|
Edgy DC
Apr 20 2009 02:29 PM
|
|
That''s because you're a big shot. Can you get us an inteview with a wig?
|
G-Fafif
Apr 20 2009 02:30 PM
|
|
Also, I have a copy of the media guide.
|
Fman99
Apr 20 2009 02:32 PM
|
|
I think Horwitz would hand us all Dodgers hats and tell us to fuck off. And to not write on anything.
|
Edgy DC
Apr 20 2009 02:32 PM
|
|
And the media guide explicitly says, "Not a former mobster"?
|
Edgy DC
Apr 20 2009 02:33 PM
|
|
="Fman99":2geyk0vg]I think Horwitz would hand us all Dodgers hats and tell us to fuck off. And to not write on anything.[/quote:2geyk0vg]
We can keep pounding out the Dodger cracks or we can be pro-active.
|
G-Fafif
Apr 20 2009 02:35 PM
|
|
="Edgy DC":2jx7ax11]And the media guide explicitly says, "Not a former mobster"?[/quote:2jx7ax11]
It also says "doesn't suck as much as you think he does" under Luis Castillo's picture.
|
Fman99
Apr 20 2009 02:37 PM
|
|
="Edgy DC":20z9ghcj]="Fman99":20z9ghcj]I think Horwitz would hand us all Dodgers hats and tell us to fuck off. And to not write on anything.[/quote:20z9ghcj]
We can keep pounding out the Dodger cracks or we can be pro-active.[/quote:20z9ghcj]
Proactivity is fine and all, Edgy, and as the torchbearer for this place I applaud your decision to try and engage someone with a pulse over there.
But I reserve the right to make snarky comments and use profanity, at will, in every thread where it seems appropriate. Internet forums and anonymous cursing are like peas and carrots.
|
Edgy DC
Apr 20 2009 02:40 PM
|
|
Understood, but the Sandy Koufax comments have long since worn thin. And I think it's safe to say that it's vastly oversimplifying it to keep reducing the issues of the new stadium to Fred Wilpon's Dodgerlove.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Apr 20 2009 02:40 PM
|
|
There's nothing wrong with snarky comments, but the stuff about the Dodgers is beginning to seem like a dead horse.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Apr 20 2009 02:43 PM
|
|
I've always found the Mets responsive to media questions. I interviewed Steve Phillips twice and Al Harizin once.
I think a well-written letter will be answered. Keep in mind brevity is your friend. A five-page rant will get tossed, but measured concerns from a decades-long fan might be appreciated.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Apr 20 2009 02:43 PM
|
|
The Dodger thing misses the forest for the trees.
Fred Wilpon could walk onto the pitchers mound and whizz on a Dodgers uniform and it wouldn't do a thing to address the lack of attention on the Mets at his park.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Apr 20 2009 02:50 PM
|
|
But it would get him the back page, most likely.
|
G-Fafif
Apr 20 2009 02:51 PM
|
|
METS PISS AWAY SOMETHING
OTHER THAN PLAYOFF BERTH
|
batmagadanleadoff
Apr 20 2009 02:53 PM
|
|
The lack of Mets history at their new park is made all the more galling precisely because of the unreasonably excessive Dodger influence at Citi Field. These are not separate issues.
|
Edgy DC
Apr 20 2009 03:05 PM
|
|
Fine, every thread to you can be a setup for an unfunny Dodger crack. But if I start a thread soliciting input and that's all I get, I'm going to take the time to re-iterate that that's not really what I was looking for.
|
batmagadanleadoff
Apr 20 2009 03:08 PM
|
|
Did I make a Dodger crack in this thread? Because I don't think I did.
I'm sticking to my previous comment. The issues aren't necessarily separate, cracks notwithstanding.
|
HahnSolo
Apr 20 2009 03:12 PM
|
|
I actually talked to Newman last season. I complained in an email to mets.com about how poorly they were handling the Shea countdown. An hour later Newman called me back. (No he did not say, "Hello, Jerry...").
