|
My three favorite Topps sets with three things I'd change
1 Attachment(s)
First Place: 1957
Great photographs, a first for Topps--reminds me of 1953 Bowman color--and a variety of poses, unlike the 1958 set, which is way too many headshots. The special cards like "Dodger Sluggers" add personality to the set as well, and the cards of Mickey Mantle and Ted Williams are classic poses that outshine all other Topps issues. Three things I'd change - 1. Would have loved a Jackie Robinson card in this set. Made my own. Attachment 166559 2. Ditto for Stan Musial. 3. Really hate that the Hank Aaron photo is reversed. 1957 was THE year for the Hammer...MVP and World Championship...I realize Topps wouldn't have known this at the time the card went to press, but what a shame they got it wrong. Second Place: 1969 Much like 1957, I enjoy the photos in this set. A variety of poses and good color. Johnny Bench and Nolan Ryan are two favorites among the not-yet-superstars featured. And a plus that the non-photo elements take up a minimum of space unlike 1972 or 1977. Three things I'd change-- 1. Again, Hank Aaron gets no love! It seems like Topps reused the same photo from the 1968 set. Not sure if the Hammer was sick on photo day, but gosh... 2. I'm not a big rookie card guy, but I never like it when the rookie card of a key player has other rookies featured as well. Luckily, Rollie Fingers is the only rookie HOF card in this set that shares billing. 3. I know Topps outsourced their All-Star selections to the Sporting News, but my gosh...the AS cards in this set are awful compared to who actually started the game. Yes to Curt Flood but no to Hank Aaron? Am beginning to think Topps has it in for the Hammer. Third Place: 1976 I don't imagine this set is a popular one with most vintage collectors--or that it even counts as vintage to many of you. Still, I just love the cards of Yaz and Bench. I also like how the All-Star designations were put directly on the player's main issue card, the first time Topps did this...I think. (Okay, some of you are saying, What about 1975? But remember the Hank Aaron all-star was put on his Record Breaker card!) Three things I'd change-- 1. Again, not really Topps' fault, but gosh! 8 of the 9 AL All-Star selections are Yankees or Athletics. Trivia question--without looking it up, who is the exception? 2. Not to beat up too badly on all-star selections, but what's up with Ron Cey and Pete Rose both being the NL All-Star 3B and only having two outfielders? Why not move versatile Charlie Hustle into the OF with Brock and Wynn? 3. And again, here I go beating up on AS selections. As a kid, the All-Time All Star subset was my favorite--a chance to own a card of Ruth or Gehrig. And I get that the players were determined by the Sporting News on the occasion of MLB's centennial. Still, I would have loved to see some more modern selections. Here the outlier was Ted Williams, who began his career in the 1930s. Sure, it's hard to say which of the honorees should take a backseat, but gosh...the set sure paints a portrait of baseball as a game ruled by ghosts. Well, congrats if you made it through the post! How about you? What's your favorite Topps set, and what would you change about it? |
1957
|
I, too, love the 1976 set. Unfortunately it came during the first 'boom' of baseball cards, so it was overproduced like crazy.
1969 I would have eliminated 99.9999999% of the capless headshots. Supposedly the impetus for those was the fact that the league expanded, so there was a lack of pictures of the players in their new uniforms. Whatever the case, they are overwhelming and awful. 1971 This is a cool set due to the variety of action shots contained within it, but there's no way in heck I would have done it with those black borders. Oh, and I would've told the photographer in Dick Allen's shot to move his frickin' knee!! 1972 Absolutely love this set, but as has been discussed relentlessly here, they should've chosen much better players for the 'in action' shots. Gibson, Brock and other superstars are just flat out missing. Plus, why no Mays in the high numbered 'traded' series??? Come on, Topps!!! And an extra selection… 1964 I stated this elsewhere, but it bears repeating. Topps' basic design featured the players heads, mitts, etc., breaking the upper white border. A very cool looking effect to be sure, but they eliminated this treatment on many players including Billy Williams and Eddie Mathews. Why? |
1969
Expansion may have contributed to capless, hatless and old photos in the 68 and 69 sets, but a bigger contributor was Marvin Miller who had finally organized the players to demand more not only from the owners but also from Topps for use of player likenesses. The stand off resulted in the use and reuse of a lot of old photos in those sets. The stand off was resolved in time to salvage the last two series in the 69 set
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
