PSA post-war Rookie registry

[KingFisk]

In case anyone missed it, a "majority of registrants" voted to add the following players and cards to the "Post-War Rookie" registry. What a joke. I mean - WTF? I am guessing every copy of the 1941 Double Play set vanished into the ether? 1938 Play Ball Fellers also?

Johnny Mize – 1948 Bowman #4

Bob Feller – 1948 Bowman #5

Phil Rizzuto – 1948 Bowman #8

Enos Slaughter – 1948 Bowman #17

Lou Boudreau – 1949 Bowman #11

Joe Gordon – 1949 Bowman #210

[jb67]

Agree. Makes no sense to me.

[con40]

I voted against all of those inclusions. Those are not rookie cards. I don't know why this hobby is fixated on pre- and post-war designations... like BC and AD in the life of Christ. Bugs the crap out of me.

Rizzuto, Mize and Slaughter have rookie cards in the 1941 Double Play set. How can PSA ignore those mainstream cards simply because they're multi-player and blank-backed? Feller's Goudey Heads-Up is a mainstream, gorgeous card. No... according to PSA his real "rookie" occurs 10 years later!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Multi-player can't possibly be a reason.

[jason.1969]

Bizarre to me that this stuff is even put to a vote. There should be standards that just get followed. Is it really as simple as the real rookie cards coming before D-Day? That really seems dumb to me.

On the bright side, I guess my 1975 Hank Aaron post-Vietnam war RCs just shot up in value!

[bobsbbcards]

Freaking unbelievable. There are 365 sets currently registered for the Post WWII HOF Rookie set. Maybe they asked everyone and the 183 people at the bottom of the list said "Hey, let's screw with the 182 people at the top by making them buy some non-rookie cards! That'll be sweet!"

Perhaps they should have weighted the voting such that Mr. 365 with his 0.99% HOF Rookie set didn't get the same say as Greg at the top of the list with 94.06% (used to be 100% probably) and an average grade of 8.95.

[Rookiemonster]

I believe this is a lot like the 1952 Mantle being called a rookie. Some people don’t care if it really is they just like to call it what they want. The leaf feller is one of those cards. Until we get a recognized and standardized recognition of what a rookie card is we will keep seeing this. Forget about what modern cards are doing to rookie cards.

[KingFisk]

When I first got back into collecting a few years ago, this particular registry set drove me. It was a big goal to get all of the cards and I was able to eventually do so (even though a few of them were non-PSA). I've moved on from being an addict to the Registry and with some distance I took it way less seriously. Adding these cards has removed any seriousness from the list that it ever may have had. If your composite doesn't even really represent what it purports, what's the point? To paraphrase a point someone made on another message board (CU or a FB page) - why not just go ahead and add Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio?

[JollyElm]

I mean, why would anyone want logic and simple facts to get in the way??

[HRBAKER]

Why does anyone care what they think is the larger question?

[jason.1969]

Originally Posted by KingFisk

When I first got back into collecting a few years ago, this particular registry set drove me. It was a big goal to get all of the cards and I was able to eventually do so (even though a few of them were non-PSA). I've moved on from being an addict to the Registry and with some distance I took it way less seriously. Adding these cards has removed any seriousness from the list that it ever may have had. If your composite doesn't even really represent what it purports, what's the point? To paraphrase a point someone made on another message board (CU or a FB page) - why not just go ahead and add Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio?

...or Babe Ruth and Honus Wagner! How prescient of Leaf to include them in their 1949 offering!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk

[bobsbbcards]

Cobb Post WW II Rookie candidates:

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Why does anyone care what they think is the larger question?

Well yes, but you clearly don't understand the mentality that drives registry collectors.

[swarmee]

Some people on the PSA CU board are asking PSA to provide an accounting of the "majority" that voted for the change. This is a short-sighted cash grab that invalidates one of the biggest fights in the Set Registry competition. What would Fonzie say while ski-jumping Jaws?

[KingFisk]

Originally Posted by bobsbbcards

Cobb Post WW II Rookie candidates:

Haha

[yanksfan09]

How can those old weird cards be rookies? There's not enough to market and accept submissions and resubmissions for. Where's the money in that?

