Pittsburgh’s Pie Ala Mode

One of Pittsburgh’s most beloved citizens and a Hall of Fame third baseman for the Pirates was Harold “Pie”  Traynor.   A local television station gave him the above nickname.  Pie would be somewhere  outside of Forbes Field before every Pirate game talking to fans.  Regardless of who you were, Pie said hello and that famous “glad to see you” reply.   Traynor died in 1972 so he also had the same presence at Three Rivers Stadium.  The Pittsburgh Pirates moved to Three Rivers midway in the 1970 season.  Pie loved being with fans telling stories and answering questions.  He was a great ambassador for  the city of Pittsburgh.   On a serious note,  Traynor gave batting and fielding advice to Pirate players and Little Leaguers around the metropolitan area.  He was a very likable man.  Traynor was the Sports Director at KQV Radio and a spokesman for a local  HVAC company.  Pie started out the commercial with “Hi I’m Pie Traynor and I am batting for the American Heating Company.”

Traynor was great player but not a home run hitter.  His batting average always was well over .300.    Since Forbes Field had large dimensions, it was perfectly suited to Traynor.   Pie had such great bat control that he always could hit for the gaps.   With this type of hitter going into a slump is almost impossible.  Traynor had great speed and fielded third base like a high powered vacuum cleaner.  His lifetime figures, reflecting the years from 1923 to 1935 were as follows-2,416 hits, 58 home runs, 1, 273 runs batted in, and a lifetime batting average of an incomparable .329.  His lifetime fielding average was .947.  Here is a summary of his accomplishments:

–played over 150 games five times;

–scored over 100 runs twice;

–collected 208 hits in 1923;

–his batting average was over .300 10 times;

–highest batting average was .356 in 1929 and .366 the following year.

Traynor hit 12 home runs in 1923 and in all other  years his total was nine or less.

The following years were the best run producers.  I have never seen such a number of  runs batted in compared to home runs.  This reflects Pie’s ability to adapt to a wide range of pitchers and every type of pitch.  Traynor hit the baseball where the other guys weren’t.

1923  HR 12 RBI 101

1925  HR 6 RBI 106

1927  HR 5 RBI 106

1928  HR 3 RBI 124

1929  HR 4 RBI 108

1930  HR 9 RBI 119

1931  HR 2 RBI 103

Unusual Statistics. Great hitter.

Advertisements

Cincinnati Bengals in 1973

Losses in week 7 and week 8 of the 1973 season brought the Bengals to an even 4-4.  Both losses were on the road-20 to 13 to the Pittsburgh Steelers and 38 to 10 to the Dallas Cowboys.  After this came six consecutive wins, one of the great runs in Cincinnati history.  They won the AFC Central with a 10-4 record.  However, the Miami Dolphins defeated them in the first week of the playoffs 34 to 16.  Here were the best performances of the Bengals in the 1973 season.  Both of the games were at home.

Week Five vs Pittsburgh.

The Bengals, with great defense,  limited the Steelers to six first downs and 138 total yards.  They recorded four sacks on Terry Bradshaw for 39 yards in losses.  Boobie Clarke, in 28 carries, gained 112 yards and scored one touchdown.  Preston Preston caught a touchdown pass in the last minute of play to avoid a shutout. Bengals 19 Steelers 7.

Week Twelve vs Minnesota

The Bengals limited the Vikings to 201 yards.  Lemar Parrish returned a fumble 23 yards for one touchdown.  Essex Johnson ran 40 yards for another.  Since the Minnesota Vikings were 12-2 and wound up in the Super Bowl, this victory was one of the best in the team’s history.  Bengals 27 Vikings 0.

Cincinnati Bengals 1972 to 1978 I

During the subject seven years, the Bengals had one of the best teams in the NFL.   However, the AFC Central was the best in the league for the above time frame.   The 1972 Cincinnati team was 8-6. This was good for third place, behind the 11-3 Pittsburgh Steelers and the 10-4 Cleveland Browns.  There were two notable games.

Week 2 at home with the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Turnovers and penalties dominated the game.  The Bengals held the Steelers to 74 yards rushing and recorded four sacks for 32 yards.  Pittsburgh’s Ron Shanklin caught six passes for 82 yards.  Horst Muhlman kicked five field goals.  The Bengals overcame a 10 to 3 halftime deficit.  Bengals 15 Steelers 10

Week 14 at Houston

This finished a miserable 1-13 year for the Oilers. Kenny Anderson went 20 for 27 for 233 yards and a touchdown.  Doug Dressler was a show by himself-eight carries for 82 yards and two touchdowns and five catches for 69 yards and a touchdown.  Horst Muhlman kicked four field goals.  Lemar Parrish intercepted three passes for 90 yards and two touchdowns.  Neal Craig returned an interception 63 yards and one touchdown.  The debacle Bengals 61 Oilers 17.  

