Master Index of Archived Threads


CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

John Cougar Lunchbucket Mar 21 2010 05:47 PM

How hard was that? [url]http://s636.photobucket.com/albums/uu87/johnql/CF%203-21-10/

John Cougar Lunchbucket Mar 21 2010 05:49 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

G-Fafif Mar 21 2010 05:55 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

That is SO more the fuck like it.

themetfairy Mar 21 2010 06:13 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Why the fuck did it take them so long? That said, I'm looking forward to seeing Citi Field 2.0 with an extra serving of Metsiness.

Benjamin Grimm Mar 21 2010 06:26 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

It looks like they're doing a good job Metting it up. Someone still needs to take care of this, though:

seawolf17 Mar 21 2010 06:43 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

/weeps I love the hell out of that. I want to take this new Metsiana out behind the middle school and get it pregnant.

Valadius Mar 21 2010 07:02 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Dykstra? DYKSTRA??? The man is nothing but a huckster wrapped in fraud tied in a bow of sleaze.

Kong76 Mar 21 2010 07:08 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

So's you're next boss, Valad. Diggin' the new Metiness.

PiggiesTomatoes Mar 21 2010 07:10 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I never made it up for a game last year -- even turned down a weekend trip offer from the wife -- and am so looking forward to getting up there this season (hopefully a couple times). While it would have been nice to compare and contrast from 1.0 to 2.0, I think I would have been more pissed at the short shrifting of the Mets' history. Hopefully Citi 1.0 goes the way of the Dunkin Donuts shoulder patch and dopey hat logo. Bye, bye 2009.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Mar 21 2010 07:40 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I think I like the inlays best.

Fman99 Mar 21 2010 08:05 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

seawolf17 wrote: /weeps I love the hell out of that. I want to take this new Metsiana out behind the middle school and get it pregnant. Seriously. I will lick my pinky and then stick it in Citi Field 2.0's sweet asshole.

metsguyinmichigan Mar 21 2010 08:10 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Awesome! I like how Jason Bay already has his own banner. Nice job all around!

Frayed Knot Mar 21 2010 08:11 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: How hard was that? To do? ... not very. Ah, but to think of !! ... now that takes a bit more initiative.

Ceetar Mar 22 2010 07:27 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Frayed Knot wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: How hard was that? To do? ... not very. Ah, but to think of !! ... now that takes a bit more initiative. To be fair, a lot of that couldn't have been done when Citi Field opened. They didn't have the plaza done, or the grass grown, or even it completely paved. They didn't have all those trees and lightposts up yet that those things are hanging from. Of course, as that stuff went up, no reason they couldn't have attached the banners at that point. I guess there plan was always to wait until it was all set up and then make a decision about what to do. Growing pains.. They'll be criticized for only doing it because they were caving to public opinion, but I have to believe that isn't true. I love the lineup cards. They actually did have them up last year, but just over a random concession on the field level. Love these changes though, 14 days..

Ceetar Mar 22 2010 07:31 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Also, I love that there is a brick that simply reads "Moo"

Edgy DC Mar 22 2010 07:46 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I also think it's a bit unrealistic if folks thought this wouldn't be a work in progress. Or that it wouldn't be doing well to approach it as a work in progress. That looks like latter-day Lenny under the armpit of former-day Lenny.

Frayed Knot Mar 22 2010 07:54 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Sure there are some specifics that couldn't have been done on day one but, when the wall of complaints started hitting last year, it became pretty obvious that ownership and those surrounding it never considered doing much to hi-light NYM history and, as a result, were totally blind-sided by it all. There would have been few if any complaints about the JR-42 exhibit, for instance, had it been done in addition to NYM stuff rather than, seemingly, instead of. But they didn't and therefore it merely served to perpetuate the idea that Fred cares more about his long-lost Dodgers than about his current team. So, yeah, I think public pressure did have a lot to do with it, which isn't by itself a bad thing and the fact that they're doing it now is good on them - at least in a better late than never way. It all just kind of reinforced the aura of marketing cluelessness that hangs around that crew too often.

attgig Mar 22 2010 08:16 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I thought they were lowering centerfield. is that lowered??? From previous talk, I thought that second section of padding was supposed to come down. was it higher? what are they doing to the home run line around that apple?

Benjamin Grimm Mar 22 2010 08:20 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

The impression I got was that they were simply going to remove the tab from in front of the apple. It does look like that's been done. I don't know how current that photo is, but it obviously doesn't show the completed renovation. There's no way that they'll leave a bright white stripe like that in center field.

Ceetar Mar 22 2010 08:20 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Nah, it was confirmed that they were only lowering the wall directly in front of the Apple, to make it a more uniform height. I assume they'll paint that black and draw the orange line in shortly.

themetfairy Mar 22 2010 08:31 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Frayed Knot wrote: Sure there are some specifics that couldn't have been done on day one but, when the wall of complaints started hitting last year, it became pretty obvious that ownership and those surrounding it never considered doing much to hi-light NYM history and, as a result, were totally blind-sided by it all. There would have been few if any complaints about the JR-42 exhibit, for instance, had it been done in addition to NYM stuff rather than, seemingly, instead of. But they didn't and therefore it merely served to perpetuate the idea that Fred cares more about his long-lost Dodgers than about his current team. So, yeah, I think public pressure did have a lot to do with it, which isn't by itself a bad thing and the fact that they're doing it now is good on them - at least in a better late than never way. It all just kind of reinforced the aura of marketing cluelessness that hangs around that crew too often. I couldn't agree more. Well stated FK.

