What constitutes an official rookie card?

djy2500

I find it hard to believe that a card can be regarded as an official rookie card that doesn’t have the teams logo! I recently submitted a new request for a rookie set on the registry and it was approved and contains several panini cards that don’t have a license with MLB; therefore, can’t print team logos. How can a card be official without the team logo. Any others feel this way?

vols1

I don't think there is an official rookie card definition. Remember Topps didn't have a NFL or NBA license for years. They had to airbrush all the logo's off the cards in the 70's.

Horse

A picture with a player wearing a major league baseball uniform inside a major league baseball stadium is the true rookie card.

JoeBanzai

There are no true rookie cards anymore.

That's ok.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

doubledragon

I've always thought the Panini baseball cards look tacky without team logos. That's Just my opinion.

CdnOsfan

@doubledragon said:
I've always thought the Panini baseball cards look tacky without team logos. That's Just my opinion.

I agree. They make some cards that would be REALLY NICE....if they had a full license and logos.

artee

@djy2500 said:
I find it hard to believe that a card can be regarded as an official rookie card that doesn’t have the teams logo! I recently submitted a new request for a rookie set on the registry and it was approved and contains several panini cards that don’t have a license with MLB; therefore, can’t print team logos. How can a card be official without the team logo. Any others feel this way?

So no panini rookie cards ever?

artee

@doubledragon said:
I've always thought the Panini baseball cards look tacky without team logos. That's Just my opinion.

@doubledragon said:
I've always thought the Panini baseball cards look tacky without team logos. That's Just my opinion.

Most of the pajama cards are tacky, there are a very limited few that with particular poses and pictures used, that really aren't very noticeable. plus they have the classic "rated rookie" logos. So for me, it's give and take. Again, very few cards meet this criteria and I still wouldn't buy a box of this crap.

jmmiller777

Ya, the rules and lines are blurry. I would say that the first card a player appears for his first MLB team in uniform could be a rookie card, with or w/o team logos. Beckett magazine used to have all this figured out, but again, lines have been blurred.

LarkinCollector

In the grand scheme of collecting concerns, this doesn't even come close to cracking my top 100. If you don't like something in the set, don't collect those entries. It really is that simple.

I've started several Master sets that I have no intention of ever even attempting to complete, but they're the only place to track the cards that I am interested in in a single location.

bishop

Defining a true rookie card is no harder than defining what constitutes a true variation. You just need to present those questions to the person in charge of this hobby for an official determination

TickledPink

There are so many... but I do know if it has the autograph it's worth another 10k ..

stwainfan

Topps football cards in the 1970's. Didn't have logos on the helments.

JoeBanzai

@MLBdays said:
I'm not sure but I think It's written in the U.S. Constitution.

If it's in the U.S. Constitution it most certainly will be ignored.

ScoobyDoo2

@JoeBanzai ....and thus the thread.

artee

@stwainfan said:
Topps football cards in the 1970's. Didn't have logos on the helments.

And they still don’t! 😉

djy2500

@LarkinCollector said:
In the grand scheme of collecting concerns, this doesn't even come close to cracking my top 100. If you don't like something in the set, don't collect those entries. It really is that simple.

Thanks captain obvious!

LarkinCollector

@djy2500 said:

@LarkinCollector said:
In the grand scheme of collecting concerns, this doesn't even come close to cracking my top 100. If you don't like something in the set, don't collect those entries. It really is that simple.

Thanks captain obvious!

You're welcome!

Unknown

This content has been removed.

PROMETHIUS88

@MLBdays said:
RC's are open interpretation.....some sell better than others ... really popular players like a DEREK JETER has a main RC(FOIL SP) that is so expensive folks are driving his other more obscure RC's to higher prices..... Cards that were 100.00 bucks a few years ago are now around 1k or more now with his impending HOF ceremony..... It's odd having so many choices now for us old time collectors but the new generation has more choice and opportunity.... its a win/win IMO. (I BELIEVE MORE IS BETTER...MORE VARIETY AND DIFFERENT) photos and auto's etc...but some aren't so enchanted... I don't think I was initially either... My perspective has acquiesced over the last couple years.

I tried to relate this sentiment to my wife about other women. She wasn't buying into it.