 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3
12-15-2010, 03:16 PM
|
||||
|
||||
I suppose there is no good reason to dislike the idea of bringing back older designs. I just simply don't like it. I also realize they have probably run out of ideas on how to design the new cards without some type of duplication. I'd rather they duplicate some of the cooler-looking cards from the 1970's instead of messing with the pre-war vintage. I always thought 1971 and 1972 was a pretty good design for a card.
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| New theory why American Beauty cards are narrower than other T206's | tedzan | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 53 | 04-05-2010 09:16 PM |
| 1920's "W" cards - why bad image ? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 04-15-2007 06:36 PM |
| 1920's "W" cards - why bad image ? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 04-15-2007 12:59 PM |
| Phantom Values of Baseball Cards | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 07-07-2005 12:20 AM |
| Grading Companies (Overview & Opinions) | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 22 | 09-27-2004 08:37 AM |
Threaded Mode