<< <i>I noticed that STeve Owen is listed in the Players HOF set. He was inducted based on his coaching, Correct? >>
Here's his HOF Bio...I think this agrees with your assumption:
To call Steve Owen a pioneer is not an overstatement. The sturdy tackle and head coach was born in Oklahoma before it was a state – it was still a territory in 1898. From little Phillips, a small Oklahoma college, Steve began his pro football career in 1924 with the Kansas City Blues (later Cowboys), a traveling team that played all their games on the road.
After a brief stay with the Cleveland Bulldogs, he was sold to the New York Giants in 1926 for $500. Owen played seven seasons with the Giants, 1926-1931 and 1933. In 1930, he was both a player and the team’s co-coach. Although he continued to play, he was named the sole head coach in 1931.
Then, in 1933, he stopped playing and devoted all his efforts to coaching. Owen and the Mara family, who owned the Giants never had a contract. He coached 23 years, 1930-1953, on just a handshake. Stout Steve Owen believed in basic fundamental football, and he was successful with his basic style. His real strength was in coaching defense.
Under his tutelage, the Giants played in eight of the first 14 championship games of the National Football League. The team’s victory in the 1934 “Sneakers Game” is well documented. He coached the Giants to another title in 1938. He originated the “umbrella defense” – the secondary was likened to an umbrella with four deep defensive backs representing the umbrella’s spokes.
The spokes include future Hall of Famers Emlen Tunnell and Tom Landry. He successfully used this defense to contain the powerful pass-oriented Cleveland Browns when they joined the NFL in 1950. Owen left the Giants following the 1953 season, but before he did he developed some of the greatest players and toughest teams in history. His 155 career victories attest to his success.------------------
Dave, don't make the mistake of trying to make sense of any of these new sets...99% of every new HOF or Key Card set I've seen added the past year or two have been nothing short or moronic...And the only fix, IMO, is to lobotomize whoever is requesting them....The feeling they give me is the same you get when some a=hole cuts you off in traffic...Rides a turn lane to bypass traffic and then cuts you at the last minute into a tiny space not meant to fit another vehicle into...All you can do is shake your head and wonder why people like this exist in the world today...
They are done for no other reason than a play for free gradings...It is a slap in the face to the true spirit of the Registry, and I wish PSA would do away with the free grade deal so we can finally put a stop to the nonsense...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Jason, I'm still going to request the All-Time Punters Set once I have enough qualifying cards to make the request.
Nick >>
LOL..Whatever floats your boat man..I'm out of the Key Card sets, so luckily won't have to see it.
That being said, after Guy, Lechler and Roby...Pretty worthless set, no?
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Yeah, but as far as 3 card registry sets go, that one would be one of the best.
Nice hammer price on the 96 SP Ogden this week. Tough card to find with decent edges and I'm glad he's got a little bit of buzz for his upcoming HOF run.
<< <i>Nice hammer price on the 96 SP Ogden this week. Tough card to find with decent edges and I'm glad he's got a little bit of buzz for his upcoming HOF run. >>
Holy crap! I missed that auction. I picked up my 10 for just $150 just a few months back.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
<< <i>Nice hammer price on the 96 SP Ogden this week.
I was really surprised at the end. Hopefully more will start showing up soon. >>
Hey Frank. Yeah I think that we may not see $300+ again as the population approaches double digits. It was sitting at Pop 4 for a really long time before 4SC decided to throw down. Mine is going to be buried with me.
Speaking of Ravens eventual HOFers, I've got one my two 02 Topps Chrome PSA 10 Ed Reeds up for sale right now. I realize the opening bid is high. Just checking for nibbles after the Ogden went nuts. PM if interested.
Quite a bit of activity on this thread the last couple of days...folks must be more willing to come out and play with a couple of "bad apples" now banned (Weinhold, you troublemaker ). Anyone else notice that VCP is no longer reporting MLI and Goodwin auction results? Apparently the AH's won't allow Bobby to cover them anymore.