Edgy DC Mar 22 2010 08:35 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Frayed Knot wrote: ...when the wall of complaints started hitting last year, it became pretty obvious that ownership and those surrounding it never considered doing much to hi-light NYM history and, as a result, were totally blind-sided by it all. If it's fair to ask, what specifically made this so obvious?

metsguyinmichigan Mar 22 2010 08:44 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

This might get me shot, but does anyone think we maybe over-emphasize Casey Stengel a bit? I love the Gil Hodges mural, but I'm not so sure about the Casey version. I know Casey gave the team some instant credibility, and was probably what people came to see in those early days. But he was more of a figurehead than an actual manager, from a lot of the things I've read. Not complaining, mind you, because I LOVE these new touches. But sometimes I wonder about these things. I hope there is something for Mrs. Payson, a true trail-blazer among owners.

themetfairy Mar 22 2010 08:47 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I won't shoot you michigan, but I'll disagree. Casey is what got the fans behind the fledgling team. He made the losers lovable. He made them special - otherwise, they just would have been a nondescript team with a losing record. I do agree about Mrs. Payson - she was a wonderful owner, who made her decisions based on love of the game.

seawolf17 Mar 22 2010 08:59 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Benjamin Grimm wrote: The impression I got was that they were simply going to remove the tab from in front of the apple. It does look like that's been done. I don't know how current that photo is, but it obviously doesn't show the completed renovation. There's no way that they'll leave a bright white stripe like that in center field. The Dodgers would have just left the white stripe like that, you know. It's the "Skoonj" Furillo Memorial Stripe.

MFS62 Mar 22 2010 09:38 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

And don't forget, Stengel also played for the Dodgers. We now end the sarcastic portion of this post. Yes, better late than never. I like the additions. The place is more and more looking like home. Later

Gwreck Mar 22 2010 10:01 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

...when the wall of complaints started hitting last year, it became pretty obvious that ownership and those surrounding it never considered doing much to hi-light NYM history and, as a result, were totally blind-sided by it all. If it's fair to ask, what specifically made this so obvious? I think it's a combination of: 1. The near-constant reminders in marketing and promotional materials that the stadium would be "world-class" and amazing; paired with 2. The visceral reaction of management (specifically, the public face of same -- Dave Howard) when confronted with perfectly legitimate complaints about the stadium; 3. That things like a Mets Hall of Fame are being built in what was space for the team store (no sign of removing the "Verizon Studio" from center field, however).

Edgy DC Mar 22 2010 10:19 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Number three I get. I don't see where number one is relevant. Number two is an opinion that I think is grossly overstated. ("Near visceral"?) I remember statements the Mets statments being along the lines of "Yeah, we understand, but please be assured that we're still working on it." Call bullshit on that, and say they never thought of any such thing, that's fine. But it's hardly visceral. It's the exact position I would expect them to take whether it was true or not. "Visceral" is a word I'd use to describe much of the fan condemnations of the stadium, however.

Frayed Knot Mar 22 2010 11:20 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Edgy DC wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: ...when the wall of complaints started hitting last year, it became pretty obvious that ownership and those surrounding it never considered doing much to hi-light NYM history and, as a result, were totally blind-sided by it all. If it's fair to ask, what specifically made this so obvious? By them seeming so blind-sided to the fact that there even were complaints, - or that even as they put on their best after-the-fact claim to have had these things in mind all along (like a NYM HoF) they still had no answers as to when they might surface or even where they might be put, - or that they designed and supervised a stadium from scratch that not only didn't set aside room for such mementos but even somehow managed to barely acknowledge team colors and logos And I'm not even one who believes that ol' Freddie is sitting around trying to re-make the Mets into some modern-day version of the Dodgers that he still pines for. But they do tend to give the impression of owners most interested in what will sell tickets in the here and now (We've got Reyes & Wright and [insert name] our new FA!!) with very little thought as to the history of the team - particularly as to that part of the history which pre-dates their buying into the team or even prior to the era of Wilpon majority ownership. All that said, I'm have no intention of continually harping on this and acknowledge that they're doing a good job in "fixing" things. I just wish they'd realize things on their own a bit more often without having to be shamed or cajoled into it.

Gwreck Mar 22 2010 11:24 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

My recollection is that as soon as fans started pointing out things to improve or stuff the Mets forgot, the team's public face (specifically, Dave Howard) immediately took the position that the stadium was fantastic and such comments were completely wrong. From the CPF alone, I look at the home-opener IGT and find a comment from the next day: "G-Fafif Apr 14 2009 03:16 PM Dave Howard on 'FAN all but scolding those who don't adore everything at Citi Field right now." My further recollection is that it took many months before the team even started acknowledging that things could be improved or changes could be made.

