|
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Probably a 7oc which is a straight 5. I am looking for one to get signed if you decide to sell.
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Anyone else with another opinion or comment? Do these ragged edges show up a lot or on other cards of this set also?
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
I had mine for a while and decided to keep it 'RAW', tho i been getting offers, so re-thinking of grading it?? Maybe
Here's mine Namath RC -- (i have only seen 1 butterfly tat version, and wish i bidded more on it) [IMG] [/IMG]
|
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
One of the most beautiful rookie cards EVER!!!! Keep it raw and set it on your desk to see every day and think JOE NAMATH style every time the boss walks in. You tell that SOB "I am going to win the Super Bowl" or some variation to that (I am the best in the company, etc).
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Edges
Centering Surface Corners All grade able criteria. Don't go BGS, they will just kill it. I'd go SGC or PSA. Vintage is tough to grade, but you have a nice card. I'd be interested in it if you'd like to trade. I'm putting together a stack of cards for my kids when they get to be 25 I'm going to turn them over to them. They are 3 and 5 now. |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Nice looking Namath! The miscut/oc will kill the grade...assuming it's not trimmed. IMO, you should definitely go with PSA and let them put the qualifier on it. Reason being is if it does indeed grade a 7 or 6(oc), it will look better in a high grade holder. If you don't get a qualifier, good luck getting it in a holder any higher than a 4.
__________________
T206's Graded low-mid 219/520 T201's SGC/PSA 2-5 50/50 T202's SGC/PSA 2-5 10/132 1938 Goudey Graded VG range 37/48 |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
I don't know? While the centering seems to be the main issue, It looks to be a fairly solid card. I have to respectfully disagree about using PSA and having them put the O/C qualifier on it. Anybody with any sense at all can see that the card is o/c, so I see no reason to have PSA label it as such. The o/c qualifier puts a "Black mark" on cards that puts a psycological thought in peoples heads that the card is of less quality than even another card that has similar centering.
I think the card would be much more attractive in an SGC holder without the stigma of any o/c qualfier. Just my 2 cents worth. Nice Card John |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| WTB: 1965 Topps Joe Namath RC #122 (Low-Mid Grade) | freakhappy | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 06-04-2011 12:28 AM |
| 1965 " Namath" Card | Ben Yourg | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 08-16-2009 09:59 PM |
| New postal rate | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 05-18-2007 04:18 PM |
| Is this the going rate for an E90-1 Jackson? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 16 | 01-19-2005 03:59 PM |
| How does this rate... | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 11-29-2002 08:18 PM |