This is a great discussion and I agree with the sentiment here regarding errors. I personally believe that errors/variations worthy of recognition from TPGs are ones that were clearly created from a distinct printing plate, and that also have hobby interest and recognition. Now I realize that this may be a sort of chicken and the egg scenario, as TPG recognition feeds hobby demand, but most of the more stark, recurring errors check both boxes (Thomas NNOF, Ripken FF, '87 Bonds Opening Day error etc)
Cards suffering from of solvent drops, fisheyes and other transient variations, though sometimes interesting, don't fit my definition of the type of thing you'd want to collect for a master set.
I have the Leyland on eBay with most of the team name in yellow. I'm sure I priced it too high but I think it's a cool card. I also have a few other player cards from 90 Topps with similar errors, but not quite as stark. Maybe I can dig some more up and scan them. I know one of them is also a manager card, and the Wathan manager card has shown that error as well. I wonder why the manager cards show up more frequently with this variation?
Interestingly enough, I pulled the Leyland out of a group of 3 boxes that also had a number of blackless cards on the green sheet.
When I get some time I'll have to go digging through my 90 Topps and get some of these scanned. I found some new errors last winter that I want to bug Steve B about for his take.
