Master Index of Archived Threads


42

AG/DC Oct 24 2008 07:50 AM

I know we've touched on this lightly, but I'm more than a little concerned that the "larger than life" statue of Jackie Robinson's "42" in the Citi Field Jackie Robinson Rotunda will soon be seen as silly and/or get ignored. First of all, you can make numbers as big as you want, and they won't be "larger than life," because they're an abstraction. Second of all, you've got a handsome, athletic legend of a guy, who dressed in the classic baggy flannels associated with the era that the architecture is trying to invoke, and you choose not to make a representational tribute? What's that about? I don't want to be too conservative here. When the Vietnam War Memorial plans come out, folks were horrified that, among other things, there wasn't a representational triubte to the fallen servicemembers. Statues were added, and the wall became a hit but the statues were ignored. The wall is now the standard for memorials --- everybody gotta have a black marble wall of rememberence.

metirish Oct 24 2008 07:55 AM

I didn't hear this , in the rotunda will be a giant sized #42 and not a life size Jackie statue? I'll reserve judgment until it]s open but I do wonder who's history will be celebrated here and if I were a clueless tourist would I think that this new stadium is for the Dodgers.

soupcan Oct 24 2008 07:58 AM

See it behind the escalators...?

Benjamin Grimm Oct 24 2008 08:04 AM

I also think the big blue 42 is pretty lame. That spot would be a good place for the Shea Stadium apple. And you could put a statue of Jackie Robinson in a more prominent spot.

soupcan Oct 24 2008 08:05 AM

I understand Robinson's impact and importance and legacy and I completely respect it but I think that MLB retired '42' more for the legacy than for the man. Erecting an abstraction makes people think more. I think the Mets are doing the right thing - celebrating the ideals of the man rather than the player. If you put the statue there I think the message gets lost and people focus on the player. The statue should be the Dodgers deal.

seawolf17 Oct 24 2008 08:19 AM

What's with the home run apple high on the wall, top left corner of the picture? I'm going to guess that it's supposed to be a big-screen TV showing game action/advertisements.

AG/DC Oct 24 2008 08:27 AM

Definitely, with a round room, you expect a monument in the middle. Else, perhaps an unoccupied middle with monuments on the periphery, like the US Capitol Rotunda has. But the escalators feeding into the middle dominate the room and obscure the monument, which I fear will be weak under any circumsttances. Jack in bronze and other materials: Here he is being greeted by the inhabitants of Cassiopeia 6 on a friendship visit to their planet in 1957. Here he is coming out with his companion Christopher: This is an image of him from the unfortunate period where he was experimenting with ass enhancement drugs in an effort to iniject some Ruthian home run power into his game. Jackie parts the sea: Remember when the alien beam turned him into a 40-foot mindless monster, mercilessly attacking the city while sitll in uniform? This statue commemorates that! I'm pretty sure the beheading wasn't historically accurate. If the Mets were to put a giant disembodied Robinson head in the middle of the Rotunda, I would want them to make it talk, just to make it that much more terrifying. His chiseled chin looks like a cute life-sized butt. "I bow before you, Zod." This isn't Jack at all, but Freddie Mercury. Wouldn't this look great in the middle of the rotunda?

Benjamin Grimm Oct 24 2008 08:33 AM

I remember seeing a statue of Robinson in Stamford, CT. Is it the one where he's standing on the mushroom?

metirish Oct 24 2008 08:36 AM

One of my favorites. Done right the life size statue looks great.

AG/DC Oct 24 2008 08:38 AM

Yeah, Robinson spent the last 12 years of his life and died in Stamford. (After he freed himself from the power of General Zod.)

themetfairy Oct 24 2008 08:40 AM

I know that Freddie Mercury statue. It's in Montreux, Switzerland.

Benjamin Grimm Oct 24 2008 08:41 AM

My ideal statue of Jackie Robinson would have him sliding hard into home, in a cloud of dust. (And it takes a talented artist to sculpt a cloud of dust!)

HahnSolo Oct 24 2008 08:47 AM

Shouldnt the 42 be in red?

AG/DC Oct 24 2008 08:54 AM

Good point. See, that's how much thought I think is missing from this.

