Share your contrarian hobby opinions

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

From a purely aesthetic standpoint, I don't understand all this love for the first two Bowman Mantles over the '52 Topps. Those Mantles (and all 1950-52 Bowmans) are crude, almost child-like depictions. The artistry, if you want to call it that, is laughable (Paul Richards, anyone?). The best efforts look more like comic book illustrations rather than anything approximating portraiture. The 1950's also feels really late in the game for using simplistic artwork over actual photography. If that appeals to you, however, 1953 Topps would be a more sound option to me. Couple all of this with their odd and inconsistent sizing over just a few short years, and you've completely lost me. '53 Color-'55 are things of beauty. Bowman finally got a handle on crafting beautiful cards, and then they were gone.

[JustinD]

I can quite literally purchase a graded 52' Mantle at any time, on any day. There are multiples for sale at noon on Christmas Day and from a multitude of locations. It is far more difficult to locate a listing for thousands of other items. It is not even in my list of top 200 cards as they are a dime a dozen. I know I am far in the minority on this opinion, but seeing one is a complete meh...

70s-80s OPC cards are vastly undervalued for the same reason the Mantle is overvalued. Just try to locate PSA 9-10 80s OPC anything and you have to convince the 1 or 2 people with one to sell it. The QC was horrific, it's like Bob and Doug Mackenzie ran those cutters.

That said, both of those are going to likely stay in their own lane for value eternally.

Oh, by the way... if you are the lovely owner of one of the 3 graded 1981 OPC Lance Parrish 9's (because a 10 doesn't exist) please let me know. Hell, if you have a Parrish that's just not 90-10 centering, doesn't look like it spent time in a kid's velcro wallet and gradable let me know, lol.

[skelly423]

Originally Posted by JustinD

I can quite literally purchase a graded 52' Mantle at any time, on any day. There are multiples for sale at noon on Christmas Day and from a multitude of locations. It is far more difficult to locate a listing for thousands of other items. It is not even in my list of top 200 cards as they are a dime a dozen. I know I am far in the minority on this opinion, but seeing one is a complete meh...

I'm with you on this. The same is true for most of the "big" cards in the hobby. The 1956 Mantle, 1955 Clemente, 1954 Aaron, 1933 Goudey Ruth #144, T206 Red portrait Cobb are everywhere. You can buy one any day of the year, all it takes is money. The demand supports the prices, but none of these cards are rare.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Tobacco cards are the "correct" size. Standard cards are too big!

[jchcollins]

Two things I'm fairly convinced on that most of the hobby probably disagrees with:

1. For my money, prewar cards are a bust / bad value compared to postwar vintage. While it's true that for most of my collecting life that they have not been readily affordable for me (I started with cards at age 9 in 1986...) - even today they simply don't hold a value for me that can compare with later cards: I can get a beater maybe up to G T206 common for the same price as I can a midgrade postwar HOF'er whose name is not Mantle. Guess which card I'm going to choose?

2. For those that care purely about the cards and not other things - even if only subconsciously - professional grading in the 21st century has become a farce. Graders have tried to convince the collecting world that something subjective is inherently objective - and have done a poor job of it at that. Between the scandals and shifting technical standards in practice if not in writing - I'm done. I've seen both PSA and SGC miss on honest grading as often as they get it right, and there is not a single, known-name accepted grading house today that has not survived at least one major scandal. Appreciate your cards for what they are and are not - and free them from their slabs - they are the work of an evil conjurer. Oh - and another thing - centering as the end all, be all of condition criteria was not accepted as a "thing" by anyone serious in the hobby before the advent of professional grading and PSA. Fact.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Two things I'm fairly convinced on that most of the hobby probably disagrees with:

1. For my money, prewar cards are a bust / bad value compared to postwar vintage. While it's true that for most of my collecting life that they have not been readily affordable for me (I started with cards at age 9 in 1986...) - even today they simply don't hold a value for me that can compare with later cards: I can get a beater maybe up to G T206 common for the same price as I can a midgrade postwar HOF'er whose name is not Mantle. Guess which card I'm going to choose?

