Show your 1973 Topps Comics

[toppcat]

Further to Fred Mckie's 1973 Pinups thread, let's see your companion Comics. PSA has about two pinups graded for every comic so these seem to be scarcer. My type example is Mickey Lolich; I like these more than the pinups but to each their own:

[raulus]

A few of mine to get the party going.

[Balticfox]

The comics are cooler than that year's cards!

[jmoran19]

I have a psa 7.5 McCovey, will try to find pic of it

[raulus]

Few more from my collection.

[Big Red Machine]

My only 1973 comic.

[raulus]

New day, new batch!

[paul]

Here's my Seaver. It was wrapped around gum for over 30 years before I bought it and unwrapped it.

[raulus]

Time for a few more.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by paul

Here's my Seaver. It was wrapped around gum for over 30 years before I bought it and unwrapped it.

Sweet! I've only seen one other Seaver, it was in Steve Werley's showcase sometime back at a Chicago National and I'm still kicking myself for not buying it.

[raulus]

A few more, including a Seaver.

[Griffins]

My only one, I guess I could try and figure out who is in it without opening it, but have never bothered.

[ASF123]

Interesting that Topps’ MLB trademark license obviously didn’t extend to the comics.

[raulus]

Last 3 for me.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by ASF123

Interesting that Topps’ MLB trademark license obviously didn’t extend to the comics.

Topps was experimenting to see if they could do away with incensing the logos etc. from the teams at the time, or perhaps threatening to do so. The related Pin-Ups set and the 73 Candy Lids are other examples, likely timed to what were upcoming license renewal negotiations. The Action Emblem stickers from the period were a kind of evolution of this.

Many of the Topps football sets have no team licensed logos and the like, early basketball sets too. For some reason, baseball products without team logos seem to be thought of as cheap by collectors and not as fully collectable as those with them.

[Gary Dunaier]

Originally Posted by toppcat

For some reason, baseball products without team logos seem to be thought of as cheap by collectors and not as fully collectable as those with them.

I wonder how much of that applies to Topps products, compaired to other companies, just because the Topps name gives them a cachet of legitimacy that not all brands have.

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by Gary Dunaier

I wonder how much of that applies to Topps products, compaired to other companies, just because the Topps name gives them a cachet of legitimacy that not all brands have.

I think unlicensed products would lack cachet regardless of the brand. They just don’t look right, whether that’s via airbrushing or more modern methods of removing the logos, and there’s something noticeably missing and off.

It was noticeable when I was a kid collecting in the ‘80s - I can’t imagine the ‘70s were all that different.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by ASF123

I think unlicensed products would lack cachet regardless of the brand. They just don’t look right, whether that’s via airbrushing or more modern methods of removing the logos, and there’s something noticeably missing and off.

It was noticeable when I was a kid collecting in the ‘80s - I can’t imagine the ‘70s were all that different.

It was the same way, at least to me. Those blank caps on a lot of regional and oddball sets were, as you note, quite cheesy in appearance.

[frankhardy]

I'm not sure now exactly how long I looked for this one for my Cardinals team set. I am pretty sure I looked for over 10 years. I finally found this one in 2018.

[GasHouseGang]

Topps had issues with the NBA license in the late 1960's into the 1970's. They made the players wear their jerseys backwards so the team names didn't show. At least they never did that in baseball! (I added an example)

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

Topps had issues with the NBA license in the late 1960's into the 1970's. They made the players wear their jerseys backwards so the team names didn't show. At least they never did that in baseball!

I’m laughing right now because I never really collected basketball cards and didn’t know that, but I have a memory of seeing old basketball cards as a kid and thinking “They used to put their names on the front of the jerseys? That’s strange.”

[ASF123]

Wasn’t such a bad look for baseball, I guess.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[paul]

That Jerry West example is interesting, but I'm confused. If Topps made West turn his jersey around so it didn't show the Lakers name, then why does the word Lakers appear in large letters right below West's picture?

[GasHouseGang]

According to Google:

Topps could not put official team logos on their early 1970s basketball cards because they did not have a licensing agreement with the NBA itself, only with the NBA Players Association (NBPA).

Topps had a contract with the players' association allowing them to use player images and names. They did not have a separate agreement with the NBA league office, which owned the rights to the official team names and logos.

As a result, early 70s Topps cards often featured:
Photos of players with the backs of their jerseys showing (to hide front logos and team names).
Players in warm-up gear or practice uniforms without logos.
Airbrushed-out logos where they might have appeared on uniforms or other gear.
Generic team names printed on the card borders or vertical edges, rather than the official logo.

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

According to Google:

Topps could not put official team logos on their early 1970s basketball cards because they did not have a licensing agreement with the NBA itself, only with the NBA Players Association (NBPA).

Topps had a contract with the players' association allowing them to use player images and names. They did not have a separate agreement with the NBA league office, which owned the rights to the official team names and logos.

As a result, early 70s Topps cards often featured:
Photos of players with the backs of their jerseys showing (to hide front logos and team names).
Players in warm-up gear or practice uniforms without logos.
Airbrushed-out logos where they might have appeared on uniforms or other gear.
Generic team names printed on the card borders or vertical edges, rather than the official logo.

That's interesting, thanks - I'm actually an IP lawyer by day, so this stuff is right up my alley.

Looking at other 1972-73 Topps basketball cards makes it clear that they first got their NBA license that year. From 1969-1971, Topps only used city names rather than the team names, which was the convention for unlicensed cards when I was a kid in the '80s and, I think (?), for quite some time after that. Current unlicensed cards not only do not use the team names, but they also alter the colors somewhat (teams and leagues have become more protective of their IP over the years).

If you look at, for example, Artis Gilmore and Dr. J's 72-73 cards, the team logos are clearly visible on the jerseys. I think they just used a lot of old photos for whatever reason, taken when they didn't have the license. There are the backwards jersey ones, and also shots like Phil Jackson where the player is posed with his arms obscuring most of the logo (what was left was presumably planned to be airbrushed).

Interestingly, apparently Topps printed a test series in 1968 that made full use of team names and logos. I wonder if that pissed off the NBA and led to the three subsequent years of unlicensed cards.