I think if they do that and give it a try, people are going to be pleasantly surprised. Yeah it might take an extra 15 minutes to get there, but you don't have to worry about rain outs, and according to plans there will be bars and restaurants around the ballpark so you can make a whole evening out of it. It's going to be much better than swinging by Walmart for a sandwich and some tallboys that I do now. I will also say that since they put in the express lane on I95 it has made driving on it much better, so it will help getting down here.

 

 

To me (and I think most people from Broward, PB, and north), it's not the getting there part of it. If I can't close up the shop a little earlier than I do now, and have to arrive during the early part of the games, then so be it. It's the getting out of there part of it. Especially week nights. I can't see how it won't be a bottleneck leaving. Maybe I'm just being overly pessimistic tho. Saturday night and Sunday afternoon games I could care in the least how long it takes to get home. Heck, Sunday afternoons we may even make a habit of hitting the local restaurants for an early dinner to blow off some time.

I didn't say I object to retiring numbers, but Barger wasn't a player and doesn't need a number. Put him into a Marlins Hall of Fame or ring of honor, or build a monument on the Plaza. Retiring numbers are for players or managers. Team presidents shouldn't get that honor because they don't wear uniforms to do their jobs. All I'm saying is there are more appropriate ways to pay respect to what he did for the franchise. A plaque on display somewhere can at least explain who he was and why he's being remembered. Now most people see the #5 flag with no explanation and wonder who he was.

 

 

Now that you explained it better, I see your point. That first part with the 200 year example was absurd exagerration.

 

But I still disagree. That retired number was given for his contributions to the birth of the team and it has been retired from Day One. Leave it that way. It is a part of our history. If some fans don't know what that flag stands for then it is our job to explain it to them. Just as it is our job to explain to the unknowing what any part of our history is, in and out of baseball. (Example---- I doubt very much if everyone in Miami knows who Julia Tuttle was, and I believe there is even a bridge or something named after her there.) I'm a huge LoMo fan, but the number on his back won't make him play any better.

 

First of all, why should it be our job to explain why the team retired a number for someone who never wore one? The man served as team president for a year and a half before we ever played a single game. I'm not trying to disrespect what he did for the team, but really, are whatever contributions he made for that short amount of time really worthy of the highest honor someone can get in the sport?? A plaque is far more appropriate, just as it would be for a team owner, GM, or broadcaster that played a significant role with a team. Also, the Julia Tuttle thing is different from this situation. You would expect local bridges and roadways to be named after locals or historical figures. That is a normal thing to do. It's not a normal thing for a team president to be given a retired number...that is an honor that should be reserved for someone who played the game.

 

Well, it's quite evident you and I are never going to agree on this one. No biggie. And it's not like if they do unretire it I will stop going to the games. I sent my email off to Samson with my thoughts on it. After that, it's out of our hands. What will be, will be I guess.

 

And after reading the following posts, apparently I'm in the minority. What a surprise. LOL

I didn't say I object to retiring numbers, but Barger wasn't a player and doesn't need a number. Put him into a Marlins Hall of Fame or ring of honor, or build a monument on the Plaza. Retiring numbers are for players or managers. Team presidents shouldn't get that honor because they don't wear uniforms to do their jobs. All I'm saying is there are more appropriate ways to pay respect to what he did for the franchise. A plaque on display somewhere can at least explain who he was and why he's being remembered. Now most people see the #5 flag with no explanation and wonder who he was.

 

 

Now that you explained it better, I see your point. That first part with the 200 year example was absurd exagerration.

 

But I still disagree. That retired number was given for his contributions to the birth of the team and it has been retired from Day One. Leave it that way. It is a part of our history. If some fans don't know what that flag stands for then it is our job to explain it to them. Just as it is our job to explain to the unknowing what any part of our history is, in and out of baseball. (Example---- I doubt very much if everyone in Miami knows who Julia Tuttle was, and I believe there is even a bridge or something named after her there.) I'm a huge LoMo fan, but the number on his back won't make him play any better.