Senator George Norris-Speech In Congress Against Our Entrance Into World War I

THIS A IS A GREAT SUMMARY IN BOTH DOLLARS AND FEELINGS AGAINST OUR ENTRANCE INTO WORLD WAR I

While I am most emphatically and sincerely opposed to taking any step that will force our country into the useless and senseless war now being waged in Europe, yet, if this resolution passes, I shall not permit my feeling of opposition to its passage to interfere in any way with my duty either as a senator or as a citizen in bringing success and victory to American arms. I am bitterly opposed to my country entering the war, but if, notwithstanding my opposition, we do enter it, all of my energy and all of my power will be behind our flag in carrying it on to victory.

NORRIS HERE STATES HE WILL SUPPORT ALL EFFORTS TO WIN THE WAR IF THE DECLARATION PASSES.  THIS MEANT PASSING ALL REVENUE BUT DID NOT MEAN HE WOULD CONSENT TO VIOLATION OF CIVIL LIBERTIES THAT WERE GOING ON IN THE WILSON ADMINISTRATION.

The resolution now before the Senate is a declaration of war. Before taking this momentous step, and while standing on the brink of this terrible vortex, we ought to pause and calmly and judiciously consider the terrible consequences of the step we are about to take. We ought to consider likewise the route we have recently traveled and ascertain whether we have reached our present position in a way that is compatible with the neutral position which we claimed to occupy at the beginning and through the various stages of this unholy and unrighteous war.

HERE IS PUT IN SIMPLER TERMS IS WHAT CAUSED US TO SIDE WITH BRITAIN AND FRANCE AND ABANDON OUR POLICY OF NEUTRALLY.

No close student of recent history will deny that both Great Britain and Germany have, on numerous occasions since the beginning of the war, flagrantly violated in the most serious manner the rights of neutral vessels and neutral nations under existing international law, as recognized up to the beginning of this war by the civilized world.

THE REASONS CANNOT BE VIOLATIONS OF THE RIGHTS OF NEUTRAL VESSELS.  BOTH SIDES HAD DONE IT.

The reason given by the President in asking Congress to declare war against Germany is that the German government has declared certain war zones, within which, by the use of submarines, she sinks, without notice, American ships and destroys American lives. . . . The first war zone was declared by Great Britain. She gave us and the world notice of it on, the 4th day of November, 1914. The zone became effective Nov. 5, 1914. . . . This zone so declared by Great Britain covered the whole of the North Sea. . . . The first German war zone was declared on the 4th day of February, 1915, just three months after the British war zone was declared. Germany gave fifteen days’ notice of the establishment of her zone, which became effective on the 18th day of February, 1915. The German war zone covered the English Channel and the high seawaters around the British Isles. . . .

GREAT BRITAIN HAD CONTROL OF THE SEAS AND USED ITS POWER EARLIER WITH NO TIME FOR NON-ALIGNED POWERS TO ADJUST.  GB WAS CLEARLY MORE AGGRESSIVE IN BOTH TIMING AND AREA COVERED.

It is unnecessary to cite authority to show that both of these orders declaring military zones were illegal and contrary to international law. It is sufficient to say that our government has officially declared both of them to be illegal and has officially protested against both of them. The only difference is that in the case of Germany we have persisted in our protest, while in the case of England we have submitted.

THE UNITED STATES DECLARED THE ACTIONS OF BOTH GREAT BRITAIN AND GERMANY  WERE AGAINST INTERNATIONAL LAW.   DESPITE THE MORE AGGRESSIVE OF GREAT BRITAIN,  WE SUBMITTED TO THEIR ACTIONS BUT PERSISTED AGAINST GERMANY.