1. I love the 1957 set for some of the reasons mentioned. I never really thought about it this way, but it is the closest Topps set to 1953 Bowman Color, which I absolutely adore. Same kind of feel, just a little smaller. But, the set had a few problems. The missing players bother me, but there are enough cards from those players in other recent sets, so it doesn't continually gnaw at me when I look at it. The 1957 Topps Hank Aaron, however, does. Hammerin' Hank had perhaps his finest year in 1957. Not only were his statistics great (118 runs scored, 198 hits, 44 home runs, 132 RBI, .322 AVG), but he helped the Braves to their only World Series win while in Milwaukee. It's his only MVP season, and he and the Braves beat Mantle and the Yankees for Milwaukee's only World Series win. So, you'd think that with Aaron's card being kind of important, that somebody in quality control at Topps would have caught that Hank, one of the finest right handed hitters to ever play the game, was suddenly batting lefty if you believed his card. So, today, I decided to take to Photoshop to correct this. It doesn't look like a lot of work went into fixing it, but it took a good teal of tinkering with. Obviously, I couldn't just flip the card, because the text would have been wrong, too. So, I had to use the clone stamp tool to sample the background, and get rid of the text. I flipped the picture, then recreated the text. It's just a simple Arial typface that I used. It's not a perfect recreation of the textNow, I just need to get the proper printer, and learn which current, readily available card stock would be appropriate to print these cards on. I'd love to be able to print some of these up, and give them to collectors who would like them. So, on the left, my version of the corrected 1957 Topps Hank Aaron, and a 1953 Bowman Style 1957 Topps Hank Aaron. In the immortal lyrics of Berlin, "No More Words http://imageshack.com/a/img912/4355/sy46VI.pnghttp://imageshack.com/a/img540/199/BsgGSG.png I will have to think about the other two sets. I'll finish my answer tonight. |
I guess I have never noticed before, but the 57 Aaron looks like he should fall over, like part of his lower body is missing. Airbrushed perhaps or an awkward pose?
|
Hey Curt,
Yeah, it is a little awkward, isn't it? Some hitters back then really leaned in from their waist. But this doesn't appear to be what's happening here. It's like he's bending over...from the toes, lol. I don't know what happened with this photo. I wouldn't put accidental airbrushing past Topps. I mean, they flipped him and made him a lefty, I wouldn't be surprised if they chopped off a leg, too, to mess with us. |
Hey Curt,
Yeah, it is a little awkward, isn't it? Some hitters back then really leaned in from their waist. But this doesn't appear to be what's happening here. It's like he's bending over...from the toes, lol. I don't know what happened with this photo. I wouldn't put accidental airbrushing past Topps. I mean, they flipped him and made him a lefty, I wouldn't be surprised if they chopped off a leg, too, to mess with us. |
Wow, just love the fixed 57 Aaron. If you do print some, the 'stache, let me know!
|
Thx for clarifying on Rose. Makes sense then. And well done on Carew. I suppose the other half of the same trivia question would be to name which 2B from the A's or Yanks failed to make it a duopoly.
|
As a ten year old, I was confused as I could be when I saw that Bobby Murcer was with the Giants and was an A.L. All Star on his 1975 card. I was pretty sure that he was in the National League. I am fairly certain that's why Hank Aaron's All-Star designation is on his record breaker card, otherwise there would be a N.L. All Star with the Brewers (which is very possible now).
|
1952 ---- To have convinced Sy Berger to make super-looking horizontal poses for the second versions of Mickey Mantle, Jackie Robinson, and Bobby Thomson!
1961 ---- There were a couple numbers not used in the last series. For one of them, I would have liked to have seen a Mickey Mantle & Roger Maris card, entitled "M 'n M Boys", horizontally configured. With the right kind of shot and smiles, that would have been monumentally smashing. 1967 ---- Made a last card of Sandy Koufax, and not a photo of just his head! ---Brian Powell |
As a child of the 80's, I have not collected any full sets, but here are my favorites:
1975 - I love love love this set. 1971 - this set has awesome action, and I love the black borders which really look nice among others. 1968 - another awesomely designed set. Other faves: 59, 62, 63, 72, 73, 76,77. I'd say I am not a fan of the plain picture cards. I like a vibrant border/design. |
Quote:
Completely agree! I was just thinking it would have been cool to have a Jackie Robinson tribute card in the 57 set. Musial missing from many of the 50's sets always bugged me. If I could add him to any set, it would be the 57, and also since #145 wasn't issued in 58, and they finally signed Musial late in the year, someone at Topps could have wised up and realized they could have issued a regular Musial card in 58 as #145. Back to the 57 set, I wish Maris had his rookie card in this set as well. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:43 AM. |