Ceetar Mar 22 2010 11:37 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

There was a lot of "Oh, I put down all this money for tickets without even having a thought about how the view would be! I don't like it! Waaah". right away too. So much of the complaining was of a nit-picky difference of opinion type thing. A lot of it still is. I'm not surprised they were on the defensive, especially at first. They spent a lot of time building what I feel is an amazing stadium, and people were harping on minor things. (which isn't surprising. We always know better, whether it's which players they should sign, how to treat Reyes' thyroid, or how to build and decorate the stadium) Also, I don't know if this is anyone's fault, but they were racing the clock to get the building functional in terms of #1, playing baseball. It would've been semi-disasterous had the Mets had to play a series at Yankee Stadium because they didn't get the entrances paved or something silly like that. There was a ton of changes between when I was there for the Red Sox exhibition and when I came back for the first real homestand. I suspect things like Hall of Fames and banners got pushed aside. Sure, most of us would've rather them chosen to prioritize the HoF over the Team Store, but that's business. Also, regardless of the team's record, the August 1st game better sell out. (still cheap seats available) For all the clamoring about history, it's be insulting if the fans don't sell out the game honoring it.

Ceetar Mar 22 2010 11:55 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I'm gonna take credit for it btw, but your album (and this thread) has now been pimped out to Mets Police, The Real Dirty Mets Blog, Metsblog, and Lennon's Newsday blog, to name a few. (Credit given to at least cranepoolforum all around)

themetfairy Mar 22 2010 11:56 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Ceetar - I'll disagree about Citi Field being amazing. Don't get me wrong - I like it, and it's very nice. But I've been to every current major league park (save for Minnesota, which I will catch up with this season), and Citi Field is not amazing. I also don't feel that the poor sightlines are a nit-picky thing. When you are building a brand new stadium, making sure the fans can follow the action should be a priority. Considering how many ballparks have been built in recent years, and how few seem to have this problem (at least to the degree that Citi Field has), I don't think you can really call this a World Class Ballpark. It's a nice place, but it wasn't built well enough to ever be considered one of the best.

Gwreck Mar 22 2010 11:59 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Ceetar wrote: There was a lot of "Oh, I put down all this money for tickets without even having a thought about how the view would be! I don't like it! Waaah". right away too. So much of the complaining was of a nit-picky difference of opinion type thing. A lot of it still is. Of course it's all opinion. I never understood the comments that the outfield walls should be blue but I certainly read about that gripe a lot. Your characterization of things as "nit-picky" is incorrect, particularly when you cite paying customers' complaints re: tickets. (The difference of course being that one is paying to watch the game, and the ticket prices guarantees that, whereas it doesn't grant any special right to have pictures of Mets players in the concourse). Also, I don't know if this is anyone's fault, but they were racing the clock to get the building functional in terms of #1, playing baseball. Sure, but a failure to incorporate team history into the ballpark was a failure of planning and not due to time constraints. Take the HOF space as an example. They didn't plan for it and then announce that it was "coming soon;" but unfinished due to construction delay; they simply didn't plan for it at all. Also, regardless of the team's record, the August 1st game better sell out. (still cheap seats available) For all the clamoring about history, it's be insulting if the fans don't sell out the game honoring it. How many tickets are sold to that game is not an accurate measure of how fans feel about the team's history.

Gwreck Mar 22 2010 12:01 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Ceetar wrote: I'm gonna take credit for it btw, but your album (and this thread) has now been pimped out to Mets Police, The Real Dirty Mets Blog, Metsblog, and Lennon's Newsday blog, to name a few. (Credit given to at least cranepoolforum all around) "Pimped out?" The photos at the top of the thread came from a different discussion board and did not originate here. Such is the problem with "crediting" things elsewhere. Howsabout people come here if they want to read what's written here.

Vic Sage Mar 22 2010 12:09 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Ceetar, put down the kool-aid... first of all, the Mets repped the stadium with alot of "there isn't a bad seat in the stadium" nonsense. That led me (and many others) to believe that purchasing the tix i could afford (i.e., the upper LF corner) would still afford me unobstructed views. I don't think purchasers of such tix were "nit-picking" or whining when they showed up to find that they couldn't see a medium fly to LF or deep flies to Cf or the power alleys. They sacrificed sight-lines for "intimacy" and ended up with neither... at least for those of us upstairs. And the notion that they left stuff undone out of a rush to get ready for opening day is laughable. If they had actually planned for a Mets HoF, they could easily have put a banner on the space allocated for it saying "coming soon!", or other place-holder info. But there was no such space allocated. They were caught with their pants down, and reacted badly at first (besides D.Howard's reaction, remember the to-do when Doc Gooden signed the wall in one of the restaurants? You'd have thought he defaced the Mona Lisa). Yes, the fact that they finally came around on building a Mets stadium instead of a Dodger retcon is better than if they dug in their heels. But lets not pretend it was anything but a reaction to intense public outrage by their customers that finally brought them around. They get no brownie points from me.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Mar 22 2010 12:10 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Yeah, sorry these are not my photos and I definitely don't deserve any credit or wish to take any and apologize for having created that impression. I thought the whole world had seen them already.