What was our duty as a government and what were our rights when we were confronted with these extraordinary orders declaring these military zones? First, we could have defied both of them and could have gone to war against both of these nations for this violation of international law and interference with our neutral rights. Second, we had the technical right to defy one and to acquiesce in the other. Third, we could, while denouncing them both as illegal, have acquiesced in them both and thus remained neutral with both sides, although not agreeing with either as to the righteousness of their respective orders. We could have said to American shipowners that, while these orders are both contrary to international law and are both unjust, we do not believe that the provocation is sufficient to cause us to go to war for the defense of our rights as a neutral nation, and, therefore, American ships and American citizens will go into these zones at their own peril and risk

THE FIRST COURSE WAS IMPOSSIBLE AND ILL ADVISED.  THE ADMINISTRATION  DID THE SECOND WHICH NORRIS CONSIDERED WRONG.   THE THIRD WAS WHAT SENATOR NORRIS WANTED.   PEOPLE TRAVEL AT THEIR OWN RISK AND CORPORATION LOSE CARGO.  THE CORPORATION CLAIMED THEY ARE RISK TAKER AND LET THEM HONE UP TO THEIR WORDS.

Fourth, we might have declared an embargo against the shipping from American ports of any merchandise to either one of these governments that persisted in maintaining its military zone. We might have refused to permit the sailing of any ship from any American port to either of these military zones. In my judgment, if we had pursued this course, the zones would have been of short duration. England would have been compelled to take her mines out of the North Sea in order to get any supplies from our country. When her mines were taken out of the North Sea then the German ports upon the North Sea would have been accessible to American shipping and Germany would have been compelled to cease her submarine warfare in order to get any supplies from our nation into German North Sea ports.

THIS ASSUMES THE UNITED STATES WOULD BE AN ACTIVIST FOR PEACE BY FORBIDDING  OUR SHIPS TO GO TO EITHER PORT.  THIS TO NORRIS WOULD SHOW THE WORLD THAT UNITED STATES WANTS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BELLICOSE ACTION OF EITHER PARTY. THAT IS FAIR WAY TO DO THING.

There are a great many American citizens who feel that we owe it as a duty to humanity to take part in this war. Many instances of cruelty and inhumanity can be found on both sides. Men are often biased in their judgment on account of their sympathy and their interests. To my mind, what we ought to have maintained from the beginning was the strictest neutrality. If we had done this, I do not believe we would have been on the verge of war at the present time. We had a right as a nation, if we desired, to cease at any time to be neutral. We had a technical right to respect the English war zone and to disregard the German war zone, but we could not do that and be neutral.

NORRIS BELIEVED THAT WE HAVE A RIGHT TO DECIDE OUR COURSE OF ACTION.  BUT WHAT WE DID BROUGHT US INTO THE WAR.  HE SPOKE OF THE CRUELTY AND INHUMANITY ON BOTH SIDES.

I have no quarrel to find with the man who does not desire our country to remain neutral. While many such people are moved by selfish motives and hopes of gain, I have no doubt but that in a great many instances, through what I believe to be a misunderstanding of the real condition, there are many honest, patriotic citizens who think we ought to engage in this war and who are behind the President in his demand that we should declare war against Germany. I think such people err in judgment and to a great extent have been misled as to the real history and the true facts by the almost unanimous demand of the great combination of wealth that has a direct financial interest in our participation in the war.

MANY PEOPLE, QUITE WELL INTENTIONED, HONESTLY BELIEVED THAT PRESIDENT KNEW BEST.  TO DISAGREE WITH HIM, TO THOSE PEOPLE, WOULD BE UNPATRIOTIC .  THE CLOSER HISTORICAL TIES TO GREAT BRITAIN MEANT THAT THAT THE UNITED STATES SHOULD ALIGN THEMSELVES WITH THEM.  MANY PEOPLE THAT WE WOULD, BY FIGHTING IN THIS WAR, BE MAKING A CASE THE THE UNIVERSAL APPEAL OF DEMOCRACY.  THIS IS NAIVE AND SIMPLISTIC TO NORIS AND TO ME.

We have loaned many hundreds of millions of dollars to the Allies in this controversy. While such action was legal and countenanced by international law, there is no doubt in my mind but the enormous amount of money loaned to the Allies in this country has been instrumental in bringing about a public sentiment in favor of our country taking a course that would make every bond worth a hundred cents on the dollar and making the payment of every debt certain and sure. Through this instrumentality and also through the instrumentality of others who have not only made millions out of the war in the manufacture of munitions, etc., and who would expect to make millions more if our country can be drawn into the catastrophe, a large number of the great newspapers and news agencies of the country have been controlled and enlisted in the greatest propaganda that the world has ever known to manufacture sentiment in favor of war.

HERE WERE THE MANY MORE LOANS MADE TO BRITAIN THAN TO GERMANY.  THE MUNITIONS INDUSTRY HAS MADE WAR OF BUSINESS.  SENATOR NORRIS IMPLIES AN UNWRITTEN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THESE TO PARTIES AND NEWSPAPERS TO “SELL” THE WAR.