Fman99 Oct 24 2008 09:13 AM

Shouldn't it be in the stadium the DODGERS play in? This Wilpon-driven Brooklyn Dodger nostalgia makes me want to puke. How about paying homage to the team that, you know, we all root for? The Mets, anyone? The team whose hats and shirts I wear all the time? AARRRRRGH!!! Where's the tylenol? (Sorry, damn 80's movie contests have skewed my sarcasm and online vitrol to retro-reference mode.)

metirish Oct 24 2008 09:16 AM

="soupcan"]See it behind the escalators...? Never seen this , looks quite horrible , maybe that stands for escalator #42?

soupcan Oct 24 2008 09:32 AM

metirish wrote: Never seen this , looks quite horrible , maybe that stands for escalator #42? Yeah, that's it - Escalator #42. My bad.

Iubitul Oct 24 2008 09:33 AM

Fman99 wrote: Shouldn't it be in the stadium the DODGERS play in? This Wilpon-driven Brooklyn Dodger nostalgia makes me want to puke. How about paying homage to the team that, you know, we all root for? The Mets, anyone? The team whose hats and shirts I wear all the time? don't get me started...

AG/DC Oct 24 2008 09:37 AM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Oct 27 2008 08:05 AM

="Fman99"]Shouldn't it be in the stadium the DODGERS play in? This Wilpon-driven Brooklyn Dodger nostalgia makes me want to puke. How about paying homage to the team that, you know, we all root for? The Mets, anyone? The team whose hats and shirts I wear all the time? AARRRRRGH!!! Where's the tylenol? (Sorry, damn 80's movie contests have skewed my sarcasm and online vitrol to retro-reference mode.) This I don't mind. Jackie Robinson's legacy is not a Dodgers legacy but an American one, and it launched from the outer boroughs in New York. It's a tribute to a culture that transends the Dodgers. And New York should be a place it's commemorated. David Falkner wrote a bio of Jackie that I liked a lot called Great Time Coming. Despite his "warts-and-all" story-telling, he opens by saying that Martin Luther King was the most important African-American of the 20th century, and Jackie is second, and that the gap is narrower than you might think. That's debateable (Clive James, who has positioned himself as gatemaster of the canon of 20th century biography, rates Louis Armstrong as one of the most towering figures of any race or nationality), but it's still compelling. Continuing to build on Robinson's legacy is a good and important thing for anybody to do and I'd be glad to see the Mets do it and do it well. It's the "and do it well" part I'm concerned about.

Vic Sage Oct 24 2008 01:59 PM

Maybe its really a tribute to "Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy" author Douglas Adams.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 24 2008 04:41 PM

Iubitul wrote: ="Fman99"]Shouldn't it be in the stadium the DODGERS play in? This Wilpon-driven Brooklyn Dodger nostalgia makes me want to puke. How about paying homage to the team that, you know, we all root for? The Mets, anyone? The team whose hats and shirts I wear all the time? don't get me started... I realize that this ship has already passed, but I'm extremely offended at the mere notion of honoring Jackie Robinson. The Mets themselves have a very rich history, spanning almost half a century. To my thinking, I cannot rationalize the celebration of an athlete that belongs to the tradition of a Met adversary, an enemy. Jackie Robinson was, is, and will always be .... a Dodger. I think that the Wilpons, but mainly Fred here, have abused their special privileges as the trustees of the Mets franchise, and all of the attached history, records and memories that go with it, just to stroke Fred's warm childhood memories.

metsguyinmichigan Oct 24 2008 05:32 PM

="metirish"]One of my favorites. Done right the life size statue looks great. Is this Phil Lynott from Thin Lizzy? Wow! I had no idea he had a statue.

