Most boring card ever?

[ZiggerZagger]

This gets my vote, simply because it could have been so much more. Topps, how dare you take the most compelling player in baseball history and make him look like a lost, wandering Grandparent. In a Dodgers uniform, no less. Nice work gents.

s-l1600.jpg


Also, for a more modern Honorable Mention, the "Baseball Heroes" Header cards from Upper Deck in the early 90's. And they were uniformly the most expensive card in the subset as well. Whatever.

BHeroes.jpg

[nolemmings]

At least you can excuse Topps for the '61 Killebrew given that Twins logos were a new animal that year and could have posed airbrush problems for the artists. So too for the '62 Stengel, which is identical to his nice-looking 1960 card but for the cap logo (or lack of same).

Killer's '61 card is vibrant and eye-catching compared to the Willie Mays card from that set, which looks like it was shot about an hour after Willie ate a bad burrito
.

Must ditto the Keane observation (pun intended). That was my first year collecting, and that card reminded me of the Creature from the Black Lagoon.

[polakoff]

Weird for me to see so many HOFers in this thread. To me a HOFer card could never qualify as the most boring card of all time, even if he looks like he's falling asleep.

The 72 minor league award card is a great submission for this thread, but at those awards cards have some color to them and are visually pleasing. For me one of the most boring cards that pops into my mind is the 1972 high number Pat Corrales in action card.



Can't see his face and somehow someone at Topps decided a photo in which HIS GLOVE ISN'T EVEN ON qualified as an "action" shot.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by polakoff

Weird for me to see so many HOFers in this thread. To me a HOFer card could never qualify as the most boring card of all time, even if he looks like he's falling asleep.

The 72 minor league award card is a great submission for this thread, but at those awards cards have some color to them and are visually pleasing. For me one of the most boring cards that pops into my mind is the 1972 high number Pat Corrales in action card.



Can't see his face and somehow someone at Topps decided a photo in which HIS GLOVE ISN'T EVEN ON qualified as an "action" shot.

Lots of the "In Action" cards will leave you scratching your head. Pete Rose is at bat in-between pitches idly chatting with the catcher on his, Ron Santo is mostly obscured by the opposing catcher, and Harmon Killebrew has just popped out. Action!!!

[Topps206]

I'm not sure if it's the most boring card ever, but there's nothing exciting about Tim Harkness circa the 1963 set.

[geosluggo]

Originally Posted by Topps206

I'm not sure if it's the most boring card ever, but there's nothing exciting about Tim Harkness circa the 1963 set.

For some reason that '63 Harkness was one of the toughest cards -- aside from superstars and high numbers -- when I was completing that set. I think the card's overall boredom factor (OBF) is mitigated somewhat by the spectacularly bad airbrush job on the inset photo.

[stlcardsfan]

I guess Harkness came to the Mets from the Pterodactyl's? LOL

[SAllen2556]

I hated the 1973 boyhood photos. The photo quality was awful, and I couldn't have cared less what Catfish Hunter looked like when he was 6.

s-l1600.jpg

[Robs70sCards]

LOL on the 1978 Topps Pete Rose.

Funny how you remember stuff like this, but I pulled that card back when I was a kid in 78 and thinking "cool I got a Pete Rose....sitting in the dugout..." and being somewhat disappointed. I was much happier in 1979 when I saw that card, like that's how you should do Pete Rose. At least his 78 RB card is decent.