The idea of voting for rookie cards like a popularity question is ludicrous. More people have more common issues so are more inclined to vote biased accordingly.

[shagrotn77]

As someone who spent a LOT of time, effort and money to collect and complete this set, this completely idiotic change makes me sick to my stomach. All 6 players that were added to this POST-WAR set have 1941 Double Play cards. As previously mentioned, some, like Feller also have mainstream issues that pre-date the '41 DP set. This all came about because Beckett changed the rules on RCs, and PSA just went along with it, rather than (gasp) thinking for themselves. I have a really hard time believing that the majority of collectors on the set voted for this change.

[shagrotn77]

I'm just waiting for 2005 Topps Chipper, Thome, Vlad and Hoffman cards to be added to the set.

[KingFisk]

Originally Posted by swarmee

Some people on the PSA CU board are asking PSA to provide an accounting of the "majority" that voted for the change. This is a short-sighted cash grab that invalidates one of the biggest fights in the Set Registry competition. What would Fonzie say while ski-jumping Jaws?

Hi John, which subforum is that in (re: the accounting)? I couldn't find the post but wanted to follow it. I only saw the one I chimed in on over there (I rarely go on that forum but was compelled to comment on this). Thanks!

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by KingFisk

Hi John, which subforum is that in (re: the accounting)? I couldn't find the post but wanted to follow it. I only saw the one I chimed in on over there (I rarely go on that forum but was compelled to comment on this). Thanks!

Looks like the thread was pulled. It was in the Sports Cards & Memorabilia board.

[shagrotn77]

What a surprise...not.

[Exhibitman]

Should be renamed the "Making It Up As We Go" registry.

[Sinker Slider]

Top 50 sets being polled again, so if you are in the top 50 and don’t like the additions, check your email and respond to the poll.

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Well yes, but you clearly don't understand the mentality that drives registry collectors.

Well yes, I understand it and then again I don't understand it.
To each their own. PSA is a marketer - don't be surprised when you are being manipulated. It's their game - you don't have to play.
It's obviously been a marketing master stroke and a multitude of collectors and some flip chasers have embraced it.
Kudos to them.

[KingFisk]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Well yes, I understand it and then again I don't understand it.
To each their own. PSA is a marketer - don't be surprised when you are being manipulated. It's their game - you don't have to play.
It's obviously been a marketing master stroke and a multitude of collectors and some flip chasers have embraced it.
Kudos to them.

My original post was more pointing out my confusion about calling those particular cards "rookies." I haven't cared about the registry in years.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by KingFisk

My original post was more pointing out my confusion about calling those particular cards "rookies." I haven't cared about the registry in years.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Thanks Carl.
My response was to Peter.
I understood your point.

[KingFisk]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Thanks Carl.
My response was to Peter.
I understood your point.

All good. Fun development:

Hi Everyone,

*

We have run into a real dilemma with the addition of the Mize, Feller, Rizzuto, Slaughter, Boudreau, and Gordon cards to the HOF Post War Rookie set. We have heard from many of you with both sides making some very valid arguments. We reviewed the poll again and looked at the responses from those collectors who are ranked in the top 50, assuming these are the most active sets. The addition of these cards affects you most.

*

We found that the vote was slightly in favor of the addition of the cards, but is really too close to call. However, there were only 30 responses out of 50. So, we are going to try this one more time because we really want to do the right thing and give everyone in the Top 50 a chance to respond. After this second vote, if we do not have a clear majority, we will not add the cards to the set. Temporarily, the cards are listed as optional until we get this settled.

*

We urge you to cast a vote as your vote matters. Simply respond to the email with a YES or NO*no later than Tuesday, 1/30. (If you emailed me after the last poll results with your opinion on this matter, there is no need to respond again. I have your vote.)

*

Thank you in advance for your patience and participation.

*

Gayle Kean

Collectors Universe



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[con40]

I'm glad Gayle sent this out to get more input from the top 50 sets. I'd like to believe that with a little more thought and deliberation, PSA will realize that these are not true RCs and it's a mistake to include them in any rookie registry.