50th Anniversary of putting the "National" in our pastime.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>ItsOnlyGil</b><p>Yep, do largely to the efforts of Horace Stoneham and Walter O'Malley fifty years ago this month, major league baseball was brought further west than Sy. Louis for the first time. This of course, eventually evolved from its comparitively megar 16 team two league format, to the exciting world which includes concepts such as Wild Card Teams.<br /><br />Yet for some, they have never really gotten over the loss of the Brooklyn and NY NL franchises aka. the Dodgers and the Giants. You hear it in their voices when they speak of Koufax, trying to claim him as a part of the NY team. Which of course he was, but not an important part of that team. It was in California that Koufax blossomed. And the same with the Giants, Cepeda and McCovey were clearly products of the West Coast and form a part of the basis of the SF 50 year history.<br /><br />I have not gotten over it. A large part of my interest in baseball left with the National League fifty years ago, and the remainder has been gone since the World Series was cancelled heading on 15 years ago.<br /><br />How about you?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>CN</b><p> It is well documented that O,Malley wanted to keep the team in Brooklyn at the Atlantic yards but Robert Moses wouldn,t allow it. I think O,Malley gets a bad wrap. If LA wanted to build you a stadium with land included and NYC was giving you a hard time replacing antiquated Ebbetts Field what would you do? As for Stoneham I think he had a few cocktails when he agreed to build on Candlestick PT. CN

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Paul S</b><p>About 15-20 or so years ago I read an article in Esquire -- by Ken Kesey and, I think, Robert Stone (yes, them of the Beat Generation) -- that the Dodgers moving to Los Angeles was tantamount to telling the not only loyal Dodger fans but the American people, "Nothing you will ever do is more important than money." Certainly this has come to pass in baseball, let alone most major sports...I won't tackle the larger issues. I love baseball, but pretty my interest in it has waned in certain ways -- all of them pretty much due to the economics. expansion, diluted talent pool, ticket prices, owners and players arguing, et al. Certainly it has always been a business but for me it begins to collapse under its own ponderous weight.<br /><br />My 11-year-old has an interesting take on fandom. He doesn't care too much for baseball, but that's understandable for his generation. He gloms onto certain players rather than teams. For instance, he's a big Kevin Garnett fan, and hence (was) a Timberwolves fan. But since KGs been traded to Boston he's now a Celtic fan. (And me a Knick fan!) He's like this with several different players in several different sports. Under the light of the way sports is these days, maybe he's ahead of his time, or at least got it right. Can't say I blame him.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>boxingcardman</b><p><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />NYC's had an NL team since 1962 for crying out loud! Besides, as was stated above it wasn't that O'Malley wanted to leave; the city refused to let him stay, unless he went to Queens.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>1962 was not as funny as everyone pretended it was. Nor was 1963, '64, '65, '66, '67, '68. But in 1969 it was unbelievable, ask Joe Namath.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>CN....<br /><br />1st, you are absolutely correct....Robert Moses was the real villain in "dem Bums" leaving Brooklyn.<br /><br />GIL<br /><br />Jets beat Baltimore<br /><br />Mets beat Baltimore<br /><br />Knicks beat Baltimore<br /><br />Can't beat that ? ?<br /><br /><br />Incidently, what did the Rangers do in '69 ?<br /><br />TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p><br />Three and a half euphoric months in first place, capped by one of the most fantastic finishes in sports history, told the dramatic story of the 1969-70 New York Rangers. The wild excitement of that final, improbable week-end – when goals were a dime a dozen – was a fitting climax to the season that may well be a springboard to the Rangers’ first Stanley Cup in over 30 years. Long known for their extraordinary zeal and their vocal powers, Ranger fans are a special breed. They dig hockey’s special excitement … the searing speed … the frenzied offence … the bullet-like shots … the courage of the goalies … the panorama of color … the haunting “click, click, click” of skates on ice. But thee is more, much more to the Ranger story For the past several seasons – the era of Emile Francis – the Rangers have been staging a dramatic climb in National Hockey League circles. It ha been “the rise of the Rangers”, and the Broadway Blues are the only NHL team to qualify for the Stanley Cup Playoffs the past four years in a row. Some will tell you that the peppery Francis, as general manager, coach, and chief architect of the Rangers’ revival, is on the verge of building a hockey dynasty in New York.<br /><br />Injuries eventually knocked the 1969-70 Rangers out of first place and the playoffs after a brutal six-game Stanley Cup series with the Boston Bruins. The 1969-70 season was indeed a special one. Who could forget the cries of “We’re number one” as the Rangers rolled over jut about everyone during November, December, and January? Or the sheer ecstasy of that final regular-season afternoon against Detroit? Nine Ranger goals hit the net that day. It was fantastic. Then came the agonizing wait while Chicago played Montreal at night. The Hawks romped, 10-2, and the Rangers made the playoffs by scoring two more goals than the Canadiens during the regular season. That never happened before in the NHL history. Not in over half a century. <br /><br /><br /><br />I don't remember what happened, Ted. I don't even like hockey.<br />Gil