stevelxa476 wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

CFP wrote:It's pretty bad, yeah. Wrigley will be a blast though.

REPORT SO FAR:

Went to Wrigley last night. Looking to go to Guaranteed Rate Field on Tuesday. I'd call "Guaranteed Rate Field" Comiskey, only arguably the only thing worse than naming a ballpark after some dumb corporation is naming it after one Charles A. Comiskey.

Kinda late on this, but most of the things in that article about Comiskey are probably not true. It turns out that most of what is written in Eight Men Out, both about him and the scandal in general is made up.

Interesting. Sources?

Wolfgang622 wrote:

stevelxa476 wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

CFP wrote:It's pretty bad, yeah. Wrigley will be a blast though.

REPORT SO FAR:

Went to Wrigley last night. Looking to go to Guaranteed Rate Field on Tuesday. I'd call "Guaranteed Rate Field" Comiskey, only arguably the only thing worse than naming a ballpark after some dumb corporation is naming it after one Charles A. Comiskey.

Kinda late on this, but most of the things in that article about Comiskey are probably not true. It turns out that most of what is written in Eight Men Out, both about him and the scandal in general is made up.

Interesting. Sources?

I thought so as well. I always took Eight Men Out to be gospel. But I am in the middle of reading "The Betrayal" by Charles Fountain which talks about the Black Sox and how a lot of things, such as benching Cicotte when he needed 30 wins for a bonus were fabricated after the fact (Cicotte didn't have the bonus in his contract). There is also this article https://sabr.org/bioproj/person/8fbc6b31

stevelxa476 wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

CFP wrote:It's pretty bad, yeah. Wrigley will be a blast though.

REPORT SO FAR:

Went to Wrigley last night. Looking to go to Guaranteed Rate Field on Tuesday. I'd call "Guaranteed Rate Field" Comiskey, only arguably the only thing worse than naming a ballpark after some dumb corporation is naming it after one Charles A. Comiskey.

Kinda late on this, but most of the things in that article about Comiskey are probably not true. It turns out that most of what is written in Eight Men Out, both about him and the scandal in general is made up.

Don't let truth get in the way of a good misguided agenda.

Hey old farts like me (40+), when you were a kid was the AL a source of a kind of strange fascination for you? Like a foreign country or something? It was like baseball, but somehow different. Of course when those in the 40+ category were young, there was no interleague play, and the leagues still retained separate legal identities, each with its own president, and a completely separate set of umpires. There was talk of the differences between the AL and NL strike zones. I remember when I was very young at least one AL game I watched some of where the home plate umpire had the more old fashioned "shield" type chest protector still used (I think) in low level intramural baseball and the like today. The AL had 14 teams to the NL's 12 because they had thrown in an extra expansion which the NL for some reason had refused to do, and of course the DH, the only really remaining remnant of the separateness of the institution.

I remember how frankly exotic the whole enterprise of the AL seemed; spring training and the All-Star Game and the World Series all were sources of excitement not just because they marked the start of baseball or a chance to see stars together or competition for a championship, but because it was so weird seeing AL teams on the field with NL ones. I think this is why Philly as a two-team town always fascinates me to this day; I wanted a definite rooting interest in the AL, a "way in" as it were, like the Phillies gave for the NL. As a kid with less sense of history, I actually identified the Yankees as my AL team, not, as one might suppose, because of their history of greatness, but because I decided their uniforms were the "black" version of the Phillies uniforms of the period, and as a kid of the late 80s / early 90s, black was predictably my favorite "color."*

Today it is more the idea of Philly having had one of each that captures my fancy.

Football had some of the same effect, but it was never as pronounced, because of all of the factors above. To this day I still kind of find something special about AL baseball, different somehow. At anyone time I could find myself rooting for the Yankees (old habits die hard), Orioles, White Sox, Tigers, or Athletics.

Anyone else old enough know what I mean?

*-The home pinstripes for the 70s/80s Phillies and the Yankees were each were similar, sans the Phillies racing stripe down the sides, and in different colors of course; I also for some reason saw the Yankees navy blue as black, probably because it often looks that way, particularly when photographed (check the internet and you'll see what I mean); finally, as a kid, when we would go places in the area that had cable, like the shore, or later when we got cable in our home, the standard package always had WPIX channel 11 in those days, which was the Yankees local TV station, which meant I could see them from time to time on TV.

Yep the AL called the high strike back then, and the NL the low strike at the knees.

thanks for the trip down memory lane... growing up totally agree with the national vs. american that other than the DH doesn't have the same feeling.

wpix = 11pm honeymooners, 11:30 the odd couple and 12 star trek.

The AL and NL seemed to be way different back in the day.

I miss them being separate entities and only playing against each other in the All Star Game and World Series.

I discovered the other day that there are still honorary presidents of each league. Frank Robinson was the AL president until his death and the NL president is Bill Giles.

stevelxa476 wrote:I miss them being separate entities and only playing against each other in the All Star Game and World Series.

I discovered the other day that there are still honorary presidents of each league. Frank Robinson was the AL president until his death and the NL president is Bill Giles.

You could have generations of kids that never get to see stars like Mike Trout play in person or other players like that.

heyeaglefn wrote:

stevelxa476 wrote:I miss them being separate entities and only playing against each other in the All Star Game and World Series.

I discovered the other day that there are still honorary presidents of each league. Frank Robinson was the AL president until his death and the NL president is Bill Giles.

You could have generations of kids that never get to see stars like Mike Trout play in person or other players like that.

