Scan barcode
patmcmanamon's review against another edition
3.0
The miserable Mets
Love Breslin, and wanted to read this cult classic on the expansion Mets. It’s basically well written Breslin essays filled with details, anecdotes and plenty of humor.
Love Breslin, and wanted to read this cult classic on the expansion Mets. It’s basically well written Breslin essays filled with details, anecdotes and plenty of humor.
rc90041's review against another edition
4.0
Laugh-out-loud hilarious for the first half or so. Not quite as hilarious in the back half, but it's a quick, sweet, short read about the worst season any team has ever had in the history of major league baseball that gets to the heart of why Mets fan love their losers.
ladyzluvcooljim's review against another edition
5.0
This is one of my favorite books I’ve read all year. For one, I’m a sucker for New York City writers; they have a wit and knack for description that just tickles me. For two, it has elements of all good stories: empathy, longevity, and the supposition that there is a higher being condemning certain people to cyclically and comically devastating fates for no apparent reason other than the enjoyment of others. It reaffirmed why I’m a Mets fan, a New York City fan, and a baseball fan.
Notable quotable:
“‘What are we building, a ballpark or a place to go to the toilet?’” (P. 16)
“The New York Mets are a team that was formed at the start of last season. They lost 120 games, which made them, on paper, the poorest team in modern baseball history. On the field they were even worse. The Mets did not lose games merely because they played badly. Never. The Mets lost because they played a brand of baseball which has not been seen in the Big Leagues in over twenty-five years. And in doing this they warmed the hearts of baseball fans everywhere. They became, in their first year of existence, almost a national symbol. Name one loyal American who can say that he does not love a team which loses 120 games in one season.” (P. 17)
“Otherwise, most legends should be regarded with suspicion. Although, if one is to have any fun out of life, one should proceed with the understanding that reminiscences are to be enjoyed, not authenticated.” (P. 19)
“With the Mets nothing changed, only the pages on the calendar. It was all one wonderful mistake.” (P. 24)
“‘’Can’t anybody here play this game?’’” (P. 30)
“‘They are without a doubt the worst team in the history of baseball,’ Bill Veeck was saying one day last summer. ‘I speak with authority. I had the St. Louis Browns. I also speak with longing. I’d love to spend the rest of the summer around the team. If you couldn’t have any fun with the Mets, you couldn’t have any fun any place.’” (P. 31)
“‘I married George for richer or poorer, for better or for worse,’ Hazel Weiss said. ‘But for heaven’s sakes, I didn’t marry him for lunch.’” (P. 59)
“You see, the Mets are losers, just like nearly everybody else in life. This is a team for the cab driver who gets held up and the guy who loses out on a promotion because he didn’t maneuver himself to lunch with the boss enough. It is the team for every guy who has to get out of bed in the morning and go to work for short money on a job he does not like. And it is the team for every woman who looks up ten years later and sees her husband eating dinner in a T-shirt and wonders how the hell she ever let this guy talk her into getting married. The Yankees? Who does well enough to root for them, Laurence Rockefeller?” (P. 75)
“For consistency, Philadelphia baseball, among other things in the town, always has been the worst.” (P. 80)
“People did not follow the Mets. They loved the Mets.” (P. 87)
Notable quotable:
“‘What are we building, a ballpark or a place to go to the toilet?’” (P. 16)
“The New York Mets are a team that was formed at the start of last season. They lost 120 games, which made them, on paper, the poorest team in modern baseball history. On the field they were even worse. The Mets did not lose games merely because they played badly. Never. The Mets lost because they played a brand of baseball which has not been seen in the Big Leagues in over twenty-five years. And in doing this they warmed the hearts of baseball fans everywhere. They became, in their first year of existence, almost a national symbol. Name one loyal American who can say that he does not love a team which loses 120 games in one season.” (P. 17)
“Otherwise, most legends should be regarded with suspicion. Although, if one is to have any fun out of life, one should proceed with the understanding that reminiscences are to be enjoyed, not authenticated.” (P. 19)
“With the Mets nothing changed, only the pages on the calendar. It was all one wonderful mistake.” (P. 24)
“‘’Can’t anybody here play this game?’’” (P. 30)
“‘They are without a doubt the worst team in the history of baseball,’ Bill Veeck was saying one day last summer. ‘I speak with authority. I had the St. Louis Browns. I also speak with longing. I’d love to spend the rest of the summer around the team. If you couldn’t have any fun with the Mets, you couldn’t have any fun any place.’” (P. 31)
“‘I married George for richer or poorer, for better or for worse,’ Hazel Weiss said. ‘But for heaven’s sakes, I didn’t marry him for lunch.’” (P. 59)
“You see, the Mets are losers, just like nearly everybody else in life. This is a team for the cab driver who gets held up and the guy who loses out on a promotion because he didn’t maneuver himself to lunch with the boss enough. It is the team for every guy who has to get out of bed in the morning and go to work for short money on a job he does not like. And it is the team for every woman who looks up ten years later and sees her husband eating dinner in a T-shirt and wonders how the hell she ever let this guy talk her into getting married. The Yankees? Who does well enough to root for them, Laurence Rockefeller?” (P. 75)
“For consistency, Philadelphia baseball, among other things in the town, always has been the worst.” (P. 80)
“People did not follow the Mets. They loved the Mets.” (P. 87)
milamoo's review against another edition
funny
informative
lighthearted
fast-paced
3.25
The descriptions of plays made my eyes glaze over at times, but I really enjoyed learning about the history of the team in depth from someone who was there.
jdcorley's review against another edition
funny
medium-paced
4.0
Breslin is perhaps the greatest American journalist ever to live, certainly the greatest columnist, and here he turns one of the most astonishing stories in American professional sports into a languorous ramble through what is the losing-est season in Major League Baseball, what it means to love a sports team, what it means to love a losing sports team, what it means to be a loser. He quotes someone, then cites a fact that's as sharp as a needle popping a balloon. The difference between being a journalist and being a non-fiction writer has never been on better display here, with journalism carrying with it its own merits. Exceptional.
persey's review against another edition
4.0
This is a hoot. The dated humor works in this snapshot of an era. Fast and fun for any baseball fan or New Yorker - a must if you’re both.
alanfederman's review
4.0
Good fun! Jimmy Breslin brings a snarky, sports columnists voice to the truly horrible 1962 New York Mets - arguably the worst, but yet most lovable team in baseball history. At times he's a one-trick pony (we get it, they are so bad they are good!), but his portrayal of early 60s New York and baseball at the time is worth the read.
More...