metsguyinmichigan Oct 24 2008 05:39 PM

batmagadanleadoff wrote: ="Iubitul"] ="Fman99"]Shouldn't it be in the stadium the DODGERS play in? This Wilpon-driven Brooklyn Dodger nostalgia makes me want to puke. How about paying homage to the team that, you know, we all root for? The Mets, anyone? The team whose hats and shirts I wear all the time? don't get me started... I realize that this ship has already passed, but I'm extremely offended at the mere notion of honoring Jackie Robinson. The Mets themselves have a very rich history, spanning almost half a century. To my thinking, I cannot rationalize the celebration of an athlete that belongs to the tradition of a Met adversary, an enemy. Jackie Robinson was, is, and will always be .... a Dodger. I think that the Wilpons, but mainly Fred here, have abused their special privileges as the trustees of the Mets franchise, and all of the attached history, records and memories that go with it, just to stroke Fred's warm childhood memories. I understand your point, but I don't mind Jackie being honored. He's an American hero, and did what he did in New York. The Mets are the spiritual descendents of the Brooklyn Dodgers. If the team changed its name when it moved to LA, we wouldn't even be having the discussion. Honoring Jackie in LA would be like if the Nationals had a Gary Carter statue outside the stadium in DC. And it's not like this is a recent thing. Back in 1997 the big ceremony honoring the 50th anniversary was at Shea -- granted, with the Mets playing the Dodgers. My only beef with it is that if we are going to honor Jackie, I want to see statues of Tom Seaver, Gil Hodges and so on. The Cardinals have a statue of Cool Poppa Bell outside their stadium, but it stands along with Lou Brock, Ozzie and friends. It's OK to pay tribute to others as long as you are respectful of your own history, and that's where I think the Mets fall down time and again.

metirish Oct 24 2008 05:42 PM

Yeah it's Phil , I bet Duan sees that statue quite a bit. Very cool I think to see a statue with an afro. Maybe Duan can answer this ,I'm thinking the guitar picks are left by random people?

seawolf17 Oct 24 2008 06:27 PM

metsguyinmichigan wrote: It's OK to pay tribute to others as long as you are respectful of your own history, and that's where I think the Mets fall down time and again. That is so true... and I just don't get why. It's almost like they're embarrassed that they don't have the history of the Yankees or the Dodgers or whatever. But you're right; they have plenty of history now. It's insulting to their younger fans.

Vic Sage Oct 27 2008 07:58 AM

i think folks are being a little ungrateful, when here is Fred giving us all the answer to life, the universe, and everything... right there, in the rotunda.

AG/DC Oct 27 2008 08:08 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 27 2008 08:10 AM

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I realize that this ship has already passed, but I'm extremely offended at the mere notion of honoring Jackie Robinson. The Mets themselves have a very rich history, spanning almost half a century. To my thinking, I cannot rationalize the celebration of an athlete that belongs to the tradition of a Met adversary, an enemy. I think you're trying too hard to be extremely offended here. Jackie Robinson's Dodgers were never a Met enemy or adversary. They never played one game against the Mets. It was the disappearing of Jackie Robinson's Dodgers in part that created the void that made the Mets possible.

HahnSolo Oct 27 2008 08:09 AM

Once I know my way around Citi, I'm sure I will be using the rotunda entrance less and less.

G-Fafif Oct 27 2008 08:33 AM

The 42 sculpture strikes me as two digits too many, but I sort of like the Mets wrestling the legacy of Robinson back from one of the National League franchises that abandoned New York. It's a helluva statement to make, in line with the declaration on April 15, 1997 at Shea Stadium that one man was bigger than the game. Jackie Robinson transcends team identity as a historical figure. As much as the Dodgermania of Ebbets Faux offends me, this doesn't, at least not on CGI paper. Forego the Cal Abrams peanut stand and the Dolph Camilli first base line and so on and I can respect the Jackie Robinson Rotunda...provided some Mets get some real estate down the line. Honestly, I've tried to be down on this, but I'm not.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 27 2008 08:41 AM

AG/DC wrote: ="batmagadanleadoff"]I realize that this ship has already passed, but I'm extremely offended at the mere notion of honoring Jackie Robinson. The Mets themselves have a very rich history, spanning almost half a century. To my thinking, I cannot rationalize the celebration of an athlete that belongs to the tradition of a Met adversary, an enemy. I think you're trying too hard to be extremely offended here. Jackie Robinson's Dodgers were never a Met enemy or adversary. They never played one game against the Mets. It was the disappearing of Jackie Robinson's Dodgers in part that created the void that made the Mets possible. I'm not trying. I really am offended. I understand all the points you and MGIM were making in what I guess is support of the rotunda, have considered those points on my own as part of this debate that has manifested in my earlier post, and even agree with them. By the way, what would you say to a Babe Ruth wing at the new Citifield? The Mets never faced the Bambino, either. I don't know that there's a right or wrong here. Fred's exercising his right to create the Jackie Robinson Rotunda: to the spoiled owners, the spoils. Where one falls on this issue is really a matter of preference. This is no different than what's your favorite pizzeria? As of now, the rotunda appears to be the main attraction to visit at the new stadium. I was hoping that it would've been Met-themed. But maybe I was being unreasonable. Let the Dodgers build a Jackie Robinson rotunda. Or a Branch Rickey one. Or perhaps, they'd reciprocate by building a Tom Seaver wing. Tom's a Californian, so I heard. At least it's not the Mike Sciosia rotunda.

