Red Sox want Yawkey Way renamed

robert terwilliger

the bart, the
Nov 14, 2005
24,059
511
sw florida
I mean, we could always set our sights on memorializing and idolizing those with a higher set of morals, regardless of what things may have been like "back in the day."

yeah and then just rename it in 60 years when whoever they name it after doesn't fit the political environment. like those schools in texas and louisiana. or the places named lee, jackson, jefferson, et all who were complicated, interesting people who lived in a time where every waking moment wasn't examined by people who deemed themselves better than anyone else.
 

TheMoreYouKnow

Registered User
May 3, 2007
16,407
3,448
38° N 77° W
If you do, you can just change the name again. It's easy. Name something after someone, have a change of heart as social mores evolve, and change it. It's really not so difficult. If that new name ends up having connotations that grow increasingly fraught, you can keep changing it to suit the times.

It's not exactly baseball, which is very reluctant to embrace change, but it's not sacrilege. Change is natural. What was once unobjectionable can grow untenable over time as the line moves.

That's pretty silly and counter the objective of a place name - to make the place recognizable and easy to locate. If you change a name 5 times in 20 years, you're just making sure that there's 5 different names out there..and that's exactly what standardized official place names were meant to avoid.

You also permanently politicize something that's really just a part and parcel of every day life for most people and something representing the tapestry of history for those with an interest in it.

Paris is full of place names based around Napoleon Bonaparte, a man who went from fighting for a Republic to oppressing other peoples around Europe, killing countless in the process, all in the pursuit of glory. I guess they should change the names to random currently 'morally acceptable' celebrities because you know it's not like its history plays any role in making Paris what it is..
 

Chazz Reinhold

Registered User
Sep 6, 2005
9,022
2,680
The Stanley Cup
Here's another serious question. Without googling it, how many people even knew he was a racist? I mean Red Sox fans have been going to Fenway park forever basically and I'm wondering if most of them even knew the history or even cared or even care about changing the street name
Does that matter? How many people actually know the real history behind Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, and that statutes that post-hoc "commemorate" them? Seems completely irrelevant.
 

hockeykicker

Moderator
Dec 3, 2014
35,181
12,784
Does that matter? How many people actually know the real history behind Robert E. Lee, Jefferson Davis, and that statutes that post-hoc "commemorate" them? Seems completely irrelevant.

Lol people know about Robert e Lee, Jefferson davis etc considering they teach that information over years of history classes in school. They don't teach Red Sox history
 

Chazz Reinhold

Registered User
Sep 6, 2005
9,022
2,680
The Stanley Cup
Lol people know about Robert e Lee, Jefferson davis etc considering they teach that information over years of history classes in school. They don't teach Red Sox history
But do they? I'd say it's pretty clear Americans either don't know, don't care to know (probably likely), or probably disingenuously pretend not to know (probably most likely) what this reverence for Lee/Davis/etc. really means. And whether or not people know is not really relevant to whether or not those statues should be removed. The fact that they stand for awful aspects of American history by themselves is enough.

EDIT: And to clarify, the parallel I'm attempting to make (I'm not attempting to make this a discussion about the merits of Confederate statues but merely use them as a comparison since they are being discussed many places ad naseum) is that whether or not people know that Yawkey was a racist individual shouldn't matter in this discussion. What should matter is that he was and that people want to change this reverence for him.
 
Last edited:

robert terwilliger

the bart, the
Nov 14, 2005
24,059
511
sw florida
there is no reverence for yawkey. there is undoubtedly a recognition that whether he was a nice person or not he did an unbelievable amount of good for the boston red sox baseball team in his time as owner and posthumously established the yawkey foundation.

the reverence for him ends there for most people. they recognize those things while also recognizing that he was the owner of the team that famously was the last to integrate. we know this now. what people have said through the years is that this is definitely regrettable but you can still recognize that he did a lot of good in his life.
 

Drake1588

UNATCO
Sponsor
Jul 2, 2002
30,100
2,494
Northern Virginia
That's pretty silly and counter the objective of a place name - to make the place recognizable and easy to locate. If you change a name 5 times in 20 years, you're just making sure that there's 5 different names out there..and that's exactly what standardized official place names were meant to avoid.

You also permanently politicize something that's really just a part and parcel of every day life for most people and something representing the tapestry of history for those with an interest in it.

