Net54baseball.com Forums

Net54baseball.com Forums (http://www.net54baseball.com/index.php)
-   Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) (http://www.net54baseball.com/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Most boring card ever? (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=236698)

7nohitter 03-11-2017 04:34 PM

Most boring card ever?
 
I am a huge fan of Harmon Killebrew, but I despise his '61 Topps card. I cannot bring myself to buy a copy, it is just so painfully boring... especially for a player of his caliber.

Anyone else?

granite75 03-11-2017 04:49 PM

Ted Williams 1939 Play Ball is such a boring rookie for such a great player.

Also, I think Yaz had three total photo sessions for Topps over his 23 years and they just reused the same photos :)



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

sniffy5 03-11-2017 04:56 PM

1962 and '63 Topps Mantle. I mean, really...???

clydepepper 03-11-2017 05:13 PM

Give 'Killer' a break and pick up one in nice condition.

Referencing my big hard-cover 'Topps Baseball Cards: The Complete Picture Collection - A 40 Year History', I found that any player without an identifying team cap - what has to be a record 101 cards out of the 589-card set fall into this 'boring' category...including five more Hall-of-Famers, two of which are All-Star cards.

This fact pinpoints why the 1961 set is one of my least favorite sets.

7nohitter 03-11-2017 05:21 PM

Ray,
Totally agree, the hatless photos are very boring to begin with. But there's something about the closeup of his bald noggin that just adds to the mundaness of the card.

geosluggo 03-11-2017 06:31 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Hatless manager cards, particularly bald ones, are a level below hatless players

geosluggo 03-11-2017 06:40 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Actually, I remember the crushing disappointment of getting a 1972 rack pack at the supermarket and coming across this beauty...

Johnny630 03-11-2017 07:12 PM

George that card is awful!! Never been a fan of the 72 topps cards, that one has to be the worst !! Perfect for this topic :-)

pokerplyr80 03-11-2017 11:08 PM

I always found it boring, or annoying, when I pulled a checklist out of a pack as a kid. My opinion of them hasn't changed much since then.

GasHouseGang 03-12-2017 12:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80 (Post 1640213)
I always found it boring, or annoying, when I pulled a checklist out of a pack as a kid. My opinion of them hasn't changed much since then.

I agree. I could never get myself to buy the 1963 Fleer checklist to complete the set because who wants to pay big money for a stupid checklist!

ajquigs 03-12-2017 04:30 AM

1 Attachment(s)
This is the card that comes to mind immediately for me.

geosluggo 03-12-2017 07:12 AM

1 Attachment(s)
I always imagine the disappointed Cold War kids ripping open packs of 1956 cards hoping for Jackie Robinson or Ted Williams and instead pulling a flannel-suited league president.

7nohitter 03-12-2017 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajquigs (Post 1640229)
This is the card that comes to mind immediately for me.


I know what you mean Andy. But this one for me is not that bad, I think because it's Stengel who always looked like the definition of a "weathered old man" and that makes it interesting to me.

That 1972 card of the minor league trophies is painful to look at!

mrmopar 03-12-2017 12:08 PM

2 Attachment(s)
I just posted this image elsewhere in the same manner. There are plenty of boring cards, too many to pick just one, but this turned out to be Munson's last card and it looks like he rolled out of bed, slapped on a cap and posed for this photo. I don't know if that is a jersey or some sort of undershirt, but it even looks to me like he has PJs on! Major disappointment after his awesome 1978 Topps card.

It would have been nice to see Topps do a tribute similar to this fantasy card, but instead we are left with roll out of bed, PJ wearing Munson instead!

ajquigs 03-12-2017 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 7nohitter (Post 1640324)
I know what you mean Andy. But this one for me is not that bad, I think because it's Stengel who always looked like the definition of a "weathered old man" and that makes it interesting to me.

That 1972 card of the minor league trophies is painful to look at!