AG/DC Oct 27 2008 09:01 AM

But it really is a logical stretch to link Robinson's legacy an adversarial relationship to the Mets. If Babe Ruth had a legacy --- let's say he cured polio during his career --- and he did it in a lab right here in New York, with a staff of New Yorkers, financed by ordinary New Yorkers like you and me, in a lab at the ballpark, supported by the team's management, with his teammates' support, and captured the imagination of the nation and the world, and underscored how outer-borough, blue collar neighborhoods could be part of something great and filled with meaningful lives, and then the team fucked off to the west coast 20 minutes after his retirement and left a bereft city, beginning the long slow decline of the American city and the pride in the cultures and accomplishments of city neighborhoods, and the Mets were created in part as a noble failure of a make-good on that broken compact, you bet I'd support a Babe Ruth monument. But Babe Ruth was none of that. He was a great (greatest) hitter representing something far different whose legacy is quite well spoken for in New York.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 27 2008 09:07 AM

So what's next: The Jonas Salk Wing at CitiField? Jackie's legacy is also well represented. I don't know of any Babe Ruth highway in NYC.

AG/DC Oct 27 2008 09:10 AM

No.

Vic Sage Oct 27 2008 09:14 AM

]But it really is a logical stretch to link Robinson's legacy an adversarial relationship to the Mets no, it's not. Robinson was a Brooklyn Dodger, and became emblematic of that franchise. That franchise ran out on the borough of Brooklyn to make more money out west. My parents never forgave them. Many in my old neighborhood curse the Dodgers to this very day. And a statue to their icon in the Mets lobby is an affront to the very real pain people like my parents went through. Its not that they blame Jackie, or don't honor his memory and his accomplishments, both on and off the field. But they'd just as soon not have their noses rubbed in one of the most painful memories of their baseball lives every time they walk into their own ballpark. Why is that so hard to understand?

soupcan Oct 27 2008 09:22 AM

I don't think its about the Dodgers at all. It's about National League baseball in NYC and a man who transcended the game. The monument is about more than a baseball player. It's about a man whose ideals and struggles and accomplishments as a person should be remembered. The guy just happened to play baseball. In New York City. For a National League team. That was the spiritual ancestor of the Mets. Wouldn't Brooklyn Dodger fans be somewhat appeased though by the fact that Jackie did not go west? He was not one of the 'traitors'

Benjamin Grimm Oct 27 2008 09:23 AM

But is it the Brooklyn Dodgers they're cursing, or the Los Angeles Dodgers? My impression is, and I could be wrong, that Hodges, Campanella, Reese, Robinson, Snider, etc. are still loved in Brooklyn, and so is that 1955 team. It's O'Malley that's hated, and the franchise that's currently located in Los Angeles. It would surprise me if those who actually remember the Brooklyn Dodgers are offended by a Jackie Robinson tribute. I have no problem with it, but I do think the whole Ebbets Field thing is a bit over the top. And they really ought to introduce, at some point, a statue of Tom Seaver. Or one of Jerry Koosman catching Jerry Grote in his arms. Or of Jesse Orosco on his knees with his arms up in the air.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 27 2008 09:25 AM