<< <i>Quite a bit of activity on this thread the last couple of days...folks must be more willing to come out and play with a couple of "bad apples" now banned (Weinhold, you troublemaker ). Anyone else notice that VCP is no longer reporting MLI and Goodwin auction results? Apparently the AH's won't allow Bobby to cover them anymore. >>
Keith got banned? Wow, crazy...Anyone know the story?
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
That really is lame, but not unexpected. You would think they'd very much WANT their auction results reported and archived in that manner.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
Instead of naming the auction house, can VCP just keep the results up there with a generic name or something? VCP not having all major auction data would really suck.
<< <i>Instead of naming the auction house, can VCP just keep the results up there with a generic name or something? VCP not having all major auction data would really suck. >>
I think what they dislike is:
1- VCP archives photos of the cards being auctioned. Which makes it quite easy to see which cards the auction houses are "selling" in consecutive auctions.
2- VCP is making money off of it with no kickback to the auction houses.
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Sorry Keith got banned. I for one do like this board and all the discussions...even if I do not agree with what is said. On the punters set I don't know who was proposed to be in it and cannot find the archive. As long as PSA allows the free vouchers and they feel it helps their business model-then why not? As NO punter has made the HOF and probably none ever will (as I see the voting and results of Ray Guy) this set would not be a duplicate as most of us collect HOFers or likely HOFers. Is Reggie Roby HOF material? However Lechler is statistically the best punter EVER. His carear is still far from over. Realistically what if?.......he gets 10 1st team all pros(has 6 now-any player not in the HOF that has that many?), leads the nfl in yards/punt again ....and still 1st all time and doesn't get many blocked at all (only 3 so far for a carear). Quite frankly he has surpassed Ray Guy statisticaly already. Is he HOF then? His card is very hard to find in PSA. He is on set of decade and all time raiders now and extra demand (if any) might bring mor epeople to getting this card graded.
As I never heard of bucky i did a check. He never lead the nfl in any punting category. I did find a decent trivia question. OK no cheating and look it up.
What player not known for his punting has the 3rd longest punt in nfl history? Man did it have to have a very good bounce and roll!!!!
Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets 1948-76 Topps FB Sets FB & BB HOF Player sets 1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Without looking it up, I remember watching Randall Cunningham punt one for like 80 yards or something, I believe against the Giants.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
<< <i>What would be considered Lechlers best card? >>
Check the 2000 Team of the Decade set. I believe his best rookie is listed there.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Good for you andy. 90 yards randall. Lechlers card on the registry is the 2000 fleer tradition. he is on card with Janakowski. So few of them out there Raiders set collectors have been asking for sellers to find them one. I am fortunate a fellow raider collector had dups and offered me one.
Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets 1948-76 Topps FB Sets FB & BB HOF Player sets 1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Lechlers card on the registry is the 2000 fleer tradition. he is on card with Janakowski.
There might be few of them graded, but 200 Fleer tradition is not a rare product. I'm surprised the Raider collectors haven't subbed more of this card. The product is cheap and available, plus it grades well. Should be no problem to get 10's
<< <i>Lechlers card on the registry is the 2000 fleer tradition. he is on card with Janakowski.
There might be few of them graded, but 200 Fleer tradition is not a rare product. I'm surprised the Raider collectors haven't subbed more of this card. The product is cheap and available, plus it grades well. Should be no problem to get 10's >>
Yeah, I feel the same about many of the modern RC's..2002-2004 Topps Chrome. 2001 Upper Deck XL Faneca RC...All very easy to find product. And the cards are not limited or individually numbered or anything...None of them are condition sensitive either. There should be, and likely will be TONS of these graded rookies out there at some point. Which is why I can't typically stomach spending big bucks on them...Just a matter of being patient until the POPS meet the demand.
