Q on OJ Rookie(s?) and casual WTB information

[jefferyepayne]

Good work on that list, Peirce!

I would encourage you to consider adding pre-rookie cards to your spreadsheet as you might find it interesting to go after image of players that don't have a mainstream cards from their playing days.

I personally find it very distasteful that cards from the 1970s-80s (Touchdown, Fleer Immortals, etc.) are considered a rookie card for players who played decades and decades earlier. It me it makes more sense to pick a regional, team, postcard, etc. of a player from their playing days as their rookie card than some tribute set from decades later.

This is one of the reason I like to collect pre-rookie cards. Putting the registry craziness aside, I'd rather have a card of a player from their playing days even if the set isn't mainstream.

jeff

[Exhibitman]

Amen, Brother Jeff. My boxing HOF collection is career-contemporary issues only, unless there is simply nothing out there for a fighter, but I am always looking.

[jefferyepayne]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Amen, Brother Jeff. My boxing HOF collection is career-contemporary issues only, unless there is simply nothing out there for a fighter, but I am always looking.

I know you are! The thrill is in the hunt and sometimes an undiscovered period item for a player shows up out of nowhere if you keep grinding. Nothing or more rewarding!

jeff

[pgconboy]

Got a Jim Brown and Eugene Upshaw, not thrilled with them but can't beg and choose, and Billy White Shoes Johnson.

With Jim Browns auto RC I am now at 51/53 for my All Time NFL Team.

Some main ones I am looking for:

Reggie White (1984 USFL preferred) then 1986 Topps
John Mackey 1964
Leroy Selmon 1977
Gale Sayers 1966
Len Ford 1955
Jack Christiansen 1952
Merlin Olsen 1964
Darrell Green 1984

Recentish Players:
Julius Peppers 2002
Steve Smith 2001
Johnny Hekker 2014
Shannon Sharpe 1990

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by jefferyepayne

I know you are! The thrill is in the hunt and sometimes an undiscovered period item for a player shows up out of nowhere if you keep grinding. Nothing or more rewarding!

jeff

That or finding a known but really tough one. Or when someone does some really good research and you find out that you have a true RC sitting there already.

[jefferyepayne]

I know you will appreciate this card, Adam, as you have one.

Found this last year at the Natty sitting on a crowded table. Dealer wanted $25 for it and couldn't get the cash out of my pocket fast enough.



jeff

[pgconboy]

What year would you estimate that is from?

https://lombardiave.com/files/2015/0...orMagazine.jpg

1963ish? Or does the photo predate the scoring quote a bit? He's got a pretty nice jaw line so he looks relatively young.

[jefferyepayne]

Originally Posted by pgconboy

What year would you estimate that is from?

https://lombardiave.com/files/2015/0...orMagazine.jpg

1963ish? Or does the photo predate the scoring quote a bit? He's got a pretty nice jaw line so he looks relatively young.

It's from a rare promotional set produced by Lee Jeans in the early 1960s. A few collectors have dug in pretty deep on this set and discovered cards that appear to be from 1961, 1962, and I think 1963 based on bio information that appears on the backs.

These are extremely hard to find and no complete checklist is known.

jeff

[pgconboy]

Originally Posted by jefferyepayne

I personally find it very distasteful that cards from the 1970s-80s (Touchdown, Fleer Immortals, etc.) are considered a rookie card for players who played decades and decades earlier. It me it makes more sense to pick a regional, team, postcard, etc. of a player from their playing days as their rookie card than some tribute set from decades later.

I agree regarding the 74-75 Immortals, TD Club etc. Not very exciting getting cards decades after the fact.

The problem is I have a tough time getting into post cards, team photos, and stuff. This obviously puts me in a bit of a bind as I love the classic football players and the history of the game but unable to collect an option that I am enthusiastic about.

Maybe I bite the bullet and get 1 of each (first football card and era correct memorabilia) and assume one grows on me haha.

Part of the reason for collecting these was that as a kid I would make all time teams for the major sports. Once I got some chore money I tried getting a card of the player to represent themselves on the team.

Eventually got a job and that moved into buying their rookie card and stumbled into a decent career which escalated into autograph rookies. While buying my team members I noticed some decent deals on HOFers that didn't quite make my teams which escalated into buying all HOF auto rookies.

Here are my All time Post WW2 NFL teams (CI is confidence interval, how strongly I feel about that player making the team)

https://imgur.com/a/9rxblhh

Red players are the guys I am missing auto rookies

edit - Eventually I plan on making a Pre-WW2 All time team.