Ceetar Mar 22 2010 12:28 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Yeah, sorry these are not my photos and I definitely don't deserve any credit or wish to take any and apologize for having created that impression. I thought the whole world had seen them already. Well, now they have. Which is kinda the point anyway. :-D Again, it's a difference of opinion. The Mets chose to cut out a Upper type deck and moved the cheap seats in. There are some pretty bad seats, but I definitely prefer when I'm sitting in say, 524 row H, to be able to see the action closer, even if that means sacrificing a small corner of the OF. And there are a lot of sections that are just fine. I had the opportunity to renew my plan for 2009, and the seats were coming up in the LF OF section, and I thought to myself "Hmm, I don't really know if I'll like the view from out there. I'd rather go to the stadium game by game and see where the preferred views are". I did that. I now know to request RF over LF in the outfield, to avoid the back half of the left field landing. To me, that closer view was what they felt was more important than cramming 60k people into the place. If it was up to me, I would've built another deck of 15 thousand people, but it's not up to me. But these things are decisions based on the owners, and that's their right. Whether it's the color of the walls and seats, or the height of the wall or anything else. Yes, they did a bad job with the Mets history stuff. Maybe you're right, maybe they had no intention of having a museum. Maybe they were just gonna hang the flyers and the banners outside and be done with it. (i.e., no more than they had at Shea) And i do think the att endance of the Hall of Fame induction game is a big deal. How can so many clamor about wanting to see history at Citi Field and then not go and see iti n the flesh? Amazing is subjective. To me, Citi Field is amazing. I don't sit in the bad seats (something that all ballparks have), I love the beer and food options, I love the way the stadium looks, both inside and out. And, of course, the Mets play there, which pushes it over the edge into my favorite stadium to watch a game at. But even objectively, I'd say I'd consider PNC or SF park as 'better', but that's about it.

Frayed Knot Mar 22 2010 01:11 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Dave Howard also went on the air claiming that there were no 'obstructed view' seats at CF (even after photographs and eye-witnesses said otherwise) but did admit that there were instead some seats with 'limited sight' - as if there were actually a distinction between the two other than just pr bullshit. Not that that subject is the same as the lack of identification topic I was discussing earlier, but trying to talk their way out of that one shirley didn't help make their case that: 'oh yeah, we planned all along to put up a NYM HoF and memorabilia , er, ... and we're going to do it just as soon as we get around to it and we'll even let you know where it's going to be, umm ... soon'

themetfairy Mar 22 2010 01:24 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

but I definitely prefer when I'm sitting in say, 524 row H, to be able to see the action closer, even if that means sacrificing a small corner of the OF. I agree that there is room for differences of opinions. But I would personally prefer to see the entire field, even if that means being less "intimate." And for the record, it's not just the cheap seats that are affected. I saw a game in the Ebbets Club last year, and there were obstructed view seats there as well. Yes, every field has good seats and bad seats. But I do not know of any other recently built ballpark that has so many seats that lack views of the entire field of play. That is an architectural error of great magnitude, IMO.

batmagadanleadoff Mar 22 2010 01:57 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Ceetar wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: How hard was that? To do? ... not very. Ah, but to think of !! ... now that takes a bit more initiative. To be fair, a lot of that couldn't have been done when Citi Field opened. They didn't have the plaza done, or the grass grown, or even it completely paved. They didn't have all those trees and lightposts up yet that those things are hanging from. The plaza wasn't done or paved or grass-filled because the Mets didn't want to do or pave or plant the plaza or install the light posts. At some point in time, they didn't have a rotunda to name after Jackie Robinson and to fill with perpetual Brooklyn Dodger video loops either but they still managed to complete that project in time for opening day. I think that the plan viv-a-vis Mets memorabilia and tradition was to do nothing unless the fans revolted. Personally, I think that anyone that believes that ownership overlooked this matter is naive.

Ceetar Mar 22 2010 02:12 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

You can't really pave and plant trees when you have construction vehicles and trucks in and out (or a pile of former-stadium rubble). It was also winter, and not the best time for planting. Personally, I think describing the Wilpons as Dodger-loving don't care about the fans and are out to screw us in every way is just silly. Maybe I'm stupid for thinking that some of this stuff would've showed up regardless. In the end though, I'm not a fan of the Wilpons or the Front Office, i'm a fan of the 25 guys on the roster playing ball, and having a place not filled with standing water and cold reheated food and beer-flavored water to watch it in.

metsmarathon Mar 22 2010 02:22 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

i think it can be fair to forgive (some of) the initial lack of metliness throughout the stadium due to the fact that it still wasn't entirely finished as of opening day, and surely there were things they were still getting around to. but they lose credibility in that the hall of fame is in previously used space. they did not plan for it originally, it is clear. if they were kindof smart, they could've floated a notion of "oh, we were gonna stash it here, but based on the fan outpouring, we realized that it wouldn't be nearly big enough for the level of fan interest that we've clearly underestimated. that's why we had to steal space from teh team store. the hall of fame was gonna be nice - see these hastily rendered pictures - but now it's gonna be hella better!"

themetfairy Mar 22 2010 02:24 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

In the end though, I'm not a fan of the Wilpons or the Front Office, i'm a fan of the 25 guys on the roster playing ball, and having a place not filled with standing water and cold reheated food and beer-flavored water to watch it in. I can definitely agree with that. I will always be a fan of the Mets and Mets history, even if I have issues with the current ownership and the way they do things.