I have to agree. The minor league trophy card is a terrific call, and it meets the boring definition better than the '62 Stengel.
While kind of boring, the Stengel really comes to mind because it had so much potential to be the first classic Mets card, but really disappoints with its logo-less, drab design.

toppcat 03-12-2017 05:33 PM

I've always considered the 66 Keane the worst Topps card ever made.

familytoad 03-12-2017 07:50 PM

Lazy
 
I think that in 1966 Keane would be disappointing to find in your pack , much like most manager cards and checklists. Most of us , understandably , want ball players :roll eyes

You can keep the coaches, trophies and for heavens sake the umpires out of the sets!!

Topps really showed a lack of creativity, design or appreciation of what a great opportunity they had in the 60's. They just look lazy. Hatless portraits, repeated poses year after year, dull pictures , plain designs...ugly airbrushed pictures.
Sometimes I wonder why I collected them! I have that ugly Keane card in my binder but I don't think I have looked at it since I slid the card into the plastic sheet...

I like the cards in the 70's much better (and the 50's) as a rule. i may be biased since the 70's I was pulling cards out of the packs...and somehow despite the dumb trophies, 1972 is my favorite set of all.
Give me the psycho set all day! (damn high numbers!)

seanofjapan 03-12-2017 08:16 PM

1 Attachment(s)
The hatless wonder cards from the 1960s are pretty boring.

This Japanese card from the 1988 Calbee set I think is the worst though (discounting checklists, etc. Slightly out of topic since its post-1980, but a 1988 Calbee is a vintage card by the standards of the Japanese hobby). Its a card of the Tokyo Dome. A domed stadium by any standard is an ugly, boring thing to look at, but the photographer in this one found the best way to maximize those qualities in his work. Its genius. You have the grey ugliness of the Dome itself framed by a grey sky in the background and a grey concrete retaining wall in the foreground, accented by a tree that has no leaves on it. There is nothing that is not grey in this photograph. I actually get physically sick when I look at this card. It is that boring and depressing to look at. I apologize for having made you look at it by posting it here.

http://baseballcardsinjapan.blogspot...ever-1988.html

ZiggerZagger 03-12-2017 10:41 PM

2 Attachment(s)
This gets my vote, simply because it could have been so much more. Topps, how dare you take the most compelling player in baseball history and make him look like a lost, wandering Grandparent. In a Dodgers uniform, no less. Nice work gents.

Attachment 265593


Also, for a more modern Honorable Mention, the "Baseball Heroes" Header cards from Upper Deck in the early 90's. And they were uniformly the most expensive card in the subset as well. Whatever.

Attachment 265594

nolemmings 03-13-2017 12:22 AM

At least you can excuse Topps for the '61 Killebrew given that Twins logos were a new animal that year and could have posed airbrush problems for the artists. So too for the '62 Stengel, which is identical to his nice-looking 1960 card but for the cap logo (or lack of same).

Killer's '61 card is vibrant and eye-catching compared to the Willie Mays card from that set, which looks like it was shot about an hour after Willie ate a bad burrito
http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/iAIAAO...tfq/s-l500.jpg.

Must ditto the Keane observation (pun intended). That was my first year collecting, and that card reminded me of the Creature from the Black Lagoon.

polakoff 03-13-2017 01:18 PM

Weird for me to see so many HOFers in this thread. To me a HOFer card could never qualify as the most boring card of all time, even if he looks like he's falling asleep.

The 72 minor league award card is a great submission for this thread, but at those awards cards have some color to them and are visually pleasing. For me one of the most boring cards that pops into my mind is the 1972 high number Pat Corrales in action card.

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTE1OFg4NT...YTKIY/$_58.JPG

Can't see his face and somehow someone at Topps decided a photo in which HIS GLOVE ISN'T EVEN ON qualified as an "action" shot.

Exhibitman 03-13-2017 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geosluggo (Post 1640133)
Actually, I remember the crushing disappointment of getting a 1972 rack pack at the supermarket and coming across this beauty...

Now I always thought the award card subset was interesting.

I'd concur on the hatless head shot cards and emphasize the subset of those of players forced to look into the sun for the photo. Awful, squinty stuff.

http://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/SdgAAO...bdx/s-l500.jpg

Gr8Beldini 03-14-2017 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by geosluggo (Post 1640131)
Hatless manager cards, particularly bald ones, are a level below hatless players

Funny (or not so funny) thing about that Johnny Keane card. He was born in 1911. If that picture was taken in 1964, he would have been 53. Looks closer to 83 in that picture.

