Mr. Met Says It All

[G-Fafif]

Mr. Met knocks covfefe off everybody's fingertips.

This season is even taking a toll on Mr. Met. The lovable mascot reached a breaking point Wednesday and flipped the bird at some fans during the 7-1 loss to the Brewers at Citi Field. The defeat stopped a three-game winning streak for the Mets and dropped their record to 23-28 on the season. A video posted by @adelucia35 on Twitter captured the moment when Mr. Met gave the finger to a group of shouting fans as the mascot appeared to walk toward a tunnel at Citi Field. There is a lot of inaudible shouting in the video, but DeLucia told several people on Twitter that he and the rest of the fans were just trying to get a high-five from Mr. Met. At 11:17 p.m., after the video had been circulating on the Internet, drawing a great deal of attention and ridicule, the Mets tweeted out an official statement condemning the actions of their popular mascot. “We apologize for the inappropriate action of this employee,” the statement read. “We do not condone this type of behavior. We are dealing with this matter internally.” According to The Associated Press, a Mets official said more than one employee wears the Mr. Met costume during the season and that the person inside of it Wednesday night will not wear it again. The incident came on a night that marked the 53rd anniversary of Mr. Met’s debut as the team mascot. Mr. Met, with former Mets ticket salesman Daniel Reilly donning the costume, first appeared before the second game of a doubleheader against the Giants at Shea Stadium on May 31, 1964, a game the Mets went on to lose in 23 innings, 8-6. On Wednesday, a majority of the crowd of 26,517 had departed the stadium Wednesday before the end of the game. The few that remained booed relentlessly at reliever Neil Ramirez in the ninth after the righthander walked back-to-back batters with the Mets trailing 7-0. The hostility clearly transitioned to Mr. Met, who’s gained notoriety recently thanks to his antics with now-injured starter Noah Syndergaard. At a public appearance in early April, Syndergaard coincidentally gave Mr. Met the middle finger from the podium, jokingly referencing where a blister had formed. Syndergaard was forced to leave his Opening Day start April 4 because of a blister. Syndergaard was not punished for his gesture. Mr. Met was not so fortunate. For much of the 2000s, 12 years to be exact, the Mets employed the same man to be the mascot — Steven Boldis. But Boldis left his post after the World Series appearance in 2015 to take a construction job. And he was later upset he didn’t receive a N.L. pennant ring. Mr. Met’s middle finger Wednesday is yet another blemish on an otherwise disappointing season in Flushing — filled with unusual and cringe-worthy moments. First, after a one-run win over the Marlins on May 5, the Mets inadvertently tweeted out a picture of T.J. Rivera with a sex toy lingering in the background in Kevin Plawecki’s locker. After learning of the gaffe, the Mets deleted the tweet and re-sent it with the photo cropped. But replies to the second post included zoomed-in images of the sex toy, so the Mets deleted that too. The very next day, Matt Harvey failed to show up for a game after admittedly staying out past curfew on Cinco de Mayo. The Dark Knight hit the golf course in the morning but never arrived at Citi Field for the Mets’ contest against the Marlins. He told he team he was suffering from migraines and didn’t inform anyone of his intended absence until the late afternoon. Harvey was suspended three days for violating of team rules. Sources later told the Daily News that Harvey was heartbroken over his breakup with Brazilian super model Adriana Lima. For the Mets, it just never ends.

[MFS62]

He was just saying "We're #1".
(Or so says a Trump spokesperson.)

Later

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

This is "funny" but totally not funny. That the Mets just put any party-patrol dumbass in the clothing of its most recognizable branding icon is just unconscionably stupid and reckless. They cut every corner even on their own identity.

I hate to say this but the Phillies would never do this. They had 1 Phanatic for years.

[bmfc1]

Every morning I wake up and wonder what stupid thing Trump did while I was sleeping. I never imagined that Trump, for even a second, would be out-done by Mr. Met.

[Lefty Specialist]

Geez, it's always something with this team, innit? Even the mascot is having a disappointing year.

[bmfc1]

The Mets have the greatest mascot in sports but even Nationals fans (their mascot is an effeminate owl) can say "yeah, but at least he doesn't give fans the finger."

[Benjamin Grimm]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: This is "funny" but totally not funny. That the Mets just put any party-patrol dumbass in the clothing of its most recognizable branding icon is just unconscionably stupid and reckless. They cut every corner even on their own identity. I hate to say this but the Phillies would never do this. They had 1 Phanatic for years.

That's a great point.

[MFS62]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: This is "funny" but totally not funny. That the Mets just put any party-patrol dumbass in the clothing of its most recognizable branding icon is just unconscionably stupid and reckless. They cut every corner even on their own identity. I hate to say this but the Phillies would never do this. They had 1 Phanatic for years. That's a great point.

The Phanatic is scared. He saw what the fans in Philadelphia did to Santa Claus.
Later

[metirish]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: This is "funny" but totally not funny. That the Mets just put any party-patrol dumbass in the clothing of its most recognizable branding icon is just unconscionably stupid and reckless. They cut every corner even on their own identity. I hate to say this but the Phillies would never do this. They had 1 Phanatic for years. That's a great point.

