Will the joe namath rookie card Topps 1965 become the next Mantle 52?

[soxfan1986]

I agree with what many have already posted , vintage football just does not have nearly the market vintage baseball has.
Honestly the two cards I think will have the greatest potential for growth in the future are two newer cards - both the Peyton manning and the tom Brady contenders rookie auto.
That set has become the standard for autographed rookies and especially those years since they are super tough to find.
The manning card especially. You very rarely see that card.
I could easily see both of those cards just continuing to rise in value as those guys retire , and as they keep disappearing from the market and get stashed away into people's PC's.

[jefferyepayne]

Originally Posted by soxfan1986

Honestly the two cards I think will have the greatest potential for growth in the future are two newer cards - both the Peyton manning and the tom Brady contenders rookie auto.
That set has become the standard for autographed rookies and especially those years since they are super tough to find.
The manning card especially. You very rarely see that card.
I could easily see both of those cards just continuing to rise in value as those guys retire , and as they keep disappearing from the market and get stashed away into people's PC's.

I can see that. I was going to offer up the Montana Rookie as a candidate but there's just too many of them out there for it to ever be a 'Mantle' kinda card. the Brady and Peyton rookies could be another story in 30-40 years.

jeff

[Laxcat]

I have always thought postwar football was cheap. Except the Namath. It is a tough card and he is a New York Icon. However, I have always thought that the Namath was overpriced. Let's face it, the '65 set is NOT the same as the '52 BB.

Unfortunately football players fade from memory faster than baseball players. Don't believe me? Why is it that you can pick up copies of HOF rookies for next to nothing? I think we agree that there were less football cards printed. So shouldn't even 3rd tier HoFer's cards be a little harder to come by/more expensive?

[jefferyepayne]

Originally Posted by Laxcat

Unfortunately football players fade from memory faster than baseball players. Don't believe me? Why is it that you can pick up copies of HOF rookies for next to nothing? I think we agree that there were less football cards printed. So shouldn't even 3rd tier HoFer's cards be a little harder to come by/more expensive?

I personally don't believe it has to do with players fading from memory as much as the lack of vintage football card collectors. It's supply and demand. No demand ... no high prices.

Here are the top 10 most collected PSA football sets based upon how many collectors have submitted cards to the registry. A rough metric, I know, but interesting:


SET NAME SETS
1955 Topps All-American - Basic 141
1957 Topps - Basic 117
1969 Topps - Basic 106
1959 Topps 93
1972 Topps 88
1955 Bowman 81
1970 Kelloggs 81
1970 Topps - Basic 81
1971 Topps 81
1956 Topps - Basic 77

I never would have guessed this list. I would have said: 1935 National Chicle, 1950 Bowman, 1952 Bowman Large, 1955 Topps AA, 1957 Topps, 1958 Topps, 1968 Topps, 1969 Topps, 1971 Topps, 1972 Topps.

There are 10 baseball sets with 200+ sets on the PSA registry.

jeff

[Peter_Spaeth]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/8...in-nfl-history

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/list/alltimeoverrated.html

[S_GERACE]

I agree with the fact that Namath was overrated if you just look at his statistics. But there was more to him than that. Jeff has already mentioned that his signing gave the AFL legitimacy but it was his win in SB III that really put the AFL on an even plane w/ the NFL. The AFL was viewed as a "joke" league until then. The Packers had handily defeated the AFL's representative in the first 2 SB's and the Jets win is still viewed as one of the biggest upsets in sports history.

Also, to compare Namath to Rex Grossman just isn't fair. The offenses run today throw shorter, high percentage passes which lead to high completion percentages and thereby higher passer ratings. The game has changed so much that you really have to compare guys from similar eras to get a fair perspective. Much like in Baseball, it's not fair to compare the ERA of Christy Mathewson to someone who plays today or "Home Run" Baker's league leading totals to a player who started after Ruth came along. Yes Namath had more INT's than TD's but that could be said of many other HoF QB's from the 1970's and prior (before the advent of the West Coast offense). If you want to compare Namath's stats to other players, choose Dawson, Unitas, Starr, Jurgensen, etc...

Namath won a major championship in the most glamorous city during the early years of the boom in professional Football! Namath also has a "what if?" quality attached to him because of his nagging injuries, much like Mantle. People love to speculate. Plus Namath had flair (was always in the company of beautiful women). Also, the 1965 Topps set is very popular. Is it the 1952 Topps Baseball set? Not even close, but Football cards in general aren't currently sought at nearly the same level as their BB counterparts.

Jeff put it best, "it's all about supply and demand" and right now the Namath RC's demand far exceeds it's supply, much like the 1952 Mantle (just not to the same extent).