Edgy DC Mar 22 2010 05:15 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Frayed Knot wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: ...when the wall of complaints started hitting last year, it became pretty obvious that ownership and those surrounding it never considered doing much to hi-light NYM history and, as a result, were totally blind-sided by it all. If it's fair to ask, what specifically made this so obvious? By them seeming so blind-sided to the fact that there even were complaints, - or that even as they put on their best after-the-fact claim to have had these things in mind all along (like a NYM HoF) they still had no answers as to when they might surface or even where they might be put, - or that they designed and supervised a stadium from scratch that not only didn't set aside room for such mementos but even somehow managed to barely acknowledge team colors and logos And I'm not even one who believes that ol' Freddie is sitting around trying to re-make the Mets into some modern-day version of the Dodgers that he still pines for. But they do tend to give the impression of owners most interested in what will sell tickets in the here and now (We've got Reyes & Wright and [insert name] our new FA!!) with very little thought as to the history of the team - particularly as to that part of the history which pre-dates their buying into the team or even prior to the era of Wilpon majority ownership. All that said, I'm have no intention of continually harping on this and acknowledge that they're doing a good job in "fixing" things. I just wish they'd realize things on their own a bit more often without having to be shamed or cajoled into it. We're approaching circular logic here. I ask "What made it so obvious" that they were blindsided and you open your answer with "By them seeming so blind-sided." That and all the fake quotes that kinda sorta paraphrase something we think we remember David Howard or somebody else saying tells me were drowning in confirmation bias. Under any circumstances, it's got to be considered good if they responded to complaints with an extensive effort.

batmagadanleadoff Mar 22 2010 05:24 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Edgy DC wrote: Under any circumstances, it's got to be considered good if they responded to complaints with an extensive effort. Not if ownership's plan was to intentionally minimize Mets history pending fan reaction. And to me at least, this is more likely than the idea that they "forgot" or "overlooked" or "didn't realize".

Gwreck Mar 22 2010 05:27 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Intentionally? Really? I'm totally on board with the incompetence/we can't be bothered thing but I'm not sure I was ready to attribute their failings to a deliberate plan.

batmagadanleadoff Mar 22 2010 05:32 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Mar 22 2010 05:34 PM

You can attribute the lack of Mets history at CF last year to whatever you want to. Really. Your guess is as good as mine. This is all a matter of opinion and speculation without first hand inside information on the matter. Me -- I'm not buying any explanation that's premised on ownership's failure to fully consider the issue.

themetfairy Mar 22 2010 05:32 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Edgy DC wrote: Under any circumstances, it's got to be considered good if they responded to complaints with an extensive effort. I don't think anyone is saying otherwise.

Edgy DC Mar 22 2010 05:33 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Not if ownership's plan was to intentionally minimize Mets history pending fan reaction. And to me at least, this is more likely than the idea that they "forgot" or "overlooked" or "didn't realize". Firstly, I disagree. Secondly, if that was somehow the plan, it would still be good that they responded to complaints with an extensive effort. But I think you've long since made it clear that you don't intend any further feints at objectivity in the matter of the management. And that's disappointing, because you are one of the posters I appreciate most on almost all other matters, aggreeing and disagreeing.

Edgy DC Mar 22 2010 05:34 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

themetfairy wrote: Edgy DC wrote: Under any circumstances, it's got to be considered good if they responded to complaints with an extensive effort. I don't think anyone is saying otherwise. Au contraire.

Edgy DC Mar 22 2010 05:36 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

By the way, I love how this looks like Casey's in the pokey and a little unsure of how he's going to get himself out.

SteveJRogers Mar 22 2010 08:36 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Never mind...

batmagadanleadoff Mar 22 2010 08:53 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Edgy DC wrote: ...you are one of the posters I appreciate most.... I know.

Vic Sage Mar 22 2010 10:00 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

that's what Han Solo said to Leia as he was being lowered into the carbonite freezing tank.

