the other hand, YOU are right about having OUR TEAM just minutes away, right here in NYC, where WE could have been enjoying them for the past 48 years, instead of knowing how unappreciated they were wasting away in "la la land".

.....and YOU are right again, about how OUR DODGERS would have continued to bring more business, baseballwise, and "otherwisewise", to this town, than the Mets have ever attracted.

JAYKAY, you simply must not stay away so long......

c.

Originally Posted by Shotgun Shuba

I love the dedication and obvious affection shown to our beloved Dodgers, but I am a little confused. It was an awful thing for the Dodgers to move but it is such a complex issue that you cannot just turn your back on the Dodger Blue...Don't live in the past, your Dodgers deserve better than that. I wish Ebbets field still stood but that is over forever, enjoy what you can still see, touch and hear. Dodgers Forever!

Of course you're confused.

You’ve stated on another thread that you’re “a man in your thirties,”
which tells me you’re obviously too young to have experienced the Dodger era in Brooklyn…
and therefore clearly incapable of feeling the loss of our team as deeply as those who actually suffered through that heartbreak.
And equally incapable of understanding how vibrant and important the memory of those days is to us.

And yet you come here and lecture us about not living in the past!

What presumptuous nonsense. What monumental chutzpah.

The fact is you’re not qualified to tell us what to celebrate, what to remember or which team to root for.

Your advice is irrelevant. And worthless.

[EbtsFldGuy]

Originally Posted by shlevine42

Of course you're confused.

You’ve stated on another thread that you’re “a man in your thirties,”
which tells me you’re obviously too young to have experienced the Dodger era in Brooklyn…
and therefore clearly incapable of feeling the loss of our team as deeply as those who actually suffered through that heartbreak.
And equally incapable of understanding how vibrant and important the memory of those days is to us.

And yet you come here and lecture us about not living in the past!

What presumptuous nonsense. What monumental chutzpah.

The fact is you’re not qualified to tell us what to celebrate, what to remember or which team to root for.

Your advice is irrelevant. And worthless.

There you have it.

Infallibility itself!

[Gotham]

This OLD thread certainly says enough about this tired subject. Brooklyn is gone forever, do we have to keep fighting about it.

[MATHA531]

Sorry...I disagree. This topic will never become old or dated...it is important for people growing up today to be aware of the GREED a piece of slime who was making mints of money had to destroy an entire community.

And there is always the chicken and egg syndrome...was Brooklyn decaying and the team had to leave or did the team leaving help contribute to the team leaving.

Finally the statement that Robert Moses was the villain is absurd as has been shown in this forum many times.

People of today do have the right to understand the contempt mlb had for fans who had supportd a team through thick and thin and ultimately what the meaning of the word GREED is.

[Brownie31]

Originally Posted by MATHA531

People of today do have the right to understand the contempt mlb had for fans who had supportd a team through thick and thin and ultimately what the meaning of the word GREED is.

Exactly, very well said. The only caveat I would add is that mlb
contempt for the fans was not limited to Brooklyn and did not
end in 1957. It continues to this very day, especially with the
reign of the clown prince, Bud Selig.

Brownie31