Totally agree...

[seawolf17]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: This is "funny" but totally not funny. That the Mets just put any party-patrol dumbass in the clothing of its most recognizable branding icon is just unconscionably stupid and reckless. They cut every corner even on their own identity. I hate to say this but the Phillies would never do this. They had 1 Phanatic for years.

This, definitely this. I work with our mascot team here, there are just things you don't do, and this is pretty high on the list.

[Bunt the First Two]

Yo, he threw a hammy
And Noah tore a lat
A thousand pricks felled Travis
Enough said ‘bout all that
And Ray Ramirez took the heat
These stories are not new
But they fired Mister Met
‘Cuz he was working blue

Harvey liked to goldbrick
He’d drink and show up late
And when he showed up not at all
He got an escort to the gate
Reyes sued for child support
Your standard scandal stew
But they fired Mister Met
‘Cuz he was working blue

Seasons come and seasons go

And most, they don’t work out

Now and then, the stars align

And we end a pennant drought

But one thing's kept from year to year

Be they glorious or fallow

Our champ of joy and decency

Was never crass nor callow

Yes, some seasons have a happy face
Or sweet, or old and grey
Some seasons smell of fire
Or resound like children’s play
But this season wears a sickly masque
Beneath a veil or two
For they’ve fired Mister Met
‘Cuz he was working blue

Edited June 1, 2017 by Guest

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Dumb people on Twitter are like 'what's the big deal the guy screwed up?' That misses the point so completely.

[Ceetar]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: This is "funny" but totally not funny. That the Mets just put any party-patrol dumbass in the clothing of its most recognizable branding icon is just unconscionably stupid and reckless. They cut every corner even on their own identity. I hate to say this but the Phillies would never do this. They had 1 Phanatic for years.

Do they though? I feel like the "vet" the party patrol people at least a little bit. Granted they're all young adults for the most part, but I'm not really sure how you could know someone's gonna not be able to control their temper down the line. I guess the Mets could double or triple to salary and make it a career and hire a vet, but why? They've spread Mr. Met too thin by having him everywhere, hell you don't think there are pictures of Mr. Met doing rather stupid things at someone's corporate outing or smoking in his truck after/before a birthday party?

Meh, it breaks the fourth wall for a moment while everyone gets their yuks in, and then it's business as usual. I mean, it's not like people stop taking their children to sesame place because an Elmo in Times Square sexually assaulted everyone woman that walked by.


Or maybe they run with it. Have Mr. Met "go bad" for a few years. harass opposing fans, break things. Oversleep. And then in 2022 have a "Mr. Met apologizes" year where he's constantly out and about handing out goodies and making nice.

[Edgy MD]

I tried to get Mister for a party nine or 10 years back. The date didn't work out because the Mets were in town. "So, there's only one costume?" I naïvely asked.

"There's only one Mister Met," I was firmly told.

I felt simultaneously taken to school and delighted. Delighted that the organization cared about risk management and quality control in exactly the department where they should care.

Or did.

[stevejrogers]

Ceetar wrote: Meh, it breaks the fourth wall for a moment while everyone gets their yuks in, and then it's business as usual. I mean, it's not like people stop taking their children to sesame place because an Elmo in Times Square sexually assaulted everyone woman that walked by.

You would have to be an utter mark if you think any of the characters in Times Square are licenced by the property owners. So that being said, it would be a big deal if the Elmo at Seasme Place did sexually assault every woman who walked by.

If you are an employee, you kind of should have some decorum when it comes to dealing with idiot customers. I mean if an usher, vendor or security personnel did that, you'd probably agree with it being handled by the company in the same manner, right?

[stevejrogers]

Edgy MD wrote: I tried to get Mister for a party nine or 10 years back. The date didn't work out because the Mets were in town. "So, there's only one costume?" I naïvely asked. "There's only one Mister Met," I was firmly told. I felt simultaneously taken to school and delighted. Delighted that the organization cared about risk management and quality control in exactly the department where they should care. Or did.

Yeah, that ended after 2015 season apparently.

[Centerfield]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: This is "funny" but totally not funny. That the Mets just put any party-patrol dumbass in the clothing of its most recognizable branding icon is just unconscionably stupid and reckless. They cut every corner even on their own identity. I hate to say this but the Phillies would never do this. They had 1 Phanatic for years.

A thousand times yup.

[Ceetar]

SteveJRogers wrote: Ceetar wrote: Meh, it breaks the fourth wall for a moment while everyone gets their yuks in, and then it's business as usual. I mean, it's not like people stop taking their children to sesame place because an Elmo in Times Square sexually assaulted everyone woman that walked by. You would have to be an utter mark if you think any of the characters in Times Square are licenced by the property owners. So that being said, it would be a big deal if the Elmo at Seasme Place did sexually assault every woman who walked by. If you are an employee, you kind of should have some decorum when it comes to dealing with idiot customers. I mean if an usher, vendor or security personnel did that, you'd probably agree with it being handled by the company in the same manner, right?

