That is correct. It happened again in 1993 when the Yanks were chasing the Jays.

1985 was also the year where Mary O’Dowd forgot the words to O, Canada.

You are right about the mid-September swoon, which oddly came after one of the seasons biggest moments. In the opening game of a 4 game set against the Jays, the Yankees rallied from behind to win, thanks in large part to a titanic HR hit by Ron Hassey (I can remember the “Babe Hassey” headlines the next day). Unfortunately, they lost the next three games and didn’t recover until it was too late.

Also, if my memory serves, I believe 1985 was the year Yankee fans booed Oh Canada, prompting Bob Sheppard to read a pre-game announcement recalling how Canadian military forces once assisted in a rescue of U.S. forces, or something like that.

[8] Agreed…the context and common sense just completely belie the language, which serves to distort what is explicit.

[9] They aren’t speaking to me or you or most people. That quote was referring to the wealthy clients of this particular real estate firm regarding a very select price level of seats. The fact of the matter is that the upper tier and bleachers will be similarly priced and in some cases cheaper. Sure, that means most people can’t sit in prime seats, but quite frankly, whether the best seats are 3K or $300 per, I am not going to be sitting in them anyway.

My now-understanding of the ‘85 season (which the 1985 version of me wouldn’t have agreed with) is that if the Yanks had just kept Rags in the rotation, they would have won that division crown.

Maybe, maybe not, but there was a big losing streak (8) in Sept that hurt the Yanks. They did manage to go on a tear in Sept as well, with a 3 game showdown in Exhibition for the division. I think the Yanks needed to sweep to tie.

“It’s obtainable,” he said. “In this economic time, people are still looking for things to take their children or grandchildren to.”

$7,000 a seat? For me and my children? It’s obtainable? I feel a rant coming on. What planet are they on? To whom are they speaking?

Ok, I totally slough off my Mets fan friends who complain about how egregious Yankee spending is because the truth is I’m secretly happy that they got me the x-mas presents I wanted.

What I find incomprehensible is that not only did the Yankees get tax breaks, but that my tax money helps pay for a stadium that I can no longer afford to enjoy.

That, in the building of said new stadium, they made no, not one attempt to make it environmentallly sound nor did they take any initiatives to reduce the amount of resources that they would be over-consuming, which will negatively impact the environement and drain more of our tax-payer money.

My Yankees are beloved. Don’t get me wrong. I know it’s not black and white. I get that I can’t have it all: a competing team: and a socially conscious organization I can respect. I must say that for today, I’m disappointed.

Tomorrow, I’ll go back to my low-level denial as I wax poetic about pitchers and catchers. Thanks for letting me rant.

Of course you can play a lot of “what if” with the mid-80s Yankees (all the kids traded away, the bad signings (Ed Whitson et al)), but that’s the one that always stood out most to me.

After all, in a colum written by Keith Law, who worked in the Toronto Front Office, he wrote the following:

“There is also a set of quotas governing how many Type A and B players one club may sign as free agents in one winter, with that number determined by the total number of Type A and B players who elect free agency in that offseason.”

As you can see, Law had it wrong, despite being both a pretty smart guy and a former MLB employee.

The 1986 team again had an excellent offense, but the pitching fell off. Still, the team won 90 games and was very much alive in September (if only Pags shot to right went out!!)

The 1987 squad took a big step back, but for a time, it look destined to win the East. As late as July 5, the Yankees held a 5 game lead, but then injuries to Henderson, Mattingly and Randolph crippled them.

Finally, in 1988, a very tight division kept the Yankees alive, but they were never really a threat after mid-August. That season was the start of the team’s decline, which lasted through 1993.

Clearly, the best team and biggest regret was 1985. Arguably, it was the best Yankee team to not make the post season, and probably better than at least a handful of those that did.

I don’t think the rule is ambiguous at all. I agree with you that it doesn’t make much sense for it to be based on the total number of free agents, because that doesn’t impose any meaningful restrictions. So, rationally, that shouldn’t be what it means.

And yet, that’s exactly what it says, and I don’t think there’s any ambiguity about it. Here’s the language: “The number of signings permitted shall be related to the number of Players electing free agency under this Section B.”

Four other times in the same paragraph, when they want to refer to type A and B free agents, they specifically say “type A and B Players.” In an earlier paragraph, they draw a clear distinction between those two phrases when they refer to “a Player who: (i) became a free agent under this Section B; and (ii) ranks as a Type A or B Player as defined below…”

So everywhere else, those phrases are used specifically and distinctly. The concept may not make much sense, but it makes even less sense to think that lawyers drawing up a contract saw that phrase and thought, We’ll let that slide because you know what we mean. And even if that’s what they meant, it’s not what they said, and that’s all that matters in a contract.

I think the language is clear and unambiguous, even if it seems stupid (which it does).

It would be, but given the people they’re catering to, they have no need to be a bit more educated on the topic. And that’s a shame.

As for the Mets’ patch, you’d think they’d do a better job than that.

As for the 85-89 Yankees, they had a decent offense (despite problems @ SS & 3b), but the pitching was fairly lousy. They only had a realistic shot @ a division title twice; in 1985 & 1988.

Is it really that outrageous to say that Rickey Henderson of the 80s would be one of the highest paid players in the game today?

No it isn’t considering he was one of the highest paid players during the 80′s.