Idea for set registry's

nailshooter

What does everyone think about a set registry for the best baseball players at each position? The football registry has it for QB'S, RB'S, WR'S, and defenses. How about the top 10 for 1B, 2B, SS, 3B, C, top 30 outfielders, and top 20 pitchers or so? Just an idea.

Mac53

Not a bad idea, but there may be too much debate over who to choose. How about a set for all of the MVPs at each position. Then, you can have a set for the 10 (I think) players who have had back to back MVPs.

JeffSherman

OK, I freely admit to being something of a stick in the mud about PSA Registry sets, and I thought the Player sets and such were OK, but I think now we're heading into the genre of PSA Registry sets of "Players I Like" or "Players Who Homered Off Al Downing" or "Left Handed Pitchers with ERAs Below 3.00 vs. the Marlins" or "Italian Surnamed Players of the 1950s." The PSA Registry, it seems, is a Registry of sets, REAL sets, not made up ones, up to a point (the HOF set is a pretty good idea, for example, as are some player sets, if they predate 1980 and the mass production of cards). At some point, the expansion of the Registry becomes ludicrous. Sorry to be a wet blanket on this stuff.....

mikeschmidt

The "Way I Collect" Registry is there for people who collect weird subsets or other things that are not widely collected.

If you can't build a Registry set that has at least 2-3 people who are building a similar-style set - just put it in the Way I Collect Registry. It reduces all the clutter. [No offense meant to the hoardes of Joe Schlabotnik player collectors]

Southsider

I disagree with the notion that the Set Registry should be restricted in some way. It's for collectors, whatever they collect as long as they make the request, assemble the set, and have the certs to register. There is no limit to the number of sets that can be registered; adding someone's set does not take anything away from any other sets that are somehow "more worthy" of being listed.

The "Collectors Showcase" registry is an alternative, but a faulty one for several reasons:

1) There is no way to organize the listings within the Showcase. Cards are listed as they are added. They cannot be arranged according to year, name, set, etc. This makes the Showcase inferior to a regular Registry set that has a defined order. IMO, this is a much needed area of improvement.

2) The Showcase does not have an benefits for completion. There are no free gradings.

3) There is no competition with other collectors on Showcase sets. Two showcase sets cannot be compared to one another, nor can the sets be weighted.

These are just my thoughts. I respect everyone's right to collect what they like, regardless of what I think of it.

I'm sure PSA doesn't mind more collectors grading more cards for more sets, either!

Pinchdatail

I think the Registry should just have one set titled "MOSH" and have it include the top grades of every frickin' card ever graded by PSA.

1967topps

Does one have to submit to PSA a list of all the items that might possibly be in a player registry?

Another question, does it take more than one person asking for a player to be added
to individual set registry?

It's amazing to see what 15 year players, stars at the time even if not HOF are not there and then there IS a set registry for
Woodie Held who managed to stretch out over a decade of mediocrity. Are we to believe there was more than
one person lobbying to have their Woodie Held
.
.
.

collection immortalized? (aren't you glad I completed that sentence LOL)

Fletch1750

Its getting very cumbersome, however I am sure it is good for psas business.