I think this was the first message on this news group

Mets: Proper frame of mind
0 views
Daniel Palmer's profile photo
Daniel Palmer
unread,
Jul 2, 1993, 11:18:00 AM
to
A few short years ago the Met fans were watching our team with the
rapt fascination of joy and amazement. The whole build up from 1984 through
the 1986 world series was a great time for Flushing fans everywhere.
When talk of "Dynasty" started being sloshed around before the '86 playoffs
I was irked. Dynasties should only be talked about in the past tense - if
not they only serve to detract. There is nothing exciting about a team, or
an event that is a "sure thing". In the context of the late '70's and early
'80's, the world series championship in '86 is almost as amazing as the '69
victory.

Baseball dominance goes in cycles, Met fans certainly should understand this!
The dominance grows shorter all the time, so to those who bemoan lack of
more past glories - be glad for those you have.

Yes, the Mets are now synonymous with "poor quality baseball" at the moment,
but the Braves were a few years back and they've been turned away empty-handed.

So I read the box scores (grimace) and pull out the '84, '85 or '86 yearbook
and remember the good times.

-Dan

--
==============================================================================| "To accomplish something in this world, you must| pal...@cs.unc.edu |
| get firmly behind yourself...and push." DWP | |
==============================================================================
John Bordeaux's profile photo
John Bordeaux
unread,
Jul 2, 1993, 1:30:38 PM
to
In article <211jj8...@godel.cs.unc.edu> pal...@cs.unc.edu (Daniel Palmer) writes:
[Background deleted]
>Baseball dominance goes in cycles, Met fans certainly should understand this!
>The dominance grows shorter all the time, so to those who bemoan lack of
>more past glories - be glad for those you have.
>
>Yes, the Mets are now synonymous with "poor quality baseball" at the moment,
>but the Braves were a few years back and they've been turned away empty-handed.
>
>So I read the box scores (grimace) and pull out the '84, '85 or '86 yearbook
>and remember the good times.
>
>-Dan
>

Absolutely correct. So let's forget current foibles (although I love the
picture of Doc charging third base to handle an infield fly) and discuss
instead past and future glories. (One last question. How do our boys of
summer compare with the legends of '62?)

For myself, I offer the following memory from the past:
My first wife and I enjoyed precious few happy times in our eight
years of marriage. October 1986 found us in Denver, living in an Aurora
apartment while I attended an Air Force school. She never liked baseball,
but I sat her down in front of the Sixth Game and forced her to watch with
me. I was trying in part to show our two-year-old son that happy families
watch baseball. Pretty shallow, so sue me. Anyhow, as Gary Carter stepped
to the plate with two outs in the ninth, down two runs, she began to take
pity on me. I sat her down once more, explaining that real fans did not
leave early "to beat the traffic", no matter how dismal the game got.
By the time Mookie Wilson dribbled one through The Legs, she was
jumping up and down on the couch, screaming encouragement. As the
announcers let the crowd do a little commentary, she turned to me, flushed
and giddy. "I'm having so much fun!", she marveled. Needless to say, she
was the one who unplugged the phone for the Seventh Game, and even baked a
pie for game food. We separated three months later. Even that night,
I knew this game would be one of a handful of good memories of our marriage.
But, without the Sixth Game, that handful would have been one evening
lighter. Thanks, boys.

Oh yes. I was in Denver for January 1987 also. But I'll save that for
alt.sports.football.ny-giants. ;-)

jb
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The above in no way reflects RAND policy, procedures, or even official
thought. Mongo only pawn in game of life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