Vic Sage wrote: ]But it really is a logical stretch to link Robinson's legacy an adversarial relationship to the Mets no, it's not. Robinson was a Brooklyn Dodger, and became emblematic of that franchise. That franchise ran out on the borough of Brooklyn to make more money out west. My parents never forgave them. Many in my old neighborhood curse the Dodgers to this very day. And a statue to their icon in the Mets lobby is an affront to the very real pain people like my parents went through. Its not that they blame Jackie, or don't honor his memory and his accomplishments, both on and off the field. But they'd just as soon not have their noses rubbed in one of the most painful memories of their baseball lives every time they walk into their own ballpark. Why is that so hard to understand? I agree. I could never, ever, stand to read this feel good propaganda about the Mets being the progeny of the Giants and Dodgers. It certainly wasn't the intent of O'Malley and Stoneham for the Mets to come into existence. If anything, they were dead against a new New York franchise partaking of the huge market for competitive advantages. The Mets came into being under the most oppressive conditions in the history of MLB. Their early and spectacular incompetence was partly by design. This whole progeny business has gotten so distorted, you'd think that the Dodgers and Giants left solely so that the Mets could be created. Jackie Robinson's uniform said "Dodgers" on the chest. That's the enemy.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 27 2008 09:30 AM

AG/DC wrote: No. So what's your favorite pizzeria?

AG/DC Oct 27 2008 09:30 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 27 2008 09:36 AM

Because it is blaming Jackie. And that's irrational. The fact that the Dodgers' and Giants' were the biggest draws in town, that their broken down players were popular when they returned to the Mets, and continually popular when they returned on Old Timer's Day, that their games were broadcast back in New York, suggests that ogtagenarians have long more than capable of distinguishing between the players that played for them and the owner that betrayed them. Since 99% of the people who enter Citi Field will have never seen a Brooklyn Dodgers game, and the ones who have are going to be typically more rational than you're giving them credit for, I'm going to stick to the position that this is a largley contrived insult. And I don't deserve escalation nonsense like "why is that so hard for you to understand?" Please stop trying to fight for sport.

AG/DC Oct 27 2008 09:33 AM

batmagadanleadoff wrote: It certainly wasn't the intent of O'Malley and Stoneham for the Mets to come into existence. Has anybody argued that it was?

AG/DC Oct 27 2008 09:35 AM

batmagadanleadoff wrote: ="AG/DC"]No. So what's your favorite pizzeria? I answered a yes/no queston. I don't know what this means.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 27 2008 09:36 AM

AG/DC wrote: ="batmagadanleadoff"]It certainly wasn't the intent of O'Malley and Stoneham for the Mets to come into existence. Has anybody argued that it was? Not specifically,and not on this thread. Just doing my anticipatory best to address the supposed idea that the Dodgers begat the Mets.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 27 2008 09:37 AM Edited 3 time(s), most recently on Oct 27 2008 09:53 AM

AG/DC wrote: ="batmagadanleadoff"] AG/DC wrote: No. So what's your favorite pizzeria? I answered a yes/no queston. I don't know what this means. It means "What's your favorite pizzeria"?

Centerfield Oct 27 2008 09:46 AM

I could perhaps buy the argument about honoring Jackie Robinson for his accomplishments if I felt that this was the reason he was being commemorated at CitiField. But I don't. I don't think Fred wanted Jackie Robinson Rotunda, or the faux-Ebbets field like look because of the things Robinson did. I think Fred wants to do it because he was a Dodger fan. I get that he was hurt when the Dodgers left, and in a way, he is fulfulling some sort of childhood dream by bringing them back, in his own way. But I think it's childish and dumb. If you are going to honor the Dodgers, you should honor the Giants too. Forget how Dodgers fans feel, think about how old Giants fans must feel walking into their new ballpark and seeing all sorts of crap about their old rivals. I get that he's an owner, and that entitles him to certain liberties. But as an owner, if you do stupid shit, we should be able to call you on it. For instance, I loved Star Wars when I was a kid. If one day I buy the Mets and decide to make their stadium look like the Milennium Falcon, I should be criticized for it. Ever since the new stadium was proposed, I hated the idea of trying to make it look like Ebbets Field. They're gone Fred. Let it go. I'm just thankful that, now that it's built, it doesn't look that stupid.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 27 2008 09:53 AM

AG/DC wrote: ="batmagadanleadoff"] AG/DC wrote: No. So what's your favorite pizzeria? I answered a yes/no queston. I don't know what this means. It means "What's your favorite pizzeria?" I used this phrase in an earlier post on this thread to suggest that there really isn't a right or wrong point of view. When I buy the Mets, I'll exercise my right to put up a statue of Tom Seaver. Or Tom Gorman. It'll be my team then. If we've reached the point here where we understand (though disagree) with each other comments and are otherwise, at a dead end, we could play What's your favorite pizzeria, as a way to respectfully agree to disagree. I'll even start. Di Fara's in Brooklyn.