Seemed like a nice enough guy. Spouted the party line that "all the big names will be back, don't worry". As we found out later, the lie detector test determined that was a lie.
But I think a nicely worded request will elicit a response.
|
batmagadanleadoff
Apr 20 2009 03:17 PM
|
|
Yes it will. It'll presumably get you a nicely worded response. But at the end of the day, and the end of the decade, and the end of next decade, there'll still be obstructed views at Citi Field. The stadium will look like Ebbets Field from the outside, and from the inside, the signature feature will be the JR Rotunda.
|
metsmarathon
Apr 20 2009 03:18 PM
|
|
the dodgers thing would be minimized somewhat had there been a polo club to help offset the ebbets club.
at least then the rotunda and the black walled field could be seen as somewhat in balance too, leaving jackie free to transcend the game.
the absence of overt ny giants reverence makes the b'lyn dodgers reverence stand out so, and helps to focus attention on the dearth of mets history (whether or not they've planned all along to include it)
but i don;t think you're going to get anywhere with the suits if you pound home the "there's too much dodgers shit" side of the equation, as opposed to focusing on what you really want - more mets shit.
but so help me, if they start slapping blue and orange paint all over the stairwells, i'll kill the whole lot of yous.
|
G-Fafif
Apr 20 2009 03:34 PM
|
|
Regarding Suit Hunt (as opposed to Ron Hunt), I think the sporting/realistic thing to do is to give them one more homestand before pressing for a spokesMet. A lot of what we'll hear early will be sloughed off as "work in progress," but after a month of hosting games and such, I think it will be fair to ask "what about this, this or that?" and "what kind of work and what kind of progress". Perhaps a thread, even this thread, could be devoted to the Ten Burning Questions we'd like to bandy about with the Suit to be Named Later.
|
Gwreck
Apr 20 2009 03:44 PM
|
|
I think a letter writing campaign is a great idea. In my opinion:
Things that are worth writing about:
1. Obstructed view seats - railing/plexiglass blocking views for Promenade Reserved seats
2. Lack of Mets history/hall of fame
3. Tarps obscuring bullpens
4. New restrictions to batting practice access
5. Lack of urinal dividers in restrooms
6. Deceptive promotion of club access
Things that are not worth writing about:
1. Jackie Robinson rotunda
2. Color of outfield walls
Not sure:
1. Inability to see parts of the outfield from seats in the outfield. I haven't sat there. (I don't plan to, either). Also am unsure about how that could even be fixed.
|
G-Fafif
Apr 20 2009 03:51 PM
|
|
FYI, dividers not missing in the Caesars Club men's room.
|
Gwreck
Apr 20 2009 03:52 PM
|
|
I know. But they are everywhere else. Seems strange that they couldn't be bothered to put them in.
|
G-Fafif
Apr 20 2009 03:57 PM
|
|
One of our commenters referred to the situation as "too much accidental schlong". No word on how much is considered a sufficient intentional amount.
|
Swan Swan H
Apr 20 2009 06:33 PM
|
|
The location of the rolled-up tarp is also a potential problem. It almost comes to the foul line, when there seems to be room to slide it back - covering an advertising sign. If I were Reyes or Wright I wouldn't be happy about it.
I also thought the sound of the PA would be better. There are speakers everywhere, so hopefully it just needs tweaking. For now it sounds like the speaker at a Taco Bell drive-thru.
|
themetfairy
Apr 20 2009 06:50 PM
|
|
On the subject of the PA - it would have been nice to have been able to hear "New York State of Mind" on the ramp as we were exiting the stadium yesterday. The sound system should carry to the ramps and stairwells.