JollyElm 03-14-2017 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gr8Beldini (Post 1640955)
Funny (or not so funny) thing about that Johnny Keane card. He was born in 1911. If that picture was taken in 1964, he would have been 53. Looks closer to 83 in that picture.

That is a completely unnerving realization. Yowza.

JollyElm 03-14-2017 04:21 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Are words even necessary?

Attachment 265860

sthoemke 03-14-2017 06:30 PM

1 Attachment(s)
1978 Topps Pete Rosa sitting in the dugout.

Couldn't Topps find a picture of him batting?

seanofjapan 03-14-2017 07:59 PM

1 Attachment(s)
I might add the 1958 Topps Ted Williams. I remember being at a card show in the early 90s and a dealer had that card and a copy of the beautiful 1955 Ted Williams with the big smile on his face side by side. The 1955 was a total beater with creases everywhere but still had some eye appeal. The 1958 was in way better shape. The price was the same. I said I would take the 1955 Williams and the dealer immediately asked if I would take the 58 from him for 20% off instead. "No." I said. 30% off ? No. Half off, please take it! No.

I just couldn't bring myself to it, it was just too boring. In addition to the bland design of the 58 set, you have the glum look on Ted Williams face. Which is just such a stark contrast to the smiling Williams on his 54-56 cards. Its like he knew his picture was going on one of the "bad" sets of the 50s and just decided a smile wasn't worth it.

jchcollins 03-14-2017 08:26 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Some might balk at this because by all accounts it is both a popular and valuable card, but I've always wondered why they couldn't find a better picture of the Mick to use on his regular issue '65 Topps card. Looks like a spring training pic taken about 10 am the morning after a bender that Whitey and Mickey probably went on the night before down in Tampa or St. Pete. His eyes look like two piss holes in a snowbank, LOL.

jchcollins 03-14-2017 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polakoff (Post 1640712)
Weird for me to see so many HOFers in this thread. To me a HOFer card could never qualify as the most boring card of all time, even if he looks like he's falling asleep.

The 72 minor league award card is a great submission for this thread, but at those awards cards have some color to them and are visually pleasing. For me one of the most boring cards that pops into my mind is the 1972 high number Pat Corrales in action card.

http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTE1OFg4NT...YTKIY/$_58.JPG

Can't see his face and somehow someone at Topps decided a photo in which HIS GLOVE ISN'T EVEN ON qualified as an "action" shot.

Lots of the "In Action" cards will leave you scratching your head. Pete Rose is at bat in-between pitches idly chatting with the catcher on his, Ron Santo is mostly obscured by the opposing catcher, and Harmon Killebrew has just popped out. Action!!!

Topps206 03-14-2017 11:41 PM

I'm not sure if it's the most boring card ever, but there's nothing exciting about Tim Harkness circa the 1963 set.

geosluggo 03-15-2017 06:29 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by Topps206 (Post 1641322)
I'm not sure if it's the most boring card ever, but there's nothing exciting about Tim Harkness circa the 1963 set.

For some reason that '63 Harkness was one of the toughest cards -- aside from superstars and high numbers -- when I was completing that set. I think the card's overall boredom factor (OBF) is mitigated somewhat by the spectacularly bad airbrush job on the inset photo.

stlcardsfan 03-15-2017 07:27 AM

I guess Harkness came to the Mets from the Pterodactyl's? LOL

SAllen2556 03-15-2017 07:34 AM

1 Attachment(s)
I hated the 1973 boyhood photos. The photo quality was awful, and I couldn't have cared less what Catfish Hunter looked like when he was 6.

Attachment 265913

Timbegs 03-22-2017 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jchcollins (Post 1641285)
Some might balk at this because by all accounts it is both a popular and valuable card, but I've always wondered why they couldn't find a better picture of the Mick to use on his regular issue '65 Topps card. Looks like a spring training pic taken about 10 am the morning after a bender that Whitey and Mickey probably went on the night before down in Tampa or St. Pete. His eyes look like two piss holes in a snowbank, LOL.