Paris is full of place names based around Napoleon Bonaparte, a man who went from fighting for a Republic to oppressing other peoples around Europe, killing countless in the process, all in the pursuit of glory. I guess they should change the names to random currently 'morally acceptable' celebrities because you know it's not like its history plays any role in making Paris what it is..
Five times in 20 years is certainly a lot, but I doubt that's in any way a realistic scenario. In general, though, people will learn where things are and adapt quickly.

This very thing happened in Montreal over the last 20 to 30 years. French names replaced a bunch of older English place names. Was there resistance? Sure. Did people start bumping into walls and not getting to where they needed to go? No. They managed to keep in their heads what names replaced the older names just fine.

There are arguments against the change, but they aren't about no longer being able to find one's destination.

I would push back against Napoleon as an example, because the French still revere him. I wouldn't say he's nearly the controversial figure to the French as is the Confederacy in the US today. To everyone else, sure, he was a conqueror and a tyrant. Yet others don't have Napoleonic-era place names today; those countries that did briefly after he went on a naming spree following his conquests replaced them long ago. The French do still have those place names and few large-scale movements to replace them have emerged - he's a source of national pride and a symbol of French puissance, which is doubly treasured since it has been lost. Figures like Robespierre are more reviled for the domestic strife associate with the Terror. To the French, Napoleon isn't nearly so tarnished by that brush.

Better French examples would likely have to do with their fraught history of institutionalized anti-semitism, exposed during the Dreyfus Affair. A number of official/military figures from that era (to whom monuments/place names persist) likely would not stand up well under the light of history when their contemporary views are taken into consideration today. It wouldn't surprise me if many such monuments/place names have already been changed, though. The nation already went through its own period of national regret over that era of its history.
 
Sep 19, 2008
373,495
24,608
Yeah, Napoleon is kind of an extreme example that makes very little sense. However with current events Yawkey Way is kind of inappropriate. Lee Highway still exists as do Jefferson Davis Highway and other such streets. Although they are planning to rename them.
 

N o o d l e s

Registered User
Jul 17, 2010
15,378
7,071
South Shore
I certainly think that Yawkey himself shouldn't really be celebrated in any way, but it seems forced to change the street name now. It should have been done years ago.

So, long story short, I fully support changing the name of the street but I wish this was done when it should have and not now, when it seems like a "trendy" thing to do.

I guess to clarify: I don't think the team's intentions are truly genuine or for the reason that it SHOULD be being done.
 

Fenway

HF Bookie and Bruins Historian
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2007
68,867
99,217
Cambridge, MA
1950's Boston was an extremely racist city and to this day it can not shake that image. Last Sunday John Oliver took a swipe at Boston over the reputation. There was no major push in the newspapers for the Red Sox to integrate with the exception of columnist Dave Egan who never went to games and his career is most noted for attacking Ted Williams often.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2013/12...-hit-harder/6354oT35Slld0eybr2QfpJ/story.html

Between 1939 and 1960, the years spanning Ted’s career with the Red Sox, Boston had eight major newspapers, or nine if one counted both the morning and evening editions of The Boston Globe, which had separate staffs and circulations. The morning papers were the Post, the Herald, the Record, the Daily Globe and the Christian Science Monitor. The evening journals were the American, the Transcript, the Traveler, and the Evening Globe. The Post and the Record dominated the city in 1940 with circulations of 369,000 and 329,000 respectively.

In the ’30s, ’40s, and ’50s, major league baseball was by far the dominant sport in the country, and would often take up a third of the front page of newspapers in Boston, New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia. To be a baseball writer assigned to cover one of the big league teams was a highly prized assignment.

The writers wore suits. On long road trips, they’d play poker on the trains with the players and among themselves. Some great yarns came out of those trips, but in the fraternal milieu, it was understood that the stories would stay in-house, never to turn up in print.

On average, the writers were a generation-or-more older than the players they covered. Before World War II, the vast majority had not gone to college, and in the ’40s, their salaries ranged between $5,000 and $7,000 a year. But you couldn’t beat the perks. In what seems a quaint anachronism today, it was common practice at least into the ’60s for the ball clubs to pay all the expenses of the writers when the teams traveled. The reporters would stay at the best hotels, order from room service, and eat at fine restaurants. Moreover, they spent six weeks in Florida for Spring Training on the teams’ tab as well. In return for such largesse, the clubs of course expected, even demanded, favorable coverage, and they received it. On the rare occasions they did not, the teams would not hesitate to assert their economic leverage over the papers.

