Proceeds from the ads below will be donated to the
Bob Wuesthoff scholarship fund.
Tuesday, August 23, 2005 |
Three Words (And More) To Murray Chass
Ram it, clown. The guy admits he has barely been in Brooklyn, but then gets all dewy-eyed over the fact that Los Angeles "stole" the Dodgers from the borough? Why don't you try looking up the team's declining attendance in the years leading up to their exit? If they were so loved -- and this despite their constant contention! -- how come only just a whisker over one million showed up in their last year in Brooklyn, opposite the 1.8M who showed up in 1947?
I'm not a big fan of clubs that hop towns, but Chass just engages in pure hatchetry here. On the other hand -- well, Murray, you're perfectly welcome to this larcenous squad, who seem to be stealing Frank McCourt's money.
Comments:
Rob,
Did you mean 1958 (first year in LA) where you wrote 1948?
-Capital Dodger
Did you mean 1958 (first year in LA) where you wrote 1948?
-Capital Dodger
# posted by 
: 8/23/2005 10:31:00 AM
: 8/23/2005 10:31:00 AM
May I---a native New Yorker, a Californian for the better part of a decade plus, a Met fan since the day they were born, a Boston Red Sox fan since the 1967 pennant race---contribute my two cents? Thank you.
Murray Chass, meet Neil J. Sullivan, author of The Dodgers Move West, perhaps the single best analysis and account of the real reasons (and culprit) behind the Brooklyn Dodgers' move to Los Angeles (hint: the real culprit shares a name with a Biblical law courier).
By the way, the Brooklyn Dodgers' appeal was not necessarily limited to Brooklyn itself, however much the Dodgers forged the borough identification, and even before the migrations to Long Island in the wake of World War II. (Recall, if you will, Walter O'Malley's legendary rejoinder when first Robert Moses tried to jam the eventual site of Shea Stadium down his throat: "If we move to Queens, we won't be the Brooklyn Dodgers anymore." Moses' real animus: he had no intention, so long as he had anything to say about it, of allowing any kind of privately-owned sports facility to be built in New York again.) For those interested in minutiae, I am the son of a Brooklyn Dodgers fan, who never lived in Brooklyn in his life, but who was himself the son of a New York police officer who made his home and raised his family in the Woodlawn/Gun Hill section of the north Bronx.
Murray Chass, meet Neil J. Sullivan, author of The Dodgers Move West, perhaps the single best analysis and account of the real reasons (and culprit) behind the Brooklyn Dodgers' move to Los Angeles (hint: the real culprit shares a name with a Biblical law courier).
By the way, the Brooklyn Dodgers' appeal was not necessarily limited to Brooklyn itself, however much the Dodgers forged the borough identification, and even before the migrations to Long Island in the wake of World War II. (Recall, if you will, Walter O'Malley's legendary rejoinder when first Robert Moses tried to jam the eventual site of Shea Stadium down his throat: "If we move to Queens, we won't be the Brooklyn Dodgers anymore." Moses' real animus: he had no intention, so long as he had anything to say about it, of allowing any kind of privately-owned sports facility to be built in New York again.) For those interested in minutiae, I am the son of a Brooklyn Dodgers fan, who never lived in Brooklyn in his life, but who was himself the son of a New York police officer who made his home and raised his family in the Woodlawn/Gun Hill section of the north Bronx.
# posted by : 8/23/2005 08:34:00 PM
: 8/23/2005 08:34:00 PM
Didn't all the Dodger fans there become Mets fans in 1962?
Apparently not. Paul LoDuca's father was a Brooklyn fan and hated the Dodgers up until they drafted him.
Apparently not. Paul LoDuca's father was a Brooklyn fan and hated the Dodgers up until they drafted him.
Newer› ‹Older
 |
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.