G-Fafif Mar 23 2010 05:41 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

From the release last August announcing the first wave of Mettyness: To improve sightlines in the Promenade Level, the Mets are lowering the LED ribbon boards hanging on its façade by approximately one foot. The first phase of work on the boards on the Left Field Landing has been completed. In addition, the metal edging on the glass railings at the bottom of the stairs and aisles throughout the ballpark are in the process of being removed. "In our ongoing effort to serve our fans, we proactively sought their feedback - through direct dialogue and e-mail, and via online and in-person research," said Dave Howard, Executive Vice President, Business Operations, New York Mets. "These new enhancements are a direct result of that communication and are designed to make the Citi Field experience even more exceptional." The Mets also have begun installing photographic imagery of famous Mets and historic moments in team history on the Field and Promenade Levels to complement the banners on the exterior of the ballpark. The team championship banners are also on display on the Left Field wall. It did take a lot of fan feedback to get the Mets to move on items that the club ignored in opening Citi Field; crediting it makes the organization seem like responsive (or "proactive") heroes. They were so hard into "not a bad seat in the house" evangelizing that they ran into their own sightline problems: they couldn't see that everybody couldn't see everything from everywhere. In all their anticipatory interviews, including the three SNY "isn't this great?" preview shows, there was no explicit acknowledgment that more was coming, no "and if you like this, you're gonna love the Hall of Fame and Museum, scheduled for Opening Day 2010." While I'd expect them to hype what they have and not emphasize a lick of the negative (like the lousy views from left field to which they had to attempt to fix four months later), it wouldn't have been out of line to tell us Even More Great Things Are On The Way. But they didn't. It just wasn't important to them at least as far as what they were projecting. I sincerely believe the Mets were so worried about putting across the idea that Citi Field was a break from the Met past (Shea, essentially) that it didn't occur to them that the Met past was important to their customers. But y'know what? They did get a clue, however they got it, and Citi Field, judging by the photos to which JCL directed us, appears to be better off for it, which means we'll enjoy it more, and everybody wins (or wins as much as they can with Beltran and Reyes on the shelf). So thank you to the Mets fans -- and Mets customers -- who got the Mets' attention. And thanks to the Mets for listening, processing and acting, which strikes me as kind of a strange sentiment given that we're the customers and they should be thanking us. Alas, this is not a normal business relationship we have with them. The only alternative we have to not going to their games is, well, not going to their games -- and we don't want to do that. There is no other team across the street where we could take our commerce (technically there is, but you know what I mean). We want to love everything about them and it pains us when we honestly don't.

Frayed Knot Mar 23 2010 06:43 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

"I sincerely believe the Mets were so worried about putting across the idea that Citi Field was a break from the Met past (Shea, essentially) that it didn't occur to them that the Met past was important to their customers." Yup!

batmagadanleadoff Mar 23 2010 07:59 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Vic Sage wrote: that's what Han Solo said to Leia as he was being lowered into the carbonite freezing tank. I know.

attgig Mar 25 2010 09:59 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

this brick just got called out on metspolice: http://metspolice.com/2010/03/23/incorr ... tsBlog.com) Sid Fernandez did not get the win, though he had exceptional relief work... =P they can't even get history on the bricks right! lol

metirish Mar 25 2010 10:18 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

this brick just got called out on metspolice: http://metspolice.com/2010/03/23/incorr ... tsBlog.com) Sid Fernandez did not get the win, though he had exceptional relief work... =P they can't even get history on the bricks right! lol An easy mistake to make when you are pouring over microfiche..........fucks sake Mets

Edgy DC Mar 25 2010 10:22 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I hope they try to contact the Mets with this information, and not merely embarass them publickly.

G-Fafif Mar 25 2010 10:29 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Thing is Fernandez really did "earn" the team win, more than McDowell did at any rate.

Frayed Knot Mar 29 2010 04:19 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

There are apparently going to be a dozen such historical plaques like the above - at least that's what it looks like according to the 'brick locator map' I just received from them. In chronological order going from left field towards behind the plate 1 - Seaver's Imperfect Game 2 - Black Cat game vs Cubs 3 - Mets win 1969 WS 4 - Seaver strikes out 19 5 - Dykstra's HR wins Game 3 NLCS 6 - 1986 WS Game 6 comeback ^^ and then from the RF side of the plate towards the RF corner 7 - Mets win 1985 WS 8 - Pratt's walk-off HR vs DBacks 9 - Ventura's Grand Slam single 10 - Mets score 10 in 8th to beat Atlanta 11 - Piazza's post-9/11 HR 12 - Endy's NLCS catch Gotta like the groupings here: - nothing noteworthy happened in the first 7 years of the franchise - then the first 3 come in a six-month span - then nothing for the next fifteen years - then 3 occurring over a two-week span - then nothing for three years - then two incidents 8 days apart - and then one the following year, one the year after that, and finally one more covering the eight seasons since then

metsguyinmichigan Mar 29 2010 04:46 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Somewhere, Lenny Harris demands his brick for setting the pinch-hit record, Glavine and Sheffield want some polished rock for their milestones, Todd Hundley would like some love for his setting the record for homers by a catcher, Willie Mays says, "Say Hey, how about my farewell or first-game homer?" Ron Hunt points out he started an All-Star Game in 1964. Anthony Young is happy that his achievement is not highlighted.

