Jump to content

A wound that time has not healed for me


Frobby

Recommended Posts

After much time and searching, I came to the conclusion that the Mets were simply the better team. They played .729 ball starting August 1 (51 wins and 19 losses) and no one could touch them. They had Nolan Ryan and Tom Seaver. They had Koosman who always pitched lights out in the postseason.

Honestly over a 70 game stretch, that's one of the best in baseball history. It was meant to be.

What was the Orioles' record over that same stretch? It can't be much worse since they played .672 ball the whole year. You're not going to get a whole lot of love here saying the '69 Mets were the better team. The Orioles were in the midst of a run where (IIRC) they had the most wins in three years since the '06-08 Cubs. The 1970 Mets went 83-79.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I'll NEVER be convinced any team was better than the 69' Orioles.

They have to be on the short list. How many teams have won more than 109 games? Off the top of my head it's the 1906 Cubs, '27 Yanks, the '54 Indians, the '98 Yanks, the 2001 Mariners. Is that it? Some 19th century teams had higher winning percentages, but the level of play was clearly inferior. I'd say only those latter Mariners and Yanks clubs have a good argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Mets were not a better team in 1969, just like the Royals weren't the better team last season. In a short series, the best team doesn't always win. In a short series, career scrubs like Al Weis and Ron Swoboda can play out of their heads. Hard hit balls can become outs and bloops can fall in.

That's baseball. One of these years, it will be the O's turn to steal a playoff series or a world championship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't alive in 1969 but that was clearly a very painful situation. Of course, the Os did make amends by winning in 1970. 1997 is the wound that has yet to heal for me. All that followed from that was 14 extremely dark and hopeless years. Last year was pretty awful as well because it seemed to follow the same script as 1997, but I am hopeful that we are not going to embark again on such a long period of darkness. Maybe not being the best team in the AL will help us this year....seems to work for most World Series participants these days!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Mets were not a better team in 1969, just like the Royals weren't the better team last season. In a short series, the best team doesn't always win. In a short series, career scrubs like Al Weis and Ron Swoboda can play out of their heads. Hard hit balls can become outs and bloops can fall in.

That's baseball. One of these years, it will be the O's turn to steal a playoff series or a world championship.

In 1996 the Orioles snuck into the playoffs as the AL wildcard team with 88 wins after Angelos vetoed a trading deadline sell-off. In the first round they met the 99-win Indians, the reigning AL Champs, owner of the best record in the league by seven games. The O's quickly dispatched them three games to one. I'm sure Cleveland fans loved that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 1996 the Orioles snuck into the playoffs as the AL wildcard team with 88 wins after Angelos vetoed a trading deadline sell-off. In the first round they met the 99-win Indians, the reigning AL Champs, owner of the best record in the league by seven games. The O's quickly dispatched them three games to one. I'm sure Cleveland fans loved that.

They got their revenge exactly one year later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The year was 1969. I was 12 years old, and the Baltimore Orioles were my consuming passion in life. Before the baseball season began, the year had started badly, with the New York Jets beating my beloved Colts in the Super Bowl in what was probably the greatest pro football upset of all time. The Orioles wiped away the pain, it seemed, by running away with the AL East by 19 games, winning 109 regular season games and then sweeping the Twins in the ALCS to win the pennant Soon, the Orioles would be World Champions again and wipe away any lingering pain from the football season.

And then came the "Amazin' Mets."

Words cannot describe how painful it was to see that great Orioles team lose to a bunch of fluky upstarts from, of all the places on Earth, New York. It was the pain from the Super Bowl, squared.

Hindsight has allowed me to see that the Mets did have an excellent pitching staff, but there were so many painful moments in that series, and the Orioles were so clearly the superior team. To rub salt into the wound, the Mets' leading hitter in that series, Al Weis, was a career .219/.278/.275 hitter who somehow hit .455/.563/.727 in that Series. And it was Weis who, two years before while on the White Sox, had collided with Frank Robinson at 2B, causing a severe concussion and ending Frank's bid for a second straight Triple Crown. (In my 12-year old mind, that collision was entirely Weis' fault, though of course there is no evidence of that, and Frank had slid into 2B to break up a DP and his head had collided with Weis' knee.)

It's been 46 years and I've still never lived it down. The Mets got so much ink that winter, and in the years that followed, that it nauseated me. I've rooted against them ever since, and I always will.

Please, please, please beat the Mets!

I didn't think that 1969 existed in Baltimore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll NEVER be convinced any team was better than the 69' Orioles.

I agree. It's just my way to explain the painful memory. :o

Now the Jets...I've always wondered if Earl Morrall threw that game. There is no rational explanation for what happened in SB III.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What was the Orioles' record over that same stretch? It can't be much worse since they played .672 ball the whole year. You're not going to get a whole lot of love here saying the '69 Mets were the better team. The Orioles were in the midst of a run where (IIRC) they had the most wins in three years since the '06-08 Cubs. The 1970 Mets went 83-79.

41-25, .621

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AS will we, with the Royals this year!

This is what needs to happen. The Royals have to be upset by either us or some other inferior opponent in the AL playoffs. It is much easier playing the role of underdog in sports because nothing is expected of you....and casual fans all root for you. Let's see how they do this year when they are clearly the favorites in the AL (other than I suppose Toronto) and they have not exactly been well behaved and lovable this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was also 12 and cried like a baby over that series. Could not believe what was happening. I'd get home from school, quickly turn on the national news hoping for the best, to unfortunately see our cartoon bird logo shedding a tear. What made it worse ... it was almost like Chet Huntley and David Brinkley were laughing about it.

Will never forget it ... will never get over it.

Sister Sledge can die as well.:angryfire: :cussing:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After much time and searching, I came to the conclusion that the Mets were simply the better team. They played .729 ball starting August 1 (51 wins and 19 losses) and no one could touch them. They had Nolan Ryan and Tom Seaver. They had Koosman who always pitched lights out in the postseason.

Honestly over a 70 game stretch, that's one of the best in baseball history. It was meant to be.

You, sir, are a communist! :D

The O's followed up their 109 win season with a 108 win season and a WS title the following year. Where were the Mets? Barely over .500. There's no comparison. The Mets got hot at the right time, and got all the breaks. That's baseball, sometimes.

By the way, although Nolan Ryan was on that Mets team, he was basically a so-so relief pitcher/spot starter. He pitched 2.1 innings in the WS, in one appearance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL. I lived in Chicago 69-71. I was in 2nd grade in 69 and the first team I ever rooted for was the 69 Chicago Cubs. Talk about learning that being a fan can be tough at an early age:) Anyway the 69 Mets took care of the first team I ever rooted for and my future beloved O's. Double whammy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...