On 5/29/2023 3:03 PM, Ruben Safir wrote:
>
>
> I think this was the first message on this news group
>
> Mets: Proper frame of mind
> 0 views
> Daniel Palmer's profile photo
> Daniel Palmer
> unread,
> Jul 2, 1993, 11:18:00 AM
> to
> A few short years ago the Met fans were watching our team with the
> rapt fascination of joy and amazement. The whole build up from 1984 through
> the 1986 world series was a great time for Flushing fans everywhere.
> When talk of "Dynasty" started being sloshed around before the '86 playoffs
> I was irked. Dynasties should only be talked about in the past tense - if
> not they only serve to detract. There is nothing exciting about a team, or
> an event that is a "sure thing". In the context of the late '70's and early
> '80's, the world series championship in '86 is almost as amazing as the '69
> victory.
>
> Baseball dominance goes in cycles, Met fans certainly should understand this!
> The dominance grows shorter all the time, so to those who bemoan lack of
> more past glories - be glad for those you have.
>
> Yes, the Mets are now synonymous with "poor quality baseball" at the moment,
> but the Braves were a few years back and they've been turned away empty-handed.
>
> So I read the box scores (grimace) and pull out the '84, '85 or '86 yearbook
> and remember the good times.
>
> -Dan
>
> --
> ===============================================================================
> | "To accomplish something in this world, you must| pal...@cs.unc.edu |
> | get firmly behind yourself...and push." DWP | |
> ===============================================================================
>
> John Bordeaux's profile photo
> John Bordeaux
> unread,
> Jul 2, 1993, 1:30:38 PM
> to
> In article <211jj8...@godel.cs.unc.edu> pal...@cs.unc.edu (Daniel Palmer) writes:
> [Background deleted]
>> Baseball dominance goes in cycles, Met fans certainly should understand this!
>> The dominance grows shorter all the time, so to those who bemoan lack of
>> more past glories - be glad for those you have.
>>
>> Yes, the Mets are now synonymous with "poor quality baseball" at the moment,
>> but the Braves were a few years back and they've been turned away empty-handed.
>>
>> So I read the box scores (grimace) and pull out the '84, '85 or '86 yearbook
>> and remember the good times.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>
> Absolutely correct. So let's forget current foibles (although I love the
> picture of Doc charging third base to handle an infield fly) and discuss
> instead past and future glories. (One last question. How do our boys of
> summer compare with the legends of '62?)
>
> For myself, I offer the following memory from the past:
> My first wife and I enjoyed precious few happy times in our eight
> years of marriage. October 1986 found us in Denver, living in an Aurora
> apartment while I attended an Air Force school. She never liked baseball,
> but I sat her down in front of the Sixth Game and forced her to watch with
> me. I was trying in part to show our two-year-old son that happy families
> watch baseball. Pretty shallow, so sue me. Anyhow, as Gary Carter stepped
> to the plate with two outs in the ninth, down two runs, she began to take
> pity on me. I sat her down once more, explaining that real fans did not
> leave early "to beat the traffic", no matter how dismal the game got.
> By the time Mookie Wilson dribbled one through The Legs, she was
> jumping up and down on the couch, screaming encouragement. As the
> announcers let the crowd do a little commentary, she turned to me, flushed
> and giddy. "I'm having so much fun!", she marveled. Needless to say, she
> was the one who unplugged the phone for the Seventh Game, and even baked a
> pie for game food. We separated three months later. Even that night,
> I knew this game would be one of a handful of good memories of our marriage.
> But, without the Sixth Game, that handful would have been one evening
> lighter. Thanks, boys.
>
> Oh yes. I was in Denver for January 1987 also. But I'll save that for
> alt.sports.football.ny-giants. ;-)
>
> jb
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> The above in no way reflects RAND policy, procedures, or even official
> thought. Mongo only pawn in game of life.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks, I doubt anyone will find an older post than that. I've been
posting about 20 years to Usenet, and I remember the regulars then
discussing their fondness for the group 10 years prior.

On 6/4/23 12:51, *ernie wrote:
>
>
> Thanks, I doubt anyone will find an older post than that. I've been
> posting about 20 years to Usenet, and I remember the regulars then
> discussing their fondness for the group 10 years prior.

It is sad that they are all gone. I was thinking about Bruce yelling
that the Wilpons were killing his last years of being a fan. He's been
silent for a long time.

On Sunday, June 4, 2023 at 7:30:27 PM UTC-4, Popping Mad wrote:
> On 6/4/23 12:51, *ernie wrote:
> >
> >
> > Thanks, I doubt anyone will find an older post than that. I've been
> > posting about 20 years to Usenet, and I remember the regulars then
> > discussing their fondness for the group 10 years prior.
> It is sad that they are all gone. I was thinking about Bruce yelling
> that the Wilpons were killing his last years of being a fan. He's been
> silent for a long time.

Probably those were his last years, period. I consider myself blessed to still be alive and well; as I'm sure everyone else is too.