It is now demanded that the American citizens shall be used as insurance policies to guarantee the safe delivery of munitions of war to belligerent nations. The enormous profits of munition manufacturers, stockbrokers, and bond dealers must be still further increased by our entrance into the war. This has brought us to the present moment, when Congress, urged by the President and backed by the artificial sentiment, is about to declare war and engulf our country in the greatest holocaust that the world has ever known.

In showing the position of the bondholder and the stockbroker, I desire to read an extract from a letter written by a member of the New York Stock Exchange to his customers. This writer says:

Regarding the war as inevitable, Wall Street believes that it would be preferable to this uncertainty about the actual date of its commencement. Canada and Japan are at war and are more prosperous than ever before. The popular view is that stocks would have a quick, clear, sharp reaction immediately upon outbreak of hostilities, and that then they would enjoy an old-fashioned bull market such as followed the outbreak of war with Spain in 1898. The advent of peace would force a readjustment of commodity prices and would probably mean a postponement of new enterprises. As peace negotiations would be long drawn out, the period of waiting and uncertainty for business would be long. If the United States does not go to war, it is nevertheless good opinion that the preparedness program will compensate in good measure for the loss of the stimulus of actual war.

Here we have the Wall Street view. Here we have the man representing the class of people who will be made prosperous should we become entangled in the present war, who have already made millions of dollars, and who will make many hundreds of millions more if we get into the war. Here we have the cold-blooded proposition that war brings prosperity to that class of people who are within the viewpoint of this writer.

He expresses the view, undoubtedly, of Wall Street, and of thousands of men elsewhere who see only dollars coming to them through the handling of stocks and bonds that will be necessary in case of war. “Canada and Japan,,” he says, “are at war, and are more prosperous than ever before.”

THE STOCK EXCHANGE LETTER SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE WIDELY PUBLICIZED.   THIS IA  ALMOST A 100% ADMISSION OF GUILT.

To whom does war bring prosperity? Not to the soldier who for the munificent compensation of $16 per month shoulders his musket and goes into the trench, there to shed his blood and to die if necessary; not to the brokenhearted widow who waits for the return of the mangled body of her husband; not to the mother who weeps at the death of her brave boy; not to the little children who shiver with cold; not to the babe who suffers from hunger; nor to the millions of mothers and daughters who carry broken hearts to their graves. War brings no prosperity to the great mass of common and patriotic citizens. It increases the cost of living of those who toil and those who already must strain every effort to keep soul and body together. War brings prosperity to the stock gambler on Wall Street–to those who are already in possession of more wealth than can be realized or enjoyed.

Again this writer says that if we cannot get war, “it is nevertheless good opinion that the preparedness program will compensate in good measure for the loss of the stimulus of actual war.” That is, if we cannot get war, let us go as far in that direction as possible. If we cannot get war, let us cry for additional ships, additional guns, additional munitions, and everything else that will have a tendency to bring us as near as possible to the verge of war. And if war comes, do such men as these shoulder the musket and go into the trenches?

Their object in having war and in preparing for war is to make money. Human suffering and the sacrifice of human life are necessary, but Wall Street considers only the dollars and the cents. The men who do the fighting, the people who make the sacrifices are the ones who will not be counted in the measure of this great prosperity that he depicts. The stockbrokers would not, of course, go to war because the very object they have in bringing on the war is profit, and therefore they must remain in their Wall Street offices in order to share in that great prosperity which they say war will bring. The volunteer officer, even the drafting officer, will not find them. They will be concealed in their palatial offices on Wall Street, sitting behind mahogany desks, covered up with clipped coupons–coupons soiled with the sweat of honest toil, coupons stained with mothers’ tears, coupons dyed in the lifeblood of their fellowmen.

TO THE MILLIONS OF SUFFER FROM, THE GOVERNMENT ATTEMPTS TO FOOL THEM BY SAYING HOW GREAT THEY ARE.  WAR BRINGS PROFIT TO A MINORITY AND SUFFERING TO MILLIONS.

We are taking a step today that is fraught with untold danger. We are going into war upon the command of gold. We are going to run the risk of sacrificing millions of our countrymen’s lives in order that other countrymen may coin their lifeblood into money. And even if we do not cross the Atlantic and go into the trenches, we are going to pile up a debt that the tolling masses that shall come many generations after us will have to pay. Unborn millions will bend their backs in toil in order to pay for the terrible step we are now about to take.