Of course the characters aren't licensed, but you know what? It's still Elmo. The headline is still "Elmo assaults women" If the Elmo in question was actually an employee of ..Sesame Place? HBO? he'd be fired and we'd move on.

I believe that you just can't take these things too seriously. These are not monoliths that are immovable. they're people and brands and fluid. It's just like not holding up Athletes as heroes who can do no wrong. (And really, still employing Jose Reyes is more damaging to the image than Mr. Met doing anything) These are actors in a play, and occasionally they err and it breaks the illusion. You lol and move on. You give the rest of the employees a stern talking to, internally.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Ceets I think you're underestimating how delicate a thing a brand is.

Brands are not fluid. They are constructs that exist only because they adhere to parameters given them. I'm not talking about a guy in a suit but an idea. That's what got screwed up last night and there's no going back.

[TransMonk]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: That the Mets just put any party-patrol dumbass in the clothing of its most recognizable branding icon is just unconscionably stupid and reckless.

Especially since we live in an age where nearly everything is visually recorded and instantaneously put on the internet for the whole world to see.

I believe Disney has a procedural manual that is inches thick on dos and don'ts for it's costumed employees. The Mets have to have something like this, right?

[Ceetar]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Ceets I think you're underestimating how delicate a thing a brand is. Brands are not fluid. They are constructs that exist only because they adhere to parameters given them. I'm not talking about a guy in a suit but an idea. That's what got screwed up last night and there's no going back.

Sure, to you. But to me, it's exactly the same. Nothing is screwed up. The brand is what the brand was. That's what I mean by fluid. the perception of what the brand is exists in different states for me and you, and is probably different than what the Mets try to project it as. And what they're going to continue to project it as. That he flipped off a guy once is going to barely register in a month, never mind years from now. I mean, are you really going to look at Mr. Met tomorrow dancing on the dugout and think "secretly you're an angry asshole and this feels fake"?

It only hurts the brand because you, and a bunch of others, think it does. Some people think having multiple Mr. Mets and wide outreach and appearing at banks hurts/dillutes the brand but the exposure and spread of it to new people might override that in the Mets eyes.

And what exactly is that brand? To me Mr. Met is a happy go lucky mascot who's a little silly and enthusiastic. But to me that doesn't preclude him from occasionally getting angry.

[Lefty Specialist]

He's done worse.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuNQOFePQeM

[Guest themetfairy]

But I only have four fingers! How can I have a middle one?

[stevejrogers]

Ceetar wrote: Ceetar wrote: (And really, still employing Jose Reyes is more damaging to the image than Mr. Met doing anything)

I see, so in a SJW, YOLO selfie taking (people have been dismissed for social media photos showing them doing crazy things with alcohol or things much tamer than lewed and/or obscene gestures) world that giving a disgraced former employee a shot to help rehabilitate his image and career is worse than letting an anonymous employee go due to an obscene jesture made towards customers.

[Ceetar]

Why are we not letting the Mr. Met employee 'rehabilitate' his image? (Because someone else can do exactly what he can do with no loss of value)

I'm not objecting to him being fired. I'm merely pointing out this means virtually nothing to the Mets or Mr. Mets image.

Also a middle finger is pretty tame and anyone dismissed from a job because they posed with a margarita on a beach or something equally mild should definitely have a gripe and should probably sue if it was made clear that that's why they were dismissed.

[Centerfield]

Ceetar wrote: I'm not objecting to him being fired. I'm merely pointing out this means virtually nothing to the Mets or Mr. Mets image.

I think you cannot be more wrong. Like the Bobby Bonilla contract, or Madoff, or Vince Coleman and the firecracker, this is the type of thing that tends to stick.

Five years from now, someone will mention Mr. Met and some annoying guy will bring up this incident.

[Ceetar]

Centerfield wrote: Ceetar wrote: I'm not objecting to him being fired. I'm merely pointing out this means virtually nothing to the Mets or Mr. Mets image. I think you cannot be more wrong. Like the Bobby Bonilla contract, or Madoff, or Vince Coleman and the firecracker, this is the type of thing that tends to stick. Five years from now, someone will mention Mr. Met and some annoying guy will bring up this incident.

yes, but that annoying guy doesn't actually _mean_ anything.

And Vince Coleman and the firecracker certainly is history. What relevance does that have on anything today?

Annoying memes around the Mets are not the same as the Mets themselves.

[Guest themetfairy]

FWIW, I was planning on wearing a Mr. Met shirt to tonight's Trenton/Binghamton game, but I decided to go with a FAFIF shirt instead because I knew I'd have to deal with a certain amount of shit over the Mr. Met incident and wanted to minimize it.

The most benign aspect of the Mets' brand is now an object of derision. Hopefully this will be short-lived, but at the moment the tarnish is real.

[MFS62]

Ceetar wrote: And Vince Coleman and the firecracker certainly is history.

I still contend that Vince did not intentionally throw that firecracker into the crowd. He simply missed the cutoff man.
Later

[Guest d'Kong76]

I didn't know about this until just now reading this thread. What a dick.