I don't think I've ever heard a surly-Maris anecdote that didn't make me at least smile. It seemed like he was at least surly for a good reason.

Nothing can be as aggravating as a writer who gets one big thing right, and then draws a completely insane conclusion from it.

Yes, Maris did face an enormous amount of pressure that year. While he never got any of the racist crap that Aaron did, and while contrary to mythology, he did NOT get booed at Yankee Stadium until 1962, he DID face an entire Summer of petty sniping from sportswriters trying to discount his feat from every conceivable angle, all coming down to the fact that he wasn't Mickey Mantle, didn't cozy up to the press, and didn't have a high enough batting average.

So Allen has that part mostly right. But what in the hell does that have to do with the Hall of Fame? After all this is said and done, you still have a very good outfielder who had one historic season and a handful of other very good ones, plus a long decline phase that took up a big stretch of his relatively short career. You have to be f*ck*ng nuts to think that this is a serious HoF candidate.

And to compare him to Jackie Robinson---Jesus, that only makes you wonder how on Earth Maury Allen ever got a job in the first place. That's about on the same level as Clarence Thomas complaining about a "high tech lynching."

Yes, Maris did face an enormous amount of pressure that year. While he never got any of the racist crap that Aaron did, and while contrary to mythology, he did NOT get booed at Yankee Stadium until 1962, he DID face an entire Summer of petty sniping from sportswriters trying to discount his feat from every conceivable angle, all coming down to the fact that he wasn't Mickey Mantle, didn't cozy up to the press, and didn't have a high enough batting average.


This just hit me like a ton of bricks:

in terms of sportswriters regards of them:

Alex Rodriguez = Roger Maris
Derek Jeter = Mickey Mantle

Am I onto something here, or is it just final-paper-caused sleep deprivation making something more interesting than it is?

This just hit me like a ton of bricks:

in terms of sportswriters regards of them:

Alex Rodriguez = Roger Maris
Derek Jeter = Mickey Mantle

And what's even more ironic is that in many cases, the same writers who were complaining that Roger Maris wasn't Mickey Mantle, were previously complaining that Mickey Mantle wasn't Joe Dimaggio. If only Maris had thought to put together a 57 game hitting streak and then gone on to marry Brigitte Bardot.

If only Maris had thought to put together a 57 game hitting streak and then gone on to marry Brigitte Bardot.

If he'd done that, he would have been even more hated by the writers - "Who does this jerk think he is? Breaking Dimaggio's sacred record AND getting the sweetest piece of ass in Hollywood? What an arrogant prick".

Yeah, but he would have gotten every sheep and goat in France to show up at his funeral.

Fetchez la vache!

It is human nature to believe that whatever one covers is super-significant.

According to a 1998 AP story, Maury covered the final week of Maris's 1961 season for Sports Illustrated.

If Maris is as important as Jackie Robinson, that makes what Maury covered that much more historic, doesn't it?

And yes, one would wish he had a better sense of perspective.

I've tossed this idea out before ... so might as well again.

Maybe the HoF should have an official vote and enshrinement for great "moments" or seasons or whatever. I know they already have displays, but maybe if we could officially enshrine Maris' 61 HR, Mazeroski's WS-winning HR, Larsen's WS perfect game, Maury Wills stolen bases (along with Aaron's 715th, etc.) we'd get rid of a lot the whining about why players who did these great things aren't in the HoF. It would also offer us some protection if, say, Johnny Damon or (god forbid) Juan Pierre makes it to 3,000 hits.

Or maybe it would just make it worse as this would be another feather in their caps and their supporters would have even more to whine about.

January 20, 2008 is going to be sweet.

We're going to do 2008 over again? Ugh.

We're going to do 2008 over again? Ugh

I hope so. This time, I'm going ####### short.

(I'm excited, too, btw. I think we did good.)