We are about to do the bidding of wealth’s terrible mandate. By our act we will make millions of our countrymen suffer, and the consequences of it may well be that millions of our brethren must shed their lifeblood, millions of brokenhearted women must weep, millions of children must suffer with cold, and millions of babes must die from hunger, and all because we want to preserve the commercial right of American citizens to deliver munitions of war to belligerent nations.

Week 14-1970 Last Game at Franklin Field

The Pittsburgh Steelers, at 5-8, came to Franklin Field to play the 2-10-1 Philadelphia Eagles.

In the first half John “Frenchy” Fuqua had touchdown runs of 72 and 85 yards.  His first half total was 198 yards.  Fuqua gained only 20 yards in the second have but who can complain.   The 218 yards Fuqua gained set a Steeler record.  I have mentioned that John Henry Johnson ran for 200 yards at Cleveland in 1964.  Aside from Fuqua, the Steelers did not  do much else.

Quarterback Terry Harraty completed just seven of 15 passes for 105 yards.  The Eagles Front Four sacked him twice for 23 yards in losses.   Terry Bradshaw handled the Pittsburgh punting and did not do well.  Philadelphia blocked a punt which Mike Dirk recovered in the End Zone for a touchdown.

Norman Snead completed 21 of 29 passes for 276 yards and two touchdowns.  Harold Jackson caught six passes for 92 yards.  Ben Hawkins caught five passes for 89 yards and a touchdowns.

The Philadelphia Eagles closed out their time at Franklin field and the Norman Snead era at Quarterback.  Snead played for the Eagles from 1964 to 1970.  In the off season,  the Eagles traded him to the Minnesota Vikings.

Final Score-Eagles 30 Steelers 20.

1970 Last Year at Franklin Field-Monday Night Football

After losing their first three games, the New York Giants won six in a row.  The came into Franklin Field to play the 1-7-1 Eagles on Monday Night of Week 10.  Philadelphia played Atlanta to a tie at 13 after defeating Miami.  This night  Philadelphia broke New York’s winning streak and this ultimately was the game that eliminated the G-Men from the Playoffs. The Giants won three in a row after this night.  However, in Week 14 the Los Angeles Rams beat them 31 to 3.  The Giants finished at 9-5 second in the NFC East to the Dallas Cowboys. The Wild Card honors went to the 10-4 Detroit Lions.

In this week 10, Norman Snead completed 12 of 19 passes for 173 yards and one touchdown.  Snead also ran in two quarterback sneaks from one yard line.  Ben Hawkins caught four passes for 99 yards. Eagles 23 Giants 20.

1970 Last Year at Franklin Field I

Franklin Field did not have a bad seat.  The next year the Philadelphia  Eagles moved into Veterans Stadium.  The Eagles lost their first seven games. They went 3-3-1 the second half of the season finishing 3-10-1, last place in the NFC East.  The three wins were all at Franklin Field and quite interesting.  The Eagles were a spoiler in two of them.

Week 8-The Miami Dolphins were 4-3 but in some danger.  After a 4-1 start, the Dolphins were shut out and blown out in successive weeks-the Cleveland Browns 28 to 0 and the Baltimore Colts 35 to 0.  Now the Eagles held them scoreless through three quarters.  That is 11 consecutive quarters of zero.  Finally, the Dolphins erupted for a field goal and two touchdowns and a big Philadelphia lead of 24 to 0 became a close victory of 24 to 17.  The Miami Dolphins won their remaining games to finish 10-4.  They were the Wild Card team in the AFC.   At Oakland,  the Raiders defeated the Dolphins in the first week of the Post Season, 21 to 14.

Two points here.  It is very rare that 10-4 playoff team has a three game losing streak much less 11 consecutive scoreless quarters.  The Philadelphia Eagles were somewhat of spoiler in this game.  Had the Dolphins won, they would have finished first in  the AFC East.  Their first playoff game would have been at home with a greater chance of winning.

Here were to top performers of the game:

For Philadelphia

Norman Snead went 15 for 29 for 187 yards and three touchdowns;

Cyril Pinder gained 99 yards on 23 carries;

Harold Jackson caught five passes for 74 yards and two touchdowns;

Lee Bouggus caught five passes for 57 yards;

the Eagles intercepted four passes two by Adrian Young;

the Eagles sacked Bob Greise four times for 34 yards in losses.

for Miami

a field in the fourth period broke the dike;

–In relief of Griese, John Stofa threw two touchdown passes;

–Paul Warfield caught two passes for 67 yards and a touchdown.