I always found this to be an unpersuasive argument, mostly because I have never in my life gone to a Phillies game with the primary or even secondary objective of seeing an opposing player. I am there to see the Phillies bash skulls. Even when the Phillies are bad, I am there to see them bash skulls.

Is this not how other people feel about the Phillies, or their own teams if they root for other teams?

+1


I was so pissed when i was there and the hometown crowd at the vet was cheering mcgwire's homers.

One thing regarding the AL vs. NL was that most players were one or the other. It was rare for a guy to be traded to a team in the other league. One exception I remember is the Phils getting Tiger Jim Bunning for Don Demeter in 1964.

Wolfgang622 wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:

stevelxa476 wrote:I miss them being separate entities and only playing against each other in the All Star Game and World Series.

I discovered the other day that there are still honorary presidents of each league. Frank Robinson was the AL president until his death and the NL president is Bill Giles.

You could have generations of kids that never get to see stars like Mike Trout play in person or other players like that.

I always found this to be an unpersuasive argument, mostly because I have never in my life gone to a Phillies game with the primary or even secondary objective of seeing an opposing player. I am there to see the Phillies bash skulls. Even when the Phillies are bad, I am there to see them bash skulls.

Is this not how other people feel about the Phillies, or their own teams if they root for other teams?

There's a difference between seeing those players play and rooting for them.

I don't root for opposing players (the Trout stuff is annoying as hell) but yes, it's exciting to see stars play in your home ballpark.

Wolfgang622 wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:

stevelxa476 wrote:I miss them being separate entities and only playing against each other in the All Star Game and World Series.

I discovered the other day that there are still honorary presidents of each league. Frank Robinson was the AL president until his death and the NL president is Bill Giles.

You could have generations of kids that never get to see stars like Mike Trout play in person or other players like that.

I always found this to be an unpersuasive argument, mostly because I have never in my life gone to a Phillies game with the primary or even secondary objective of seeing an opposing player. I am there to see the Phillies bash skulls. Even when the Phillies are bad, I am there to see them bash skulls.

Is this not how other people feel about the Phillies, or their own teams if they root for other teams?

I’ve never gone to a game because I wanted to see a player from another team, but it’s cool to get the chance some players/teams you don’t see often.

I was excited to see the Tigers and Miggy a couple weeks ago, was kinda disappointed that no one really acknowledged him from the crowd, Dan Baker rushed up to the press box to announce him in the top of the 1st

Ace Rothstein wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

heyeaglefn wrote:

stevelxa476 wrote:
I was excited to see the Tigers and Miggy a couple weeks ago, was kinda disappointed that no one really acknowledged him from the crowd, Dan Baker rushed up to the press box to announce him in the top of the 1st

%@%^ miguel cabrera, i havent forgotten 2003

Maybe I have an outsider view of this growing up in a town without a MLB franchise but still a Phillies fan.

If I'm on a vacation or in SoCal I'm definitely looking up what teams are in town to catch a game with a player of stature or someone I enjoy watching. It doesnt bother me one bit.

I go to a ton of Angels games to watch Trout

I think it’s more just that they’re aren’t a lot of stars anymore. Bonds McGwire Sosa ect. always drew big crowds at their peaks.

stevelxa476 wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

stevelxa476 wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

CFP wrote:It's pretty bad, yeah. Wrigley will be a blast though.

REPORT SO FAR:

Went to Wrigley last night. Looking to go to Guaranteed Rate Field on Tuesday. I'd call "Guaranteed Rate Field" Comiskey, only arguably the only thing worse than naming a ballpark after some dumb corporation is naming it after one Charles A. Comiskey.

Kinda late on this, but most of the things in that article about Comiskey are probably not true. It turns out that most of what is written in Eight Men Out, both about him and the scandal in general is made up.

Interesting. Sources?

I thought so as well. I always took Eight Men Out to be gospel. But I am in the middle of reading "The Betrayal" by Charles Fountain which talks about the Black Sox and how a lot of things, such as benching Cicotte when he needed 30 wins for a bonus were fabricated after the fact (Cicotte didn't have the bonus in his contract). There is also this article https://sabr.org/bioproj/person/8fbc6b31

That article, but this paragraph:

During the course of the Deadball Era, Comiskey’s amicable relationship with Ban Johnson disintegrated into open warfare. According to legend, the discord erupted in 1905, when Johnson sent Comiskey a load of fresh fish on the same day that he suspended outfielder Ducky Holmes for an altercation with an umpire the day before. Comiskey, who had already given his extra outfielder, Jimmy Callahan, the day off, was irate. “What does he want me to do?” he bellowed. “Put one of these bass out in the left field?”22 (Versions of this story abound: Some sources say the incident occurred in 1907, and involved Fielder Jones, not Holmes.) A further series of disagreements set the stage for 1919, when two scandals rocked the league and irrevocably split Comiskey and Johnson.

makes little sense to me unless I think in Godfather terms - Ban Johnson was telling Charles Comiskey that his Ducky Holmes slept with the fishes?

MoBettle wrote:I think it’s more just that they’re aren’t a lot of stars anymore. Bonds McGwire Sosa ect. always drew big crowds at their peaks.

This is also true. My wife is a huge sports fan and has no idea who Javy Baez is, for example. If you asked her the top 20 stars in the NBA or NFL she could name them with no struggle.

heyeaglefn wrote:

stevelxa476 wrote:I miss them being separate entities and only playing against each other in the All Star Game and World Series.

I discovered the other day that there are still honorary presidents of each league. Frank Robinson was the AL president until his death and the NL president is Bill Giles.

You could have generations of kids that never get to see stars like Mike Trout play in person or other players like that.

Drive to Baltimore if you want to see him that bad.