Ferdinand Cesarano Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Did anyone watching the 1961 Washington Senators consider that expansion team to be the same franchise that had won the World Series in 1924 and pennants in 1925 and 1933? No, they did not. People in Seattle are no stupider; they could handle the idea that a previous franchise of the same name is the one that won the championship. The only difference is that we have reached a degraded state of affairs in which we no longer expect record books to accurately record what actually happened. (Anyone who wishes to call this development meaningless or to detach it from the growing dangerous societal trend of lack of respect for facts is fooling himself/herself.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 1 hour ago, Ferdinand Cesarano said: Did anyone watching the 1961 Washington Senators consider that expansion team to be the same franchise that had won the World Series in 1924 and pennants in 1925 and 1933? No, they did not. People in Seattle are no stupider; they could handle the idea that a previous franchise of the same name is the one that won the championship. The only difference is that we have reached a degraded state of affairs in which we no longer expext record books to accurately record what actually happened. (Anyone who wishes to call this development meaningless or to detach it from the growing dangerous societal trend of lack of respect for facts is fooling himself/herself.) That's pretty much it. Pre-Cleveland Deal, there was never a discussion. It never occurred to anyone to "leave history behind." Funny, though, suppose someone had said "well, I know that all the Senators players are going to Minnesota, but since Washington's getting a team right away, it's pretty clean to just consider Minnesota a new team and have the new Washington team continue to be the Senators." Seems pretty clean, eh? Then, ten years later the Senators moved to Texas. And today, the Texas Rangers would be the team that "officially" has the connection to the 1924 team. And in the early 1970s, Harmon Killebrew would have faced "his former franchise" in Texas despite never having (to that point) actually switched teams. And which franchise is the first 60 years of Senators baseball directly the connected with? The Twins or the Rangers? The Twins...but the history would be really, really weird today. And the fact that I am a Twins fan is neither here nor there. It's not that I want the history for my team...it's that it actually is a part of a team that happens to be the team for which I cheer. I truly only care about it as a fan of baseball history, much like I do the former lives of the Giants, Dodgers, Pilots, Boston/Milwaukee Braves, etc. Anyhow, "leaving the franchise certificate" behind would have been a simple, easy thing following this move. And it would have ended up a disaster. Fortunately, we had not reached this "degraded state of affairs in which we no longer expect record books to accurately record what actually happened." Now you make one interesting point that most here will consider over-the-top: Quote (Anyone who wishes to call this development meaningless or to detach it from the growing dangerous societal trend of lack of respect for facts is fooling himself/herself.) Hmmmm. I guess I don't detach it from this trend. I don't blame the Cleveland and Hornets messes for the trend, but those messes could be symptomatic of this trend. In the 1990s, we were not going to go crazy, but we just told a little white lie about the Browns. Now we've moved on to full-blown dishonesty, as reflected in the Hornets/Bobcats/Hornets/Pelicans mess. And it looks like it's all over for us dorks. Hopefully MLB, the most history-based league, holds out. Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse." BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD POTD (Shared) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtcantwe Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 When the sonics left to become the Thunder, city representatives asked them to choose a new name. In the hopes they get another franchise one day, they could use the name again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted May 24, 2017 Share Posted May 24, 2017 I was at the new Braves ballpark this weekend and enjoyed the franchise history exhibited in the concourse. Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse." BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD POTD (Shared) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSU151 Posted May 24, 2017 Share Posted May 24, 2017 14 hours ago, OnWis97 said: I was at the new Braves ballpark this weekend and enjoyed the franchise history exhibited in the concourse. Have they opened up the museum yet? The Braves' museum at Turner was fantastic. Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnWis97 Posted May 24, 2017 Share Posted May 24, 2017 18 minutes ago, WSU151 said: Have they opened up the museum yet? The Braves' museum at Turner was fantastic. The weather foiled my plans...out of the blue came the gray and we ended up leaving without doing the full walkaround. Unless the area in my photo is what you are talking about. They had jerseys* from past players/iterations of the team, trophies, gold gloves, retired numbers, player statues etc. It was just the 100-level concourse roughly behind the plate. It's exactly what I think every franchise (at least those that have been around a while) should do somewhere in the concourse. The more I search for photos of it the more I think it is what you are talking about. It's really, really nice. I wish the Twins had that somewhere (and gave at least a nod to the Senators). Man, I should have spent more time; been more mindful of where I was and how rarely I get to that part of the country. *I think a lot of the jerseys were just reproductions. The Babe Ruth jersey looked a bit too pristine. Disclaimer: If this comment is about an NBA uniform from 2017-2018 or later, do not constitute a lack of acknowledgement of the corporate logo to mean anything other than "the corporate logo is terrible and makes the uniform significantly worse." BADGERS TWINS VIKINGS TIMBERWOLVES WILD POTD (Shared) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omnivore Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Given the NBA gave Charlotte their history back when the Bobcats became the Hornets, it's pretty clear that if Seattle ever got another NBA franchise, they'd obviously become the Sonics and would get the shared history back, OKC would go back to being an expansion team for historical purposes and done. Like...this isn't even really that complicated from a NBA standpoint, given we have a precedent now. On 5/24/2017 at 1:43 PM, OnWis97 said: The weather foiled my plans...out of the blue came the gray and we ended up leaving without doing the full walkaround. Unless the area in my photo is what you are talking about. They had jerseys* from past players/iterations of the team, trophies, gold gloves, retired numbers, player statues etc. It was just the 100-level concourse roughly behind the plate. It's exactly what I think every franchise (at least those that have been around a while) should do somewhere in the concourse. The more I search for photos of it the more I think it is what you are talking about. It's really, really nice. I wish the Twins had that somewhere (and gave at least a nod to the Senators). Man, I should have spent more time; been more mindful of where I was and how rarely I get to that part of the country. *I think a lot of the jerseys were just reproductions. The Babe Ruth jersey looked a bit too pristine. On the Braves, it's cool they trace their lineage since the franchise name never changed much like the Dodgers and Giants and A's. I like the teams that maintain the history, much like a company that moved from one city to another. But I think baseball is more unique in that way, especially since until the Expos move, there hadn't been one in such a while. There would be no point for the Twins to recognize Senators history, though. The Nats exist now negating that need and also they changed the franchise name so it'd be really silly to do that in my mind. I mean, I get they're the "same franchise" essentially, but nobody in D.C. or Minnesota sees them that way. NCFA-FCS/CBB: Minnesota A&M | RANZBA (OOTP): Auckland Warriors | USA: Front Range United | IFA: Toverit Helsinki | FOBL: Kentucky Juggernaut Minnesota A&M 2012 National Champions 2013 National Finalist, 2014 National Semi-finals 2012, 2013, 2014 Big 4 Conference Champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont care Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 I hate that the hornets and browns now made this the norm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.