AG/DC Oct 27 2008 09:55 AM

I'm on record as being against the Ebbets Field façade also. Callling a tribute to Jackie Robnson an insult is another matter.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 27 2008 09:58 AM

Centerfield wrote: I could perhaps buy the argument about honoring Jackie Robinson for his accomplishments if I felt that this was the reason he was being commemorated at CitiField. But I don't. I don't think Fred wanted Jackie Robinson Rotunda, or the faux-Ebbets field like look because of the things Robinson did. I think Fred wants to do it because he was a Dodger fan. I get that he was hurt when the Dodgers left, and in a way, he is fulfulling some sort of childhood dream by bringing them back, in his own way. But I think it's childish and dumb. I suspect the same. There's often a huge gap between action and motive. Owners are smart enough to provide what they'd believe to be the most politically correct or acceptable explanations for their public actions, instead of the pure truth. I don't have the evidence, but I'd bet anything that the creation of the Jackie Robinson rotunda was mostly motivated by Fred's desire to revisit his own personal childhood baseball memories.

AG/DC Oct 27 2008 09:59 AM

batmagadanleadoff wrote: If we've reached the point here where we understand (though disagree) with each other comments and are otherwise, at a dead end, we could play What's your favorite pizzeria, as a way to respectfully agree to disagree. I'll even start. Di Fara's in Brooklyn. I appreciate that, though Vic's told me I fail to even understand. Broadway Joes in Riverdale.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 27 2008 10:00 AM

Oh brother! <------- Now I'm Wee Willie Small Balls. I need nine more posts. And quick.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 27 2008 10:01 AM

AG/DC wrote: I appreciate that, though Vic's told me I fail to even understand. Well, you didn't understand "What's your favorite pizzeria". So Vic's at least somewhat right.

AG/DC Oct 27 2008 10:03 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 27 2008 10:06 AM

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I don't have the evidence, but I'd bet anything that the creation of the Jackie Robinson rotunda was mostly motivated by Fred's desire to revisit his own personal childhood baseball memories. Another theory with facts supporting it is that the Mets and the city were under an intense populist campaign to name the stadium Jackie Robinson Stadium. Having already written the $$ from their coporate naming rights into the spreadsheets, they had to find a way to appease or be portrayed as racist. Wilpon's on record as having responded to the demand for the stadium to be named in honor of Jackie with something along the llines of "He will be appropriately honored." I imagine a scenario where he ran back to the plannning board and said, "How do we 'appropriately honor' him? I just promised big out there."

AG/DC Oct 27 2008 10:04 AM

batmagadanleadoff wrote: ="AG/DC"]I appreciate that, though Vic's told me I fail to even understand. Well, you didn't understand "What's your favorite pizzeria". So Vic's at least somewhat right. I don't typically take my pizza with red herrings on it.

Centerfield Oct 27 2008 10:05 AM

I don't believe that Fred is being honest when he says he's honoring Jackie Robinson for the great things that he did. I think he's "honoring" him to get Dodger stuff all over the place to satisfy his own agenda. No one is arguing that Jackie Robinson was a great man, but honestly, he has almost nothing to do with the Mets. By the time the 1962 Mets took the field, baseball was integrated, and the original squad had several black players. Likewise, the Millenium Falcon was a great spaceship. She did the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs. But like Robinson, has almost nothing to do with the Mets.

metsguyinmichigan Oct 27 2008 10:07 AM

I get what Fred is doing. Say I somehow became Very Rich Mets Guy in Michigan and bought the Tigers and built a new stadium to replace the God-awful place they're in now, I'd add blue and orange rectangles to the sides and have a statue of Tom Seaver. Why? Because I could. So while I can see what he's doing, I'm not offended because I like Jackie Robinson. But like I said, I want to see them honor Tom and Gil and everyone else, too. Pizza in Michigan tends to be awful, unless you like Dominos and Little Caesers, both of which have Tigers links. I found a family owned place recently, and the pizza was really, really, good. Surprisingly good. New York good. So one day I was talking with the owners, and praising their pizza, saying it was the closest thing to New York pizza I've found in Michigan. Turns out they're from North Jersey. I was afraid to ask team preference, because if they were Yankees fans I'd feel guilty about going back.

