Registry Frustration Question

CVHJOS9

Long time reader, but rarely post.
Is it wrong of me to think that for a teams HOF registry player selection, that when you think of the player that team should come up in your mind? Or they should have at least made the Pro Bowl or All-Pro team while with that team.
The last couple of years players have been added to my teams checklist who i never knew even played for the team. One player, "played" 3 games and retired. Another was on the team for 1/2 the season, suited up and never played. Why are the allowed on the checklist.

I have sent multiple emails to the set registry but have gotten no response.

I feel better now that the rant is over, and hope someone will reply enlightening me on either PSA's logic or why I'm wrong.
Thanking you all for many years of great discussion reading.

toppsfootball

Hi,

I'll assume you're talking about the Rams since you have Rams avatar. (Go Niners! LOL). Looking at the Rams HOF registry I quickly saw four players names that I had no clue played for or was on the active roster for the Rams during their careers. Checked the Pro Football Reference site for verification. Those were Ron Yary (Vikings-8 games W/Rams), Winston Hill (Jets-3 games w/Rams), James Lofton (Packers/Bills-1 game w/Rams), and Bill George (Bears-14 games w/Rams). One name I didn't see on the Rams player HOF that I knew played briefly for Rams is Joe Namath (4 games). I am 99.9% sure if someone requests Namath be added to the Rams player HOF PSA would add it.

This is what PSA states for all the HOF player sets (Notes: This set requires specific cards.) To me that means that anybody that played for or was on active roster can be added. I am with you though in believing that the player should only be in the player HOF if the majority of his career was with one team. I did one more check on the great HOF QB Johnny Unitas to see if he was in the Chargers HOF player set, and he wasn't. Unitas played in a hand full of games for Chargers at end of his career. Again 99.9% sure PSA would add him to Chargers player HOF if someone requested it.

I haven't always agreed with PSA's decisions on cards being added to sets I'm working on and realize they have final say. Regardless I will always love the thrill of building my sets for myself, and to display on the PSA registry! I hope this info helps you out/makes you feel a little better!

Matt

CVHJOS9

Hi Matt, yep bigtime Rams fan, and you are correct with those players that were added. I just wish they would have a vote for it, because yes Johnny Unitas shouldn't be with the Chargers, Namath shouldn't be with the Rams, and Emmitt Smith shouldn't be with the Cardinals.

Selfishly i don't want to have to buy a new card, for someone who wasn't a "Ram".

Stay safe,

Jose

DBesse27

Hi Jose,

When those sets were created, the criteria was that the player needed to be deemed a “primary contributor” to that franchise (deemed by the HOF themselves) in order to be eligible for the set. As the set registry staff has lost some longtime team members, that criteria seems to have been forgotten. It sucks and I’m upset about it too.

Dan

spakinois

I totally agree with questioning the registry process. I have seen players cards added to a registry and never once seen the "vote" for the card to be added to the list. But i constantly question why or how was this card or player picked. I wish there was a clearer understanding as to how the additions and process works.

DBesse27

I see this complaint a lot, but you should realize that some sets don’t/shouldn’t require any voting. It depends on the criteria. For instance, I collect the Patriots team Hall of Fame set. Vrabel recently got inducted. It would be inappropriate for the membership to vote whether or not to include him in the set. If he’s in the team’s Hall, he’s in the set.

spakinois

This is true. I was more referring to how they pick the card manufacturer/card type as well. I collect several different hall of fame sets but sometimes one set has one particular make and another set has another totally different one. I just wanted more clarification on why or how they pick whether something is a chrome or silver prizm or Bowman or what have you. If it's the only one of that year, then it makes totally sense since that's the only one available. But over the years, several different makes have emerged. What constitutes whether they will go with a Prizm Silver as opposed to a Prizm Base?

DBesse27

@spakinois said:
This is true. I was more referring to how they pick the card manufacturer/card type as well. I collect several different hall of fame sets but sometimes one set has one particular make and another set has another totally different one. I just wanted more clarification on why or how they pick whether something is a chrome or silver prizm or Bowman or what have you. If it's the only one of that year, then it makes totally sense since that's the only one available. But over the years, several different makes have emerged. What constitutes whether they will go with a Prizm Silver as opposed to a Prizm Base?

You make some good points. Regarding your last question though, they do (or should) always go with the base over parallels. At least that’s always been their policy.