2. For those that care purely about the cards and not other things - even if only subconsciously - professional grading in the 21st century has become a farce. Graders have tried to convince the collecting world that something subjective is inherently objective - and have done a poor job of it at that. Between the scandals and shifting technical standards in practice if not in writing - I'm done. I've seen both PSA and SGC miss on honest grading as often as they get it right, and there is not a single, known-name accepted grading house today that has not survived at least one major scandal. Appreciate your cards for what they are and are not - and free them from their slabs - they are the work of an evil conjurer. Oh - and another thing - centering as the end all, be all of condition criteria was not accepted as a "thing" by anyone serious in the hobby before the advent of professional grading and PSA. Fact.

I do wonder if the manufacturers knew there would be an obsession about borders if they would have done away with them and just went with a solid color card with no borders. Or would they have liked the obsession?

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I do wonder if the manufacturers knew there would be an obsession about borders if they would have done away with them and just went with a solid color card with no borders. Or would they have liked the obsession?

I think your answer there lies in those that inherited the companies - when was the last time before this year that Topps made a base set with defined borders? They shied away from it for a very long time after grading became a thing. I'm not an expert on ultra modern, but that much seems obvious.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Carter08

I do wonder if the manufacturers knew there would be an obsession about borders if they would have done away with them and just went with a solid color card with no borders. Or would they have liked the obsession?

The absence of a white border does not in any way eliminate centering from a grading platform or equation. It continues to be just as measurable and obvious to the collector from the visual clues of the card of photo and text.

I was just as concerned about centering as were the majority of collectors I knew in 1982 as I am in 2022. Grading just recognized that value was and is placed in the beauty of symmetry as has been recognized in art since its creation.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by JustinD

70s-80s OPC cards are vastly undervalued for the same reason the Mantle is overvalued. Just try to locate PSA 9-10 80s OPC anything and you have to convince the 1 or 2 people with one to sell it. The QC was horrific, it's like Bob and Doug Mackenzie ran those cutters.

Early OPC is really underrated all across the board. Those are some tough cards to find in nice shape and especially with nice centering. I was very happy to add this one recently:

[Rad_Hazard]

Originally Posted by BillyCox3

From a purely aesthetic standpoint, I don't understand all this love for the first two Bowman Mantles over the '52 Topps. Those Mantles (and all 1950-52 Bowmans) are crude, almost child-like depictions. The artistry, if you want to call it that, is laughable (Paul Richards, anyone?). The best efforts look more like comic book illustrations rather than anything approximating portraiture. The 1950's also feels really late in the game for using simplistic artwork over actual photography. If that appeals to you, however, 1953 Topps would be a more sound option to me. Couple all of this with their odd and inconsistent sizing over just a few short years, and you've completely lost me. '53 Color-'55 are things of beauty. Bowman finally got a handle on crafting beautiful cards, and then they were gone.

Oddly enough I really dislike the sizing of early Topps. I much prefer the smaller Bowmans from 48-52 and I enjoy the size differences. I probably like 1950 sizing the best. As for the art it's just much more appealing to me on 50-52 Bowman than either 52 or 53 Topps. The bold black outlines are somewhat of an OCD thing with me and art, and they add a LOT visually for me on early Bowman art cards. The 52 and 53 Topps sets are just meh when I compare them side by side with 50-52 Bowman.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by BillyCox3

From a purely aesthetic standpoint, I don't understand all this love for the first two Bowman Mantles over the '52 Topps. Those Mantles (and all 1950-52 Bowmans) are crude, almost child-like depictions. The artistry, if you want to call it that, is laughable (Paul Richards, anyone?). The best efforts look more like comic book illustrations rather than anything approximating portraiture. The 1950's also feels really late in the game for using simplistic artwork over actual photography. If that appeals to you, however, 1953 Topps would be a more sound option to me. Couple all of this with their odd and inconsistent sizing over just a few short years, and you've completely lost me. '53 Color-'55 are things of beauty. Bowman finally got a handle on crafting beautiful cards, and then they were gone.

I like 'em all a lot but my sentimental favorite is the 1952 Bowman because I got one at a card show auction for $3.25 in 1978. The rates have gone up...

[Rad_Hazard]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I like 'em all a lot but my sentimental favorite is the 1952 Bowman because I got one at a card show auction for $3.25 in 1978. The rates have gone up...

Beautiful! The 52 Bowman really stands out to me among this bunch. That is a beaut of a 1 for the Topps though, very nice!