Centerfield Oct 27 2008 10:12 AM

AG/DC wrote: ="batmagadanleadoff"]I don't have the evidence, but I'd bet anything that the creation of the Jackie Robinson rotunda was mostly motivated by Fred's desire to revisit his own personal childhood baseball memories. Another theory with facts supporting it is that the Mets and the city were under an intense populist campaign to name the stadium Jackie Robinson Stadium. Having already written the $$ from their coporate naming rights into the spreadsheets, they had to find a way to appease or be portrayed as racist. Wilpon's on record as having responded to the demand for the stadium to be named in honor of Jackie with something along the llines of "He will be appropriately honored." I imagine a scenario where he ran back to the plannning board and said, "How do we 'appropriately honor' him? I just promised big out there." That's an interesting theory. You may be right there. But I would counter that this outcry was brought about, at least in part, because he designed his stadium to look like Ebbets Field. Absent that, Fred could have come back with "Why would we name our Stadium after a guy who played for another team? And if he's that important to baseball/society as a whole, how about the MFY's get in this by naming their stadium 'Jackie' and we'll name our's 'Robinson'."

soupcan Oct 27 2008 10:14 AM

[url=http://www.pepespizzeria.com/]Pepe's[/url] in New Haven The one in Fairfield is actually pretty good too. Ate at [url=http://www.roadfood.com/Reviews/Photo.aspx?RefID=241&PhotoID=4230]Roseland[/url] in Derby, CT last night. didn't live up to its reputation I thought.

AG/DC Oct 27 2008 10:16 AM

I don't see that potential answer of Fred's working in any way but himiliation.

batmagadanleadoff Oct 27 2008 10:25 AM

AG/DC wrote: ="batmagadanleadoff"]If we've reached the point here where we understand (though disagree) with each other comments and are otherwise, at a dead end, we could play What's your favorite pizzeria, as a way to respectfully agree to disagree. I'll even start. Di Fara's in Brooklyn. I appreciate that, though Vic's told me I fail to even understand. Broadway Joes in Riverdale. It's now almost half an hour since my "What's your favorite pizzeria" post, and you still haven't started a "What's your favorite pizzeria" thread. Are you slipping? Is everything OK?

metsmarathon Oct 27 2008 10:27 AM

="Centerfield"]If one day I buy the Mets and decide to make their stadium look like the Milennium Falcon... i guess i'm the only one who thinks that would be a freaking awesome baseball stadium, huh? i should find some free time and photoshop that...

Iubitul Oct 27 2008 11:02 AM

soupcan wrote: [url=http://www.pepespizzeria.com/]Pepe's[/url] in New Haven The one in Fairfield is actually pretty good too. Ate at [url=http://www.roadfood.com/Reviews/Photo.aspx?RefID=241&PhotoID=4230]Roseland[/url] in Derby, CT last night. didn't live up to its reputation I thought. soup - if you're in Milford, try Michelangelos on the Post Road.

metsmarathon Oct 27 2008 11:49 AM

i think that it'd be cool to have larger than life sized statues for each of the retired numbers. i mean, the pic only shows the big blue 42, but there could be a 41 under another escalator, a 'shea' under another, etc., and perhaps one day a 31 at the top of a flight of stairs - who knows! ok, so im not entirely serious about hte placement, but the idea of abstract numbers i like. 'we can't put them on a freakin' jersey - they're too damned big to fit on the back of a normal man'

Frayed Knot Oct 27 2008 12:08 PM

If the Dodger references are more or less limited to the outisde architecture (there are no similarlities in the field AFAIK) and the JR tribute I'm not going to have a problem with it. If there's a lot more at the same time that NYM history is getting buried in the basement than that's a different story, but I'll at least wait until we get to that point before breaking out the pitchforks.

metirish Oct 27 2008 12:14 PM

As mentioned above I think after the big money for naming rights( would they get that right now in the current mess) Fred felt it his duty to honor Jackie and not to be forgotten here is his friendship with Rachel Robinson.