Tom Brady Rookie Card

[TanksAndSpartans]

From what I see on the PSA registry, they went with this: 2000 SP AUTHENTIC TOM BRADY

[Publius]

Originally Posted by DezHood

From what I see on the PSA registry, they went with this: 2000 SP AUTHENTIC TOM BRADY

Yep, its this one that's considered his "true " rookie. Agree with another poster, the modern stuff starts to get really frustrating, I think Peyton Manning has like 250 cards issued his rookie year, whereas Steve Largent has one and only one true rookie. (for reference of course)

[S_GERACE]

Hi Greg,
The 2000 SP is his best rookie card and usually runs about $1,200 for an 8 and about $1,750 for a 9. However, it is not a very attractive card.

I personally prefer the 2000 Bowman Chrome or Bowman Chrome refractor. The regular Bowman Chrome is about $90 in a PSA 8 and $150 in a PSA 9. The refractor is probably about $600 in a PSA 8 and $850 in a PSA 9.

If you don't care for Chrome cards, you could go with the 2000 Bowman regular issue at about $50 in a PSA 8 and $85 in a PSA 9.

These are Brady's best RC's. Like I said, the best RC is the SP but I prefer the "looks" of the Bowman/Bowman Chrome more. You can have a better looking card and save some dough in the process.

Hope this helps.
Scott

[S_GERACE]

Here is a scan of the 2000 Bowman Brady.

[gnaz01]

Thanks all, wouldn't mind going for an SP from UD but the ones on eBay are crazy priced. Anyone know where I can buy one "reasonable"??

[bcbgcbrcb]

Isn't the Auto Playoff Contenders a very popular one as well. Maybe not classified as a true rookie because of the auto and I guess it was an insert-type card, correct?

[S_GERACE]

I personally wouldn't include it because of the auto/insert aspect but yes, it is a popular card. It's all a matter of personal preference. The Bowman Chrome refractor is also an insert card but to me it it's not a chase card like the Playoff Contender.

To give you an example using vintage cards, Otto Graham's RC is listed as the 1950 Bowman on the PSA registry but if someone were to approach me with a 1946 Sears card I wouldn't dismiss them if they called it his rookie card. The argument against the 1950 Bowman is that there was actually another card issued prior to it. The argument against the 1946 Sears is that it was not nationally distributed. I feel that both sides have valid points. Again, to me it is a matter of preference.

It seems like only football cards issued from 1951 through 1988 have rookie cards that are pretty clear cut, with the exception of the 1955 Topps All-Americans & 1961 Topps/Fleer. You can't call something a rookie card 10 years after he retired (Hutson). Again, it's personal preference.

[twincitycards]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Isn't the Auto Playoff Contenders a very popular one as well. Maybe not classified as a true rookie because of the auto and I guess it was an insert-type card, correct?

The Playoff Contenders is a true rookie card, not an insert/parallel. Here are Brady's true rookie cards I would recommend, after these three there is quite a bit of a drop off.

1: Playoff Contenders
2: SP Authentic
3: SPx