Ashie62 Mar 29 2010 06:04 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I was at two of these, but the imperfect game is my personal number one. I can remember where everyone in the house was. As a kid it seemed like life and death. The 1986 World Series year was great. You always had hope, and assumed they would come back when behind, and mostly they did. Thanks for the list.

soupcan Apr 01 2010 06:31 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Stole all these from baseballfever.com Fixed: Awesome:

Benjamin Grimm Apr 01 2010 07:09 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

soupcan wrote: That's what I'M talkin' about!

bmfc1 Apr 01 2010 07:25 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Someone spent the money on a brick and all they wrote was "MOO"?

metsmarathon Apr 01 2010 07:31 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

i love that its dead center under the 86 world series win.

Edgy DC Apr 01 2010 10:19 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I like that they included the detail that Ray Knight's "clutch hit" left the ballpark.

metsguyinmichigan Apr 02 2010 04:59 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Love it! Wonder why the didn't set the apple so the background is the stadium and not the parking lot? The Tigers have a big statue of a tiger at the front gate, and it's a natural meeting spot/posing for photos area. I see the apple being the same kind of thing.

Edgy DC Apr 02 2010 06:50 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

metsguyinmichigan wrote: Wonder why the didn't set the apple so the background is the stadium and not the parking lot? Facing the subway stop, maybe? metsguyinmichigan wrote: The Tigers have a big statue of a tiger at the front gate, and it's a natural meeting spot/posing for photos area. I see the apple being the same kind of thing. It's clear that it was re-conceived as a meetup spot.

soupcan Apr 02 2010 07:20 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Yeah I think its facing the stairs coming down from the 7 train. What I wonder is why that main planter isn't directly in front of the rotunda to begin with.

G-Fafif Apr 02 2010 09:33 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Chris Swann's latest photo album here, including awesome shots of what appears to be an awesome Mets HOF & Museum.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 02 2010 09:43 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Weather looks great for an opener on Monday too. I got wood!

HahnSolo Apr 02 2010 09:45 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

G-Fafif wrote: Chris Swann's latest photo album here, including awesome shots of what appears to be an awesome Mets HOF & Museum. Thanks, Greg. Awesome HOF, indeed. Can't wait to check it out.

G-Fafif Apr 02 2010 09:45 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Weather looks great for an opener on Monday too. I got wood! Let's hope Angel Pagan has the same when he leads off.

Edgy DC Apr 02 2010 09:54 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I know pornography when I see it and that link to the Mets Hall of Fame is PORN.

metirish Apr 02 2010 09:56 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

It's just beautiful can't wait to see it in person. Now can the boss looking guy in the apple pictures please do something , move at least for fecks sake.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 02 2010 09:57 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Well, that explains my trousers' getting tighter. Not getting out there until May, either (LWYoungerPooper's first trip, the Saturday against the Giants).

G-Fafif Apr 02 2010 10:27 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

A friend who lives in Flushing adds this delightful tidbit: There's one pretty nifty thing about the Apple's placement that's not captured by those pictures, though. As you approach Citi Field on the Flushing-Bound 7, the Top Hat ended up being angled in such a way that the word "HOME"--and only the word "HOME"--is visible. It's pretty cool.

soupcan Apr 04 2010 05:55 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

How awesome is this...?

batmagadanleadoff Apr 04 2010 06:08 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

How awesome is this...? You already said that: They did this part right at Target - Wish the Mets had something Metly like that in the outfield. They should have taken the skyline from Shea and put it atop the new scoreboard rather than on top of the Shake Shack. viewtopic.php?f=1&t=13210&p=325056&hilit=scoreboard#p325056

soupcan Apr 04 2010 06:26 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I know, I was referring to how it looks all lit up.

batmagadanleadoff Apr 26 2010 10:07 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Well, I'm not nearly the only one who thinks this .... The Mets said the rotunda was intended to honor Robinson's contributions as a civil-rights pioneer, an important figure in New York's social history and a symbol of American diversity. "Yeah," said former Mets catcher Mike Piazza, when asked about the team's decision, "but he didn't play for the team." Do the Mets Need a History Lesson? As the Mets Work to Repair Relations With Former Players, Some Say the Team Doesn't Do Enough to Honor the Past http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 19744.html

Gwreck Apr 26 2010 11:12 PM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Couple of inaccuracies there: Jackie Robinson statue; the implication that the '69 reunion was put together after the opening of the park (it was a planned promotion before the park opened) but an interesting article. I personally never picked up on a problem with alumni relations but I suppose part of that perception is skewed by the constant presence of Keith, Ron, Bobby Ojeda, Darryl, et al. on the telecasts.

Edgy DC Apr 27 2010 05:15 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Yup.

Fman99 Apr 27 2010 06:06 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Well, I'm not nearly the only one who thinks this .... The Mets said the rotunda was intended to honor Robinson's contributions as a civil-rights pioneer, an important figure in New York's social history and a symbol of American diversity. "Yeah," said former Mets catcher Mike Piazza, when asked about the team's decision, "but he didn't play for the team." I said it the first time I saw it and I stand by my opinion.

metsguyinmichigan Apr 27 2010 07:20 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

So, if I'm reading that correctly, a newsletter and a Facebook page would make everything OK?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Apr 27 2010 07:27 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

We've known the Mets have been terrible stewards of their own history for years now and also that they have had issues with some alumni in the past. It's a little odd that this story would come out now only after that'd more or less been acknowledged by the Mets.

