Gothamite Posted April 16, 2005 Share Posted April 16, 2005 Yeah, the "BROOKLYN" uniforms at home bothered me a lot. I don't like "inspired by" uniforms, I like throwbacks.As for the Seals, the Giants apparently briefly considered changing their name when they moved to SF. There was a movement in the city to do so, but the owners decided to keep the old name, saying it wasn't a good idea to ditch one tradition in honoring another.However, if O'Malley hadn't moved his Dodgers west, the PCL might have been able to become the third major league (as was the plan), and we might now have the San Francisco Seals, Hollywood Stars, Seattle Rainers and Los Angeles Angels (without any Anaheim silliness) playing against the San Diego Padres in the West. O'Malley killed that by taking away the PCL's two best markets in one fell swoop. The Green Bay Packers Uniform Database! Now in a handy blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQK Posted April 16, 2005 Share Posted April 16, 2005 What a slap in the face of Brooklyn.The Los Angeles Dodgers should NEVER be allowed to use "Brooklyn" or the "B" cap in any way. They crushed an entire city when they left, all because of Walter O'Mally's greed. Now they think that 48 years can erase that? I still see my mother saddened whenever the Dodgers are mentioned to her. Most of my mother's-side family were Dodger fans before they left. The hurt is still there, and it is passed down from generation to generation. What the Dodgers did to Brooklyn will never be forgoten, and this was a travesty on the part of the Dodgers....sorry for the rant. Stay Tuned Sports Podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 I thought part of the blame had to go to the city of New York for not allowing a new park to be built in Brooklyn and wanted it in Queens, which O'Malley wasn't keen on. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkrdevil Posted April 17, 2005 Share Posted April 17, 2005 I thought part of the blame had to go to the city of New York for not allowing a new park to be built in Brooklyn and wanted it in Queens, which O'Malley wasn't keen on. Exactly, New York called the Dodgers bluff on the stadium issue now. The city thought they would never move out of the biggest media market, unfortunatly they didn't realize what LA would become. The true crime was the Giants, they could have stayed in New York gotten a new stadium with their national league competition gone. They would be in the same situation that the Mets got except better because they had history. The Mets became a succes because of all the fans that were Giants and Dodger fans just think what an established team would have done. They would have challenged the Yankees for popularity in New York. O'mally and the Dodgers talked the Giants into moving out west so they wouldn't be the only team out there and to take some heat of them. It might have hurt the Giants in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtman62 Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 My late mom too was a Brooklyn Dodger fan, and it broke her heart when the bums went west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totc Posted April 18, 2005 Share Posted April 18, 2005 However, if O'Malley hadn't moved his Dodgers west, the PCL might have been able to become the third major league (as was the plan), and we might now have the San Francisco Seals, Hollywood Stars, Seattle Rainers and Los Angeles Angels (without any Anaheim silliness) playing against the San Diego Padres in the West. O'Malley killed that by taking away the PCL's two best markets in one fell swoop. It would have been nice, going forward, to have three major leagues, but you wonder whether you would have seen what happened a few years back in AAA ball -- you notice that there is no longer an American Association? It sent teams to the International and Pacific Coast Leagues.I couldn't see three distinct leagues even if you allowed for interleague play.Let's give this scenario some thought:NATIONAL LEAGUE (in 1957)Milwaukee BravesSt. Louis CardinalsBrooklyn DodgersCincinnati RedsPhiladelphia PhilliesNew York GiantsChicago CubsPittsburgh PiratesAMERICAN LEAGUE (in 1957)New York YankeesBoston Red SoxWashington SenatorsDetroit TigersKansas City AthleticsBaltimore OriolesChicago White SoxCleveland IndiansPACIFIC COAST LEAGUE (in 1957)San Diego PadresLos Angeles AngelsHollywood StarsSan Francisco SealsOakland OaksSacramento SolonsPortland BeaversSeattle RainiersImagine the possibilities if you still had three teams in New York's metropolitan area and gave Sacramento and Portland teams. Thing is, you would have left out the heartland (i.e., Arlington, Minneapolis, Denver, Houston) and Florida (Miami, St. Petersburg). Oh, and Canada (Toronto, Montreal). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.