|
metsmarathon
Apr 20 2009 07:02 PM
|
|
="Swan Swan H":rt9ginvn]I also thought the sound of the PA would be better. There are speakers everywhere, so hopefully it just needs tweaking. For now it sounds like the speaker at a Taco Bell drive-thru.[/quote:rt9ginvn]
im also a bit disappointed by the PA. i think they opted for something well suited to playing music in acoustically neutral outdoor spaces, (perhaps like a large garden or small park) but not for making announcements and being heard over crowd noise in very active, difficult outdoor spaces. they'd've been better off with a bunch of powerful horns and such rather than a series of smaller cone-based speakers throughout the place. plus, the ones i was below on saturday sounded buzzy already.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Apr 20 2009 07:45 PM
|
|
Gwreck:
Things that are worth writing about:
1. Obstructed view seats - railing/plexiglass blocking views for Promenade Reserved seats
(I think you'd have a crack at this only if you are a season ticket holder who paid for those seats not realizing they were obstructed)
2. Lack of Mets history/hall of fame
(agreed)
3. Tarps obscuring bullpens
(This might be a safety issue mandated by the league. Would be nice to know, though.)
4. New restrictions to batting practice access
(agreed)
5. Lack of urinal dividers in restrooms
(Flaunt it, man! But seriously, these might be coming. If you were looking for stuff that you can add slowly during the season, this would be one. worth mentioning in a letter to make sure they're aware. Some of the older parks, but the way, have a common trough. Nasty old school stuff.)
6. Deceptive promotion of club access
(Go get 'em!)
Things that are not worth writing about:
1. Jackie Robinson rotunda
2. Color of outfield walls
(Agreed.)
Not sure:
1. Inability to see parts of the outfield from seats in the outfield. I haven't sat there. (I don't plan to, either). Also am unsure about how that could even be fixed. |
|
Edgy DC
Apr 20 2009 08:32 PM
|
|
="batmagadanleadoff":17anausm]Did I make a Dodger crack in this thread? Because I don't think I did.[/quote:17anausm]
Somebody else did, and my objection seemed to prompt your entry into the conversation.
I think the signature feature is Mets baseball games.
|
Kong76
Apr 20 2009 09:12 PM
|
|
Gw: Things that are worth writing about:
1. Obstructed view seats - railing/plexiglass blocking views for Promenade Reserved seats
Watched about an inning yesterday in seats, spent the rest of the day all over
wandering and had a ball.
2. Lack of Mets history/hall of fame
I think they're getting the message about the HOF, I don't need too much
history around the ballpark other than that.
5. Lack of urinal dividers in restrooms
When ya gotta go, ya gotta go ... otherwise wait 'til ya really gotta go. I'm
half kidding, I'd rather not hang it out in public and the urinal toilets are kinda
funny looking with no dividers.
1. Inability to see parts of the outfield from seats in the outfield. I haven't sat there. (I don't plan to, either). Also am unsure about how that could even be fixed.
Yeah, that's obstructed too way down the lines.
My early opinion is the trade-off of being able to wander around and watch
the game from anywhere I want to thus far is worth having a plan ticket that
I can probably renew year after year that (for now) that is relatively cheap.
|
Fman99
Apr 21 2009 06:09 AM
|
|
="Gwreck":n13tm8f6]I think a letter writing campaign is a great idea. In my opinion:
Things that are worth writing about:
1. Obstructed view seats - railing/plexiglass blocking views for Promenade Reserved seats
2. Lack of Mets history/hall of fame
3. Tarps obscuring bullpens
4. New restrictions to batting practice access
5. Lack of urinal dividers in restrooms
6. Deceptive promotion of club access
Things that are not worth writing about:
1. Jackie Robinson rotunda
2. Color of outfield walls
Not sure:
1. Inability to see parts of the outfield from seats in the outfield. I haven't sat there. (I don't plan to, either). Also am unsure about how that could even be fixed.[/quote:n13tm8f6]
OK, I am the "keeps bringing up the Dodgers thing" guy. Fine. It sticks in my craw and that's that.
So, why is the Jackie Robinson rotunda not worth mentioning to Mets brass? Is it because it's already a done deal? Because I think there are a fair amount of Mets fans, both here in the CPF and in general, who think that kind of tribute would best be served at Chavez Ravine and not in Flushing.