Why 4SC hasn't jumped on these like they jumped on the 80's-90's stuff a few years ago is beyond me...Anyone else remember when the 93 Bowman Roaf was under pop 5 for PSA 10? (now 26)....Or the 89 Dirt Dawson that is now pop 48??? I do..And they were selling well into the $100's...Now they are $10-$20..lol
It will happen with much of the easy to find, non- numbered 2000's product as well...Just a matter of time.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
You're right Jason, but it really depends on the product. Some of the new product is limited, plus much of the new product has the glossy finish to the cards. Fleer Ultra product has been a bear for me to grade. The cards tend to stick together, and when you go to separate them, many times part of the card will stick to the other card. Even if you take the cards from pack to Cardsaver, they'll stick to the Cardsaver and when the grader tries to remove the card, part of it will be left behind. That's why I now put all my cards in penny sleeves has I'm breaking down product. Than I select the best to be graded and put them into cardsavers. I chimed in about the Lechler card because the 2000 Fleer Tradition product reminds me of the cards we collected as kids, but better (60-70's). The card stock is the same, but with much clearer photography. Since the grading issue are the same, it should be easier to cull the product for hi grade samples.
<< <i>Steve Hutchinson may be the exception. Why is that card so hard to find? A raw one is currently on ebay with bidding at $71! >>
To my knowledge, they aren't limited or numbered. My guess is, the card is treated as a common by most collectors, and they simply don't understand what they have. Which is the case with most of the modern. Once a few collectors see the prices, or a 4SC sees these prices, we could see a nice grip of them come out.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Frank & jason are dead right on....the lechler is a nothing card. a 9 is worth about $10 though...that is until the few that want it have it. a 10?
so to get one graded u probably need to get a 10 .
a raw hutchinson went 4 $81 last night. Yikes!!!!!
lesons learned...remember the 84 stephenson.
I bought a 74 Joe d 9 for about $400 and recently a 10 for less than half that..... once 4sc got subbing it on a much larger basis.
The 93 roaf...bought a 10 from a fellow member for $125 and now am buried into it. Note: not badmouthing the member..it was was going 4 that back then.
As pops of relatively easy 2 get cards go up.....well you all know the rest.
Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets 1948-76 Topps FB Sets FB & BB HOF Player sets 1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Speaking of modern HOF cards that are going to be a pain in the arse to find in PSA 10...
Bought a box of 1994 Playoff to try to get a gradeable Larry Allen. I'm not familiar with this product at all but the box I got from BBCE was brutal. All of the cards in every pack were stuck together. Even if I had gotten a Larry Allen, which I didn't, there's no way it would've been a 10 candidate. Are all those boxes that way?
Why on earth is his Playoff card his key RC, anyway? It's really annoying that the mid-90s future HOF key rcs are all over the place in terms of brands.
<< <i>Speaking of modern HOF cards that are going to be a pain in the arse to find in PSA 10...
Bought a box of 1994 Playoff to try to get a gradeable Larry Allen. I'm not familiar with this product at all but the box I got from BBCE was brutal. All of the cards in every pack were stuck together. Even if I had gotten a Larry Allen, which I didn't, there's no way it would've been a 10 candidate. Are all those boxes that way?
Why on earth is his Playoff card his key RC, anyway? It's really annoying that the mid-90s future HOF key rcs are all over the place in terms of brands. >>
Not all, but 95% of the Playoff boxes they are stuck together. I finally found the Larry Allen rookie at a card shop when I lived in Dallas. A card that didn;t get stored for 15+ years, but was opened in 1994 and then cared for because he was a local Dallas Cowboys rookie...The Playoff RC in PSA 10 is ALWAYS gonna be tough...There are exceptions. My statements above were in general and not 100% inclusive..Just 99%..lol
The Playoff card is the most valuable of the 3 Larry Allen rookie cards. Unfortunately, there were just A TON of different products in the 90's, And if our goal is to collect the most valuable base issue rookie of each player, then there are going to be differences. It got easier in the 2000's because now there are sooo many that are numbered less than 1,000 (999 is the consensus cutoff), but there are still situations where different base rookies carry different values in