Edgy DC Apr 27 2010 07:39 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Well, somebody is always the last person to take up a populist cause, without fully realizing the zeitgeist has shifted while you've been cross-checking your sources. The Wall Street Journal, who looks into sports occassionally --- and when they do, deeply, but not always expertly, taking a refreshing look at the good-business-practice angle but capable of sometimes missing the evidence right in front of their noses that a daily baseball fan would spot right off --- is a pretty good candidate for that. (Run-on, I know.) It's like the folks just now getting on the "Those urban-culture-oriented youth need to pull up their pants!" bandwagon who don't seem to know the trend is actually on the wane.

Fman99 Apr 27 2010 07:42 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Edgy DC wrote: It's like the folks just now getting on the "Those urban-culture-oriented youth need to pull up their pants!" bandwagon who don't seem to know the trend is actually on the wane. As long as I'm around, the "walking around with your pants down low and your goods showing" will have a home. But not for fashion. I do it the right way, for obscenity. I'm old school.

batmagadanleadoff Apr 27 2010 07:54 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

I'd like to pretend that the WSJ piece is a protest: People will continue to complain about this aspect of Mets management so long as the rotunda's named after Jackie Robinson. BTW, this particular quote is consistent with every bad hunch I harbor about the Wilpons: "When we're back there, we truly enjoy it," said Jim McAndrew, a starting pitcher for the '69 Mets, who flew in for the reunion from his home in Fountain Hills, Ariz. "It's just that you get the feeling that they know these are things that you want to do, but then when you walk away, you kind of feel used.''

seawolf17 Apr 27 2010 08:38 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

metsguyinmichigan wrote: So, if I'm reading that correctly, a newsletter and a Facebook page would make everything OK? Jeff Wilpon is opening up a Farmville account as we speak.

Nymr83 Apr 27 2010 08:46 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I'd like to pretend that the WSJ piece is a protest: People will continue to complain about this aspect of Mets management so long as the rotunda's named after Jackie Robinson. BTW, this particular quote is consistent with every bad hunch I harbor about the Wilpons: "When we're back there, we truly enjoy it," said Jim McAndrew, a starting pitcher for the '69 Mets, who flew in for the reunion from his home in Fountain Hills, Ariz. "It's just that you get the feeling that they know these are things that you want to do, but then when you walk away, you kind of feel used.'' Don't worry Jim, we feel the same way every time we buy a ticket.

themetfairy Apr 27 2010 08:54 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

The WSJ just introduced its New York section this week. Someone was probably working on that story for a while, like Edgy surmised. In the long run, it's a good thing that there's now another newspaper that's going to start paying attention to the Mets; they may need a little time to get up to speed with their coverage, though.

Gwreck Apr 27 2010 09:46 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

The author of that article is supposedly the new "beat writer" that the Wall Street Journal hired to cover the Mets. It's not clear to me exactly how much he is covering the team, when he drops gems like this: "On a miserable night Sunday, the 1-0 rain-shortened win over the Braves drew an announced 27,623, probably about 20,000 more than the number of people at Citi Field." Uh, Mike? Did you poke your head out of the pressbox to check? Were you even there? There weren't 27k people there but there were a lot more than 7,000...

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Apr 27 2010 09:49 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

So, if I'm reading that correctly, a newsletter and a Facebook page would make everything OK? Jeff Wilpon is opening up a Farmville account as we speak. Mafia Wars Jeff Wilpon needs a Winter Classic at Citi Field, Eminent Domain-Iron Triangle and a Pee Wee Reese Kosher Pork Pavilion. Help Jeff reach his goals! Join Mafia Wars today! =#404000]April 27 at 11:46am * Share

Edgy DC Apr 27 2010 09:56 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Gwreck wrote: The author of that article is supposedly the new "beat writer" that the Wall Street Journal hired to cover the Mets. It's not clear to me exactly how much he is covering the team, when he drops gems like this: "On a miserable night Sunday, the 1-0 rain-shortened win over the Braves drew an announced 27,623, probably about 20,000 more than the number of people at Citi Field." Uh, Mike? Did you poke your head out of the pressbox to check? Were you even there? There weren't 27k people there but there were a lot more than 7,000... I'm reading multiple times here, but you and he seem to be saying the same thing.

Benjamin Grimm Apr 27 2010 09:58 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

"On a miserable night Sunday, the 1-0 rain-shortened win over the Braves drew an announced 27,623, probably about 20,000 more than the number of people at Citi Field." This implies that there were about 7,000 people in the stands. Gwreck is saying that there were a lot more than that.

Edgy DC Apr 27 2010 09:59 AM Re: CitiField gets all Metty n' shit

Well, wait, I need to read six or seven more times.