 

First of all, why should it be our job to explain why the team retired a number for someone who never wore one? The man served as team president for a year and a half before we ever played a single game. I'm not trying to disrespect what he did for the team, but really, are whatever contributions he made for that short amount of time really worthy of the highest honor someone can get in the sport?? A plaque is far more appropriate, just as it would be for a team owner, GM, or broadcaster that played a significant role with a team. Also, the Julia Tuttle thing is different from this situation. You would expect local bridges and roadways to be named after locals or historical figures. That is a normal thing to do. It's not a normal thing for a team president to be given a retired number...that is an honor that should be reserved for someone who played the game.

 

Well, it's quite evident you and I are never going to agree on this one. No biggie. And it's not like if they do unretire it I will stop going to the games. I sent my email off to Samson with my thoughts on it. After that, it's out of our hands. What will be, will be I guess.

 

And after reading the following posts, apparently I'm in the minority. What a surprise. LOL

 

For good reason too.

Your 2012 Carl Barger Marlins

 

 

Or how about: Your 2012 Miami Bargers

I didn't say I object to retiring numbers, but Barger wasn't a player and doesn't need a number. Put him into a Marlins Hall of Fame or ring of honor, or build a monument on the Plaza. Retiring numbers are for players or managers. Team presidents shouldn't get that honor because they don't wear uniforms to do their jobs. All I'm saying is there are more appropriate ways to pay respect to what he did for the franchise. A plaque on display somewhere can at least explain who he was and why he's being remembered. Now most people see the #5 flag with no explanation and wonder who he was.

 

 

Now that you explained it better, I see your point. That first part with the 200 year example was absurd exagerration.

 

But I still disagree. That retired number was given for his contributions to the birth of the team and it has been retired from Day One. Leave it that way. It is a part of our history. If some fans don't know what that flag stands for then it is our job to explain it to them. Just as it is our job to explain to the unknowing what any part of our history is, in and out of baseball. (Example---- I doubt very much if everyone in Miami knows who Julia Tuttle was, and I believe there is even a bridge or something named after her there.) I'm a huge LoMo fan, but the number on his back won't make him play any better.

 

First of all, why should it be our job to explain why the team retired a number for someone who never wore one? The man served as team president for a year and a half before we ever played a single game. I'm not trying to disrespect what he did for the team, but really, are whatever contributions he made for that short amount of time really worthy of the highest honor someone can get in the sport?? A plaque is far more appropriate, just as it would be for a team owner, GM, or broadcaster that played a significant role with a team. Also, the Julia Tuttle thing is different from this situation. You would expect local bridges and roadways to be named after locals or historical figures. That is a normal thing to do. It's not a normal thing for a team president to be given a retired number...that is an honor that should be reserved for someone who played the game.

 

Well, it's quite evident you and I are never going to agree on this one. No biggie. And it's not like if they do unretire it I will stop going to the games. I sent my email off to Samson with my thoughts on it. After that, it's out of our hands. What will be, will be I guess.

 

And after reading the following posts, apparently I'm in the minority. What a surprise. LOL

 

For good reason too.

 

Not in my opinion. And so far it's only on this board, where there are a few that will take the other opinion just to start an argument.

 

We will be in Jupiter today, so I'm going to start asking other fans what they think of it. I think it's an interesting topic for between innings.

This just in: in a compromise move, d LoMo will legally change his name to Carl Barger and wear the #5.

This just in: in a compromise move, d LoMo will legally change his name to Carl Barger and wear the #5.

 

 

 

Okay. That's cute.

 

Didn't really see that many Marlins fans at the game yesterday. And the section we were in was all season ticket holders using the tickets from our vouchers that we turned in at FunFest back in January. Not one of them agreed with you guys.

This just in: in a compromise move, d LoMo will legally change his name to Carl Barger and wear the #5.

 

 

 

Okay. That's cute.

 

Didn't really see that many Marlins fans at the game yesterday. And the section we were in was all season ticket holders using the tickets from our vouchers that we turned in at FunFest back in January. Not one of them agreed with you guys.

In that case, we're all wrong.

This just in: in a compromise move, d LoMo will legally change his name to Carl Barger and wear the #5.

 

 

 

Okay. That's cute.

 

Didn't really see that many Marlins fans at the game yesterday. And the section we were in was all season ticket holders using the tickets from our vouchers that we turned in at FunFest back in January. Not one of them agreed with you guys.

In that case, we're all wrong.

 

I don't see what the big deal is. It was a mistake/ shortsightedness to retire a number that was never wore. I guess your problem lies with the issue of un-retiring something? Well.. it shouldn't of been retired in the first place.