[G1911]

*I don't collect rookies* disclaimer, but it seems to me that there should be one rookie card: whichever card was actually issued first, and early in a players career, is the rookie card. Some players just don't have rookie cards. If a player didn't have a card until their 6th year, they don't have a rookie. If their first card is an ugly minor issue, it's still the rookie. Assigning the rookie card arbitrarily to whatever relatively early card hobbyists decide they like seems a bit absurd to me.

[jefferyepayne]

Originally Posted by G1911

*I don't collect rookies* disclaimer, but it seems to me that there should be one rookie card: whichever card was actually issued first, and early in a players career, is the rookie card. Some players just don't have rookie cards. If a player didn't have a card until their 6th year, they don't have a rookie. If their first card is an ugly minor issue, it's still the rookie. Assigning the rookie card arbitrarily to whatever relatively early card hobbyists decide they like seems a bit absurd to me.

I most definitely agree with the thinking here but I've found there are conflicts that make it difficult to choose one card in some cases. What if there are multiple cards from their earliest year? What if the only image is on *cardboard* but isn't a traditional card (i.e. real photo postcard, matchbook, stamps, etc.)? I personally don't have an issue with there being multiple rookie cards. Other than for the registry craziness, why does it matter if there is more than one?

And yes, some of the decisions made on rookie cards were not good. But don't blame it all on early hobbyists as lots of the newer players have what appears to be an arbitrary card chosen as their rookie cards, probably by grading companies who set the tone with what ends up in their registry sets.

jeff

[G1911]

Originally Posted by jefferyepayne

I most definitely agree with the thinking here but I've found there are conflicts that make it difficult to choose one card in some cases. What if there are multiple cards from their earliest year? What if the only image is on *cardboard* but isn't a traditional card (i.e. real photo postcard, matchbook, stamps, etc.)? I personally don't have an issue with there being multiple rookie cards. Other than for the registry craziness, why does it matter if there is more than one?

And yes, some of the decisions made on rookie cards were not good. But don't blame it all on early hobbyists as lots of the newer players have what appears to be an arbitrary card chosen as their rookie cards, probably by grading companies who set the tone with what ends up in their registry sets.

jeff

I suppose it doesn't 'matter' if there is more than one, but just as a players rookie year is his first in the big league(s), a rookie card should be the first card. If a player has a card issued in March of year X and another in November of year X, the card from March is the Rookie, whether or not it is common, popular, or attractive. For modern there can be more than 1, because whatever set dropped first will have 30 parallels of that player all issued on the same day. It's entirely possible to have multiple; they should just all be tied for the first card of a player; which is, I think, not relevant to most vintage.


What is a card? I would propose to start the Socratic with: A flat, rectangular piece of cardboard or stiff paper, that is an image driven item, and which does not have multiple 'pages', nor is altered from it's original shape or character to meet such definition.


I would say that a stamp is not, a cutout from a matchbox is not, a picture from a newspaper is not, a postcard is, a CDV/cabinet is. There are plenty of border cases surely, particularly with things like 'sticker cards'. If we are adding modern in, are parralel 'cards' made of metal cards? I think not. An item issued in a pack of cards is not inherently a card in itself.


I am, of course, not blaming relatively early hobbyists for modern, for establishing which "Rookie card" of a player in 2003 is the hot one or the 'one that counts' or is any way, shape or form a "Rookie". Time is linear, but the context here was vintage. Most of the vintage rookies were selected in the 1980's, based it would appear, on what dealers had in stock or were readily available rather than through any process of inquiry. The modern process is hardly more elegant or generally one of genuine inquiry either.

[jefferyepayne]

Originally Posted by pgconboy

I agree regarding the 74-75 Immortals, TD Club etc. Not very exciting getting cards decades after the fact.

The problem is I have a tough time getting into post cards, team photos, and stuff. This obviously puts me in a bit of a bind as I love the classic football players and the history of the game but unable to collect an option that I am enthusiastic about.

Maybe I bite the bullet and get 1 of each (first football card and era correct memorabilia) and assume one grows on me haha.

I get your hesitancy, as I started as a mainstream card collector myself. But the more I got into the history of football and its players and started seeing incredible cardboard items of players who didn't otherwise have mainstream cards from their playing days, the more interested I got in some of these other items. Now I love matchbooks, postcards, bread labels, type 1 photos, cabinet cards, etc. that depict early football stars on them.

I bet if you dabble a bit in these like I did, you will discover there are some great, great images of great players depicted on them and start to appreciate them a lot more.

jeff