I know, I know. It's been discussed to death. But it's also symbolic of some of the other complaints. It speaks to the current ownership's own inability to honor OUR team's history at the expense of other teams and players. No blue and/or orange seats? C'mon.
There should be a big statue of Tom Seaver, not a big blue 42. And so on.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Apr 21 2009 07:15 AM
|
|
I guess there really are two different ways of looking at this. To me, a Jackie Robinson memorial in Los Angeles wouldn't make a drop of sense. (As I said elsewhere, it would be like memorializing Connie Mack in Oakland instead of Philadelphia, or Walter Johnson in Minneapolis instead of Washington.)
But on the other hand, I don't think a big rotunda in the Mets home ballpark is necessary either. A better place would have been in Keyspan Park or near the site of Ebbets Field (the real one) or near the Brooklyn anchorage of the Brooklyn Bridge.
Did you catch what Rachel Robinson said when she was in the Mets broadcast booth? She was so pleased that the photos of Jackie were displayed in tile, making them permanent. She said it's nice to know that they'll be there forever. And then she added, "At least I hope so."
She probably realizes that it's likely that her grandchildren, if not her children, will live to see the place torn down, with each individual tile being auctioned off.
|
Edgy DC
Apr 21 2009 07:29 AM
|
|
I really don't want to have the "We're honoring a Dodger" argument in dozens of threads.
|
duan
Apr 21 2009 09:08 AM
obviously I haven't seen it
|
|
so I'm not a great witness. However, I have NO problem whatsoever in them having a special place for one of New York's most important ever sportsmen. It's clear that Jackie Robinson is something that baseball justifiably feels had an impact on the evolution of civil rights and of equality within your country.
I can't see why honouring that is seen as anything but a pleasure.
As for the Mets HOF, well I'd be inclined to think 2012 might be just around the right time for them to do it properly and in a way that has meaning. It'd have a very nice ring to it and would be a good way of celebrating 50 years.
|
G-Fafif
Apr 21 2009 09:40 AM
Re: obviously I haven't seen it
|
|
| ="duan"]As for the Mets HOF, well I'd be inclined to think 2012 might be just around the right time for them to do it properly and in a way that has meaning. It'd have a very nice ring to it and would be a good way of celebrating 50 years. |
First permanent exhibit...
2009-2011: The Generally Ignoring Our History Years
|
batmagadanleadoff
Apr 21 2009 09:58 AM
Re: obviously I haven't seen it
|
|
="duan":3eomplwq] As for the Mets HOF, well I'd be inclined to think 2012 might be just around the right time for them to do it properly and in a way that has meaning. It'd have a very nice ring to it and would be a good way of celebrating 50 years.[/quote:3eomplwq]
Why not wait a hundred years -- to 2062? Because Diamonds are better than Gold.
|
HahnSolo
Apr 21 2009 10:24 AM
Re: obviously I haven't seen it
|
|
="duan":1fn2ahcc]As for the Mets HOF, well I'd be inclined to think 2012 might be just around the right time for them to do it properly and in a way that has meaning. It'd have a very nice ring to it and would be a good way of celebrating 50 years.[/quote:1fn2ahcc]
I'd think that the opening of a brand-new baseball only park for the team would be the right time to do it.
|
duan
Apr 21 2009 10:52 AM
|
|
yeah but it didn't happen.
Look, they're keeping Gooden's signature, they've gone on the record as acknowledging that people want more "METS" stuff, but to me this just seems like a crazy quest to beat people up over decisions that were made with decent intentions.
|
Gwreck
Apr 21 2009 11:09 AM
|
|
I think we're getting off topic. I put the Rotunda in the "not worth writing about" from a purely pragmatic perspective. I doubt anyone really thinks they're going to change it.
|
Ashie62
Apr 21 2009 02:52 PM
|
|
How about a bust of Johnny Roseboro & Juan Marichal going at it..That would honor 2 post NY teams
Personally..I'd like to see a bust of Bud Harrelson scruffling with Charlie Bustle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