 

This just in: in a compromise move, d LoMo will legally change his name to Carl Barger and wear the #5.

 

 

I still smile when I see your .gif of Gaby clotheslining that guy.

This just in: in a compromise move, d LoMo will legally change his name to Carl Barger and wear the #5.

 

 

 

Okay. That's cute.

 

Didn't really see that many Marlins fans at the game yesterday. And the section we were in was all season ticket holders using the tickets from our vouchers that we turned in at FunFest back in January. Not one of them agreed with you guys.

youre a season ticket holder? Never knew that.

 

Don't know what your problem is with people that go to games. But, whatever.

 

Was just saying what section we were in because it may of showed some prejudice towards the outcome of the poll.

This just in: in a compromise move, d LoMo will legally change his name to Carl Barger and wear the #5.

 

 

 

Okay. That's cute.

 

Didn't really see that many Marlins fans at the game yesterday. And the section we were in was all season ticket holders using the tickets from our vouchers that we turned in at FunFest back in January. Not one of them agreed with you guys.

In that case, we're all wrong.

 

 

Nah. This is one of things where there is no right or wrong. Just differing opinions.

This just in: in a compromise move, d LoMo will legally change his name to Carl Barger and wear the #5.

 

 

 

Okay. That's cute.

 

Didn't really see that many Marlins fans at the game yesterday. And the section we were in was all season ticket holders using the tickets from our vouchers that we turned in at FunFest back in January. Not one of them agreed with you guys.

In that case, we're all wrong.

 

I don't see what the big deal is. It was a mistake/ shortsightedness to retire a number that was never wore. I guess your problem lies with the issue of un-retiring something? Well.. it shouldn't of been retired in the first place.

 

 

I think it probably has more to do with dumping our entire history. At FanFest Samson even said something along the lines that this would be a new franchise come 2012 and building it's own history. I believe that was when someone commented on losing the teal. So what's next? No flags representing 1997 and 2003? They weren't the Miami Marlins, the new franchise. They were the team this FO apparently wants everyone to mostly forget.

 

That number was retired to honor the memory of a man that contributed so much to the birth of this team and never got the opportunity to watch them. He died in the process of continuing the dream so many in South Florida had. So, I don't see what the big deal is in leaving it retired. Because it's LoMo that wants it? Honestly ask yourself, if it wasn't a fan fav and instead one of this boards man to blame for everything, would it make a difference then?

This just in: in a compromise move, d LoMo will legally change his name to Carl Barger and wear the #5.

 

 

 

Okay. That's cute.

 

Didn't really see that many Marlins fans at the game yesterday. And the section we were in was all season ticket holders using the tickets from our vouchers that we turned in at FunFest back in January. Not one of them agreed with you guys.

In that case, we're all wrong.

 

I don't see what the big deal is. It was a mistake/ shortsightedness to retire a number that was never wore. I guess your problem lies with the issue of un-retiring something? Well.. it shouldn't of been retired in the first place.

 

 

I think it probably has more to do with dumping our entire history. At FanFest Samson even said something along the lines that this would be a new franchise come 2012 and building it's own history. I believe that was when someone commented on losing the teal. So what's next? No flags representing 1997 and 2003? They weren't the Miami Marlins, the new franchise. They were the team this FO apparently wants everyone to mostly forget.

 

That number was retired to honor the memory of a man that contributed so much to the birth of this team and never got the opportunity to watch them. He died in the process of continuing the dream so many in South Florida had. So, I don't see what the big deal is in leaving it retired. Because it's LoMo that wants it? Honestly ask yourself, if it wasn't a fan fav and instead one of this boards man to blame for everything, would it make a difference then?

 

It's not that LoMo wants the number. It's that retiring it in the first place was kind of a silly thing to do since the man never wore a number. Nobody is saying to not honor Barger's place in team history. The problem I have is that as far as I can remember, his biggest actual contribution to the team was being the first person to have a number retired. Wayne and his money brought the dream of having a team here to reality. It's a shame Barger died so soon into his job, but just dying doesn't warrent the top honor that a team can give someone. Perhaps he did more then I give him credit for....that's why a plaque outlining all of his contributions is a much better way to honor him then a flag displaying a number he never wore.