Funny thing is, I read a few of Mickey's biographies (auto and otherwise). In one, I remember a passage about him stating precisely that. I guess many of the Topps photo shoots were scheduled early. He said there were a few where he was on a bender with the gang and completely hungover and he hated the cards that captured that. He said he hated two in particular but refused to name them specifically and saw them while signing all the time at the shows of the late eighties and early nineties.

My guesses were always the 1962 and the 1965! Gotta love the Mick...

smrtn240 03-26-2017 01:48 PM

1 Attachment(s)
tear jerker right here

Robs70sCards 03-26-2017 07:37 PM

LOL on the 1978 Topps Pete Rose.

Funny how you remember stuff like this, but I pulled that card back when I was a kid in 78 and thinking "cool I got a Pete Rose....sitting in the dugout..." and being somewhat disappointed. I was much happier in 1979 when I saw that card, like that's how you should do Pete Rose. At least his 78 RB card is decent.

Robs70sCards 03-26-2017 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stlcardsfan (Post 1641364)
I guess Harkness came to the Mets from the Pterodactyl's? LOL

LOL! I guess that kind of takes it off the boring list now.

familytoad 03-27-2017 12:20 AM

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1911-M116-Sc...oAAOSwt5hYbw9X

Ok this is a baseball player?

ZenPop 03-28-2017 05:02 PM

BLECH designs (from an opinionated graphic designer)

Topps = 1957, 1958, 1961, 1966, 1968, 1970...

Any card featuring a hatless player... the "in action" cards..

Manager cards (exception: The 1960 manager cards were AWESOME with that pennant...)

GREAT designs

1952, 1953, 1954, 1955, 1956, 1960, 1965...

I also like the '63, '67, '71, and (yes) '72 sets... (after that, my interest trails)

Bowman 1950-'53 run was brilliant, too... (not so much the design of '53, but the photography was outstanding)

jason.1969 03-29-2017 01:37 PM

In general I don't like the hatless. But not all are bad. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...ee02ef7c91.jpg

stlcardsfan 03-30-2017 07:08 AM

Really? I think the '69 Bench is one of the all time classics!

jason.1969 03-30-2017 07:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stlcardsfan (Post 1645880)
Really? I think the '69 Bench is one of the all time classics!

That's exactly what I was saying! I love the 69 Bench, even sans chapeau.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

geosluggo 03-30-2017 07:20 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Worthy of consideration. Probably 32 years old in this picture but people just looked a lot older then.

stlcardsfan 03-30-2017 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jason.1969 (Post 1645885)
That's exactly what I was saying! I love the 69 Bench, even sans chapeau.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Gotcha! But you are right, would have been even better with a backwards cap like his RC.

Peter_Spaeth 04-01-2017 04:53 PM

1 Attachment(s)
.

Leon 04-01-2017 06:35 PM

LOL..... "I actually get physically sick when I look at this card. It is that boring and depressing to look at." That really is one fugly card...

Quote:

Originally Posted by seanofjapan (Post 1640529)
The hatless wonder cards from the 1960s are pretty boring.

This Japanese card from the 1988 Calbee set I think is the worst though (discounting checklists, etc. Slightly out of topic since its post-1980, but a 1988 Calbee is a vintage card by the standards of the Japanese hobby). Its a card of the Tokyo Dome. A domed stadium by any standard is an ugly, boring thing to look at, but the photographer in this one found the best way to maximize those qualities in his work. Its genius. You have the grey ugliness of the Dome itself framed by a grey sky in the background and a grey concrete retaining wall in the foreground, accented by a tree that has no leaves on it. There is nothing that is not grey in this photograph. I actually get physically sick when I look at this card. It is that boring and depressing to look at. I apologize for having made you look at it by posting it here.

http://baseballcardsinjapan.blogspot...ever-1988.html


7nohitter 04-03-2017 07:21 PM

You guys have come up with some real snoozers. The following is NOT my card, saw it on eBay.

glynparson 04-06-2017 09:29 AM

There's a strip card set
 
that just lists the position and has a drawing of the player. For more modern a number of the game cards are boring if you don't play the games. Ie APBA, stratomatic, etc.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:12 PM.