Nothing else in Boston was integrating then so why should the Red Sox become trailblazers and antagonize the fanbase? Keep in mind the Braves integrated and their attendance collapsed and 4 years after winning the NL Pennant they were gone to Milwaukee.

Baseball owners for the most part were racist in that era with the exception of Bill Veeck. The Yankees were the second to last team to integrate and wound up being the only team in New York for a few years. AL owners allowed Calvin Griffith to move the Senators to Minnesota and gave Washington an expansion team in 1961.

http://www.startribune.com/recalling-ex-twins-owner-griffith-s-bigoted-outburst/257189521/

Taking questions from the audience, Griffith was asked why he brought the Twins to Minnesota from Washington, D.C., in 1961. Coleman wrote that Griffith answered the question with a criticism of Twin Cities sports reporters -- and then he changed direction, moving on to the subject that would dominate local headlines for days to come::

Coleman wrote "At that point Griffith interrupted himself, lowered his voice and asked if there were any blacks around. After he looked around the room and assured himself that his audience was white, Griffith resumed his answer. 'I'll tell you why we came to Minnesota,' he said. 'It was when I found out you only had 15,000 blacks here. Black people don't go to ball games, but they'll fill up a rassling ring and put up such a chant it'll scare you to death. It's unbelievable. We came here because you've got good, hardworking, white people here.' "

His comments have been recalled by Coleman and others in the aftermath of the NBA's ban of Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling for his remarks about African-Americans.

Griffith went on to call Twins superstar and Hall of Famer Rod Carew "a damn fool" for agreeing to a three-year contract that paid him $170,000 per year: "He only gets $170,000 and we all know damn well that he's worth a lot more than that, but that's what his agent asked for, so that's what he gets. Last year, I thought I was generous and gave him an extra 100 grand, but this year I'm not making any money so he gets 170 -- that's it."

The Dodgers and Giants moved to California in 1958 partly because the demographics near Ebbetts Field and the Polo Grounds had changed. Robert Moses wanted the Dodgers to move to Queens where Shea Stadium would be built later and Walter O'Malley said no.

The most racist owner in pro sports of that era was George Preston Marshall who owned the Redskins of the NFL who refused to sign a black player until ordered to do so by the US Government

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Preston_Marshall#Racism

Yawkey was no saint but if you ask people in Boston today, John W Henry is far more evil. :cry:
 

ADifferentTim

Knowledgeable & Pure
Dec 18, 2013
4,564
0
LACo/IE; SoCal
I am not even a Red Sox fan, and I actually applaud for the Henry ownership group to lead the complete healing of such wounds.

Besides, the Yawkey ownership era for the Red Sox franchise was an era of false hopes and promises, the same time the NBA Celtics owned Boston.
 

Fenway

HF Bookie and Bruins Historian
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2007
68,867
99,217
Cambridge, MA
I am not even a Red Sox fan, and I actually applaud for the Henry ownership group to lead the complete healing of such wounds.

Besides, the Yawkey ownership era for the Red Sox franchise was an era of false hopes and promises, the same time the NBA Celtics owned Boston.

EXCEPT - In Yawkey's Boston of the late 50's and 60's the Celtics were a hard sell at the box office even though they won 11 of 13 possible titles from 1957-1969. The Bruins were the worst team in the NHL for most of that period and they outdrew the Celtics in a big way.

Celtics attendance log

http://www.celticstats.com/misc/attendance.php

Bruins attendance log

http://www.hockeydb.com/nhl-attendance/att_graph.php?tmi=4919

One fact that can not be ignored - When the NL Braves integrated in 1950 - their attendance COLLAPSED but the Red Sox attendance stayed the same. It is safe to assume that he had employees telling him the same would happen to the Red Sox.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/teams/bravatte.shtml

I don't believe Yawkey was any more racist than society in general back then. But it is important to consider that nobody in the Boston media except for Dave Egan ever brought it up. Nobody ever asked Yawkey if he regretted not signing Willie Mays or being the last team to integrate.

15 years ago Bud Selig decided that John W Henry would be the new owner of the Red Sox even though he was not the high bidder - Charles Dolan was. Henry received a lot of goodwill for being the owner when the Red Sox finally won and he went on a real estate buying spree that went unchecked. He also bought the Boston Globe.

This is really complicated
 

Voight

#winning
Feb 8, 2012
40,656
17,029
Mulberry Street
It would take all other property owners on the street to agree, but I say leave it. Sure he had his flaws but he did a lot for that franchise and "Yawkey Way" just rolls of the tongue so easily.

This is only a discussion because of recent events in Charlottesville. They want to do this because its the flavour of the month. It'll blow over by Christmas at the most.
 

BackToTheBrierePatch

Nope not today.
Feb 19, 2003
66,174
24,578
Concord, New Hampshire
I don't believe Yawkey was any more racist than society in general back then. But it is important to consider that nobody in the Boston media except for Dave Egan ever brought it up. Nobody ever asked Yawkey if he regretted not signing Willie Mays or being the last team to integrate.

I think this is likely true. It is a awful black mark on the game that MLB took so long to introduce a black man into the sport. From everything that I have read the movie 42 is a pretty good description how owners, players and managers were back during that time period.
I didn't read the article, but I wonder how minorities who played for him felt about him. They would be the ones who would no best IMO
 

Fenway

HF Bookie and Bruins Historian
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2007
68,867
99,217
Cambridge, MA
Red Sox make it official today

Boston Red Sox file petition to change name of Yawkey Way

The Red Sox are pushing the City of Boston to change the name of an iconic street adjacent to Fenway Park.

The team has filed a petition to change the name of Yawkey Way back to its former name of Jersey Street. The team says the move would show fans that Fenway "is inclusive and welcoming to all."
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
186,863
38,954
A guy who is trying to look like he is on the right side of history. If it's being re-named, just make it David Ortiz Way or something
 

Fenway

HF Bookie and Bruins Historian
Sponsor
Sep 26, 2007
68,867
99,217
Cambridge, MA
Yawkey Way is no more

ryan_fenway1_met.jpg
 

BKIslandersFan

F*** off
Sep 29, 2017
11,499
5,106
Brooklyn
All for renaming but what’s Jersey Street? What’s thats reference to? Was it the original name?

Yawkey was convinced that one of the reason the Braves attendance collapsed in the early 50's was that the National League had integrated and Boston at that time was a very racist city. There is no question that many white fans did stop following the Braves. Vin Scully remembered that everywhere Brooklyn went there was excitement except Braves Field which he said was a tomb. Yawkey did employ some executives and managers who were indeed racist - Pinky Higgins and Joe Cronin.

The Red Sox even moved spring training to Scottsdale Arizona in 1959 and that city did not allow blacks in the city after dark which meant players like Pumpsie and Earl Wilson had to say in a colored hotel. :shakehead

Mrs. Yawkey was not tolerant, Haywood Sullivan was behind Sox players being invited to the Winter Haven Elks - except the black players. John Harrington grew up in Irish Mission Hill and he was set in his ways.

Everyone knows that the Red Sox were the last to integrate but not many know who was second to last - the New York Yankees.

Yankees integrated 4 years before Red Sox. Just stop. Please. Just stop. This isn’t about your petty baseball rivalry. Red Sox has a serious dark mark on their history.

Jackie Robinson called him a racist, his interview shows his true color. He was racist. Stop defending this man.

Way to enforce the idea that Boston is a racist city.
 
Last edited:

DoyleG

Reality sucks, Princesses!
Dec 29, 2008
7,300
885
YEG-->YYJ-->YWG-->YYB
Boston Changes 'Yawkey Way' To 'Jersey Street' After Concerns Over Racist Legacy

Lauren McKone agrees that the Yawkey Way name should stay, even if just out of nostalgia.

"It's like a tradition now," the 25-year-old says. "You come to Yawkey Way, and you get sausage on the street before the game. I like Yawkey Way, and it would be weird if it changed from Yawkey Way now."

Especially weird, she says to see the street revert to its old name: Jersey Street. As many have noted, that might not be such a great trade for the Red Sox. The Jersey Street name was apparently meant to honor the British Isle of Jersey, where — in a long ago era — local aristocracy boosted their fortunes buying and selling slaves.

As the French might say: Le Oops. :laugh:
 

Cheese Wagstaff

Registered User
Dec 11, 2017
1,418
976
Probably just a temporary name while they get around to naming it David Ortiz Did Steroids Boulevard.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad