Mets/Phils a Rivalry? Not Just Yet
By Mike Silva ~ February 18th, 2009. Filed under: Mike Silva.
Philly and New York are about ninety miles apart but, until recently, seem to never cross paths in baseball. All that has changed since 2007 and what probably will go down as collapse part one. It was that year that Jimmy Rollins issues “the team to beat” mantra that has become, almost comically, the spring discussion during media day in Port St. Lucie. Now it appears that the teams are also competing in other venues.
First Phil Sheridan of the Philadelphia Inquirer comments on the weak trash talk, I came across a Mets/Phillies rivalry blog, what’s next Mr. Met beating the Philly Phanatic in a competition? Wait that did happen. Is this rivalry now complete? With the teams competing on the field, media, and in business?
The jury is still out in my book. A rivalry means that two sides take it seriously. To date, I still don’t take the city of Philadelphia very seriously. It only took till 2007 for me to see conscious support of the Phillies on a consistent basis. That doesn’t make me forget all the nights that the Vet resembled a ghost town. I was there for a few of those nights. Don’t believe me? Email Howard Megdal and he will tell you. Mind you, this was not just when the Phillies were bad either. Although that has been the case the majority of time I have known the game of baseball. How can you build a rivalry when the other side doesn’t show up a majority of the time?
The Yankees and Red Sox grew their rivalry over the years and it’s ingrained in their history. Other New York rivalries have come and gone. The Knicks and Bulls were a great rivalry, but that was built up over the years. Pat Riley and the Heat played the Knicks almost every year in the playoffs. The whole Braves situation has worn off now that Bobby Cox and company have come back down to earth. I couldn’t even tell you if the Mets and Phillies are headed in the same direction. This year will probably determine it, but we have a long way to go. And, as the case with those basketball rivalries, they have a tendency to come and go.
The point is the city of Philadelphia needs something to latch on to. It appears the Mets are that target. I can’t complain since the Mets have done it to themselves by giving the Phils the division the last two years. Personally I still think this is a one sided rivalry. I am more concerned about how the Mets stack up against the NL. My sights are set bigger than just the East. If the Mets get to the playoffs, I will worry about Philadelphia if and when they play each other. And I can assure you that the fans, and media, will not be talking about Philly during any championship parade. It almost appears the other side rather see the Mets lose than the Phillies win. Even worse, they took the fact that the Mets didn’t make the playoffs as a personal affront. Why you ask? Because they felt their championship was tainted because they didn’t have to go through New York.
So with all due respect to the Philly media, bloggers, and even the Phanatic I really am not interested in having a rivalry. If a championship wasn’t enough to make you happy maybe you should start talking to your therapist. I will focus on discussing the game of baseball, and not use it to sooth any second city syndrome. There is no rivalry, because New York doesn’t care.
February 18th, 2009 at 8:21 am
Over the next few weeks WSBGM’s will be breaking down each of the NL East teams’ rosters. First on the docket is the infield (outfield, rotation, and bullpen to follow). There’s a poll to vote on the best NL East infield following the breakdown of each teams’ players.
Link: http://pabaseball.blogspot.com/2009/02/nl-east-infields.html
Give it a link if you like it…thanks.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:54 am
“To date, I still don’t take the city of Philadelphia very seriously. It only took till 2007 for me to see conscience support of the Phillies on a consistent basis.”
The word should be conscious – not conscience.
“The whole Braves situation has worn off now that Bobby Cox and company have come back down to earth.”
No, it hasn’t. Every team is in a rivalry with the Mets, especially the Braves. Remember when the Braves beat the Mets in a game last year, and it was quoted from several Braves players that they loved beating the Mets? Teams DO NOT have to be contenders not to have a rivalry.
The Mets are similar to the Dallas Cowboys in football. Every team in the NFC East division hates them and wants to beat them, whether they are good or bad during a season.
“If a championship wasn’t enough to make you happy maybe you should start talking to your therapist. I will focus on discussing the game of baseball, and not use it to sooth (sic) any second city syndrome. There is no rivalry, because New York doesn’t care.”
Then why write this article? Sounds like sour grapes after losing two straight season to Philadelphia.
The Mets – Phillies game of August 26th last year gives you all the reasons to believe this is indeed a rivalry. The Phillies were down 7-0 then came back and won by scoring single runs in the 8th and 9th innings, before winning in the 13th.
The Philadelphia/New York rivalry goes way back several hundred years to even before baseball, when Philly was the defacto capital of our country.
Even if fans don’t show up to the ballpark doesn’t mean they don’t care. Down the stretch last season, the Mets didn’t sell out every game.
Rivalries are built over time with fans, but the rivalry on the field is more important. And the current players on the Phillies want to beat the current players of the Mets more than even you believe.
Spring training talk isn’t a rivalry – the August 26, 2008 game shows there is one.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Mike,
You’ve missed the 7 train.
I grew up in New York, transplanted to South Jersey. Was at Game 7 in 86 and have the ticket stub stashed away somewhere.
Converted Phillies fan for about 5 years.
I can tell you about many years where Shea wasn’t a sell out and when you could go right up to the ticket window 15 minutes before game time and get any of thousands of seats, just like the old Phillies.
I was at many of the games at the Vet when Met fans came down and drowned out the Phillies cheers with their foot stomping.
I know that doesn’t happen anymore.
The historic Phillies franchies plays in a football town and everyone seems to know that. The Mets, they play in the shadows of the Yankees, and they always will. Or, it will take many, many years to get passed that. Many more in your book it would appear, going by the amount of time it takes for teams to have a ‘rivalry.’
Don’t look now, but that 7 train, it doesn’t matter anymore, just like the Mets.
Mike
February 18th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
As a long-time Phillies fan, let me say that attendance at the Vet wasn’t horrible. But it did have 20K more seat than it has now.
The Phillies ownership wasn’t really committed to winning until they had the revenue streams from the new stadium. I think, now, they realize that being committed to winning will produce more interest.
There was a famous “we’re a small market team” quote from the 90′s. Seriously, they didn’t seem to be trying. But there has always been a lot of Phillies fans who cared about the team.
One thing that will never work in Philly is perceived lack of effort.
February 18th, 2009 at 2:54 pm
I’ll agree with JeterFan – teams don’t have to be contenders to be involved in a rivalry.
Also, Mets-Phillies is most definitely a “rivalry”. Probably the 2nd biggest in baseball at this point. Any Met fan who has attended a game in Philly knows that. Compare to the experience of attending a game in Florida or Washington.
If Mets/Phils isn’t a rivalry, then what is? What are the baseball “rivalries”?
March 27th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Okay Mr. Silva keep pointing to the sky like Jose Reyass. When you finally look down again the Mets would have once again missed the playoffs, Carlos Roidtran, and K-Roid will be predicting that next year they will be the team to beat.
March 27th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Phil/Mets rivalry is the best thing in baseball today. These two teams have no problem dissing one another. By the way the way if you think the Mets just gave it away, it should be pointed out that the Phils had to win games as well. The Mets one ear got swept by the Nats, and the Phils beat the Nats to move on. The Mets did not deserve to win the division.