I can't remember (and don't care to be reminded) what any look like beyond 87 Topps, so for me anything not 1980 Topps, 1981 Topps, or 1984 -1986 Donruss is hideous.
Ugliest for me is probably 82 or 84 Topps. I'm sure a lot of people hate the early Fleer and Donruss issues, but I've come to actually appreciate them, much as I'd love an ugly little puppy, who, despite his poor grooming and ugly features, wins me over with his big heart and determination...
For me, it would be the '82 Fleers. There's not a single photo in the set that didn't look like it was taken with a 110 pocket camera. The '81 Donruss was the worst set of the '80s (overall) in my opinion, but that was more because of horrible quality control rather than just plain ugliness. Although it's not to far off in that area either.
I didn't care too much for 1985 Topps back in 1985 and I have yet to warm up to it 20 years later. I like the rest of the junk from the 80's though. 1984 Topps was the first set I collected when I was 11 so that's a sentimental favorite.
Whats funny is we all KNOW the designs of the 1980's....if someone brought up the ugliest design of the 1990 and someone said 1997 topps i wouldlnt have ANY CLUE what that looked like....the 80 are more valuable to us then we give them credit for....if not in the pocket book...in the heart!
<< <i>if everyone hates 1982 topps...got any commons to send my way as i upgrade my set???
loth >>
I like 82 T also Loth and I have tons of ungraded vending commons sitting around. PM me a list if you would like ungraded and we'll figure something out.
The uglist card has to be 1984 Topps. Those cards were so ugly and just way to busy with graphics and pictures. A very close second has to be the Kelloggs of 1982. WOW!!
<< <i>The uglist card has to be 1984 Topps. Those cards were so ugly and just way to busy with graphics and pictures. A very close second has to be the Kelloggs of 1982. WOW!! >>
I actually like the 84's and I think the second picture(headshot) was way ahead of its time. The next time there was a second picture was 89 UD and that set revolutionized the hobby. The 84's were kinda like the mid 50's sets in that it had an action shot and a headshot.
<< <i>The uglist card has to be 1984 Topps. Those cards were so ugly and just way to busy with graphics and pictures. A very close second has to be the Kelloggs of 1982. WOW!! >>
I actually like the 84's and I think the second picture(headshot) was way ahead of its time. The next time there was a second picture was 89 UD and that set revolutionized the hobby. The 84's were kinda like the mid 50's sets in that it had an action shot and a headshot. >>
Me too, I think they re-used the headshot thing from the 83 set, but changed it so there is a colored background, but the thing that bugs me about 83s is that with the players and team names on the bottom of the card takes up too much space and makes the action shot smaller. I like the 84s because the main photo is bigger than on 83s. JMHO.
I agree with the recent consensus - I thought the '84s were pretty nice. I too like the inset photo, and it was also the first year I got back into collecting as an adult. I liked the '83s maybe a bit more than the '84s. However, the subsets in both of those years did quite suck. I was never a big fan of the in-action cards, all star cards, team leaders, etc.
Mark (amerbbcards)
"All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
I like 84 since, at least through most of the 80's, it was thought to have several good rookies... including two "locks for the hall of fame" (Darryl and Don). I still think of it as a nice looking set but maybe that's because of my fond memories. Same for 82 and 83 for that matter. 88 hasn't gotten a lot of votes but it's a pretty ugly set. Oh ya, also though I am a Dodger fan I found '82 Fleer (I think it is) annoying that 50% of the photos are at Dodger Stadium (in action or posed before game but a huge number at Chavez Ravine). Oh ya, lastly I want to defend '81 Donruss... it's sort of like the little engine that could, David v. Goliath, or whatever. Remember back to breaking the monopoly, throwing cards out on the market about a week later, etc.... I am a softie and that set is so bad I feel bad for it so end up really liking it; plus I actually have several 10's so I like it better!
Comments
1994 Pro Line Live
TheDallasCowboyBackfieldProject
'81 Donruss
'83 Fleer(Papersack brown border)
SPORTFLICS!!
'89 Score
'86 Donruss Highlights(UGGHH!)
Damian
<< <i>
Legit LOL.
Isn't it funny how expensive the old GPK cards are?
Ugliest for me is probably 82 or 84 Topps. I'm sure a lot of people hate the early Fleer and Donruss issues, but I've come to actually appreciate them, much as I'd love an ugly little puppy, who, despite his poor grooming and ugly features, wins me over with his big heart and determination...
Stingray
What, did they look at the 1962s and think"Oh, let's do THAT again!"? Ugly.
My 1934 Goudey Set
<< <i>You know, I'm gonna go for 1987 Topps. I just can't stand the wood grain border look.
What, did they look at the 1962s and think"Oh, let's do THAT again!"? Ugly. >>
I agree. I also don't like 89 fleer.
My Auctions
MY GOLD TYPE SET https://pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/complete-type-sets/gold-type-set-12-piece-circulation-strikes-1839-1933/publishedset/321940
I can't explain why else I think those 84's of Stingray's are so beautiful.
loth
1) 1985
2) 1980
3) 1983
4) 1986
5) 1984
6) 1988
7) 1981
8) 1989
9) 1987
10) 1982
Borders were too big, the photos sucked and the printing quality was trash.
"All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
<< <i>'89 Topps was the epitome of nauseous design.
Borders were too big, the photos sucked and the printing quality was trash. >>
That was close 2nd for me.
Stingray
loth
<< <i>if everyone hates 1982 topps...got any commons to send my way as i upgrade my set???
loth >>
I like 82 T also Loth and I have tons of ungraded vending commons sitting around. PM me a list if you would like ungraded and we'll figure something out.
Jordan
My Auctions
<< <i>1981 Topps... the baseball cap icons in the bottom corner are horribly cheesy. >>
Oh, that's so true. Why that puffy ugly cap? (But I'm blinded by the fact that the Phillies won the 80 Series and all those players were in the set.)
anything with John Wockenfuss on it.
<< <i>The uglist card has to be 1984 Topps. Those cards were so ugly and just way to busy with graphics and pictures. A very close second has to be the Kelloggs of 1982. WOW!! >>
I actually like the 84's and I think the second picture(headshot) was way ahead of its time. The next time there was a second picture was 89 UD and that set revolutionized the hobby. The 84's were kinda like the mid 50's sets in that it had an action shot and a headshot.
My Auctions
<< <i>
<< <i>The uglist card has to be 1984 Topps. Those cards were so ugly and just way to busy with graphics and pictures. A very close second has to be the Kelloggs of 1982. WOW!! >>
I actually like the 84's and I think the second picture(headshot) was way ahead of its time. The next time there was a second picture was 89 UD and that set revolutionized the hobby. The 84's were kinda like the mid 50's sets in that it had an action shot and a headshot. >>
Me too, I think they re-used the headshot thing from the 83 set, but changed it so there is a colored background, but the thing that bugs me about 83s is that with the players and team names on the bottom of the card takes up too much space and makes the action shot smaller. I like the 84s because the main photo is bigger than on 83s. JMHO.
Stingray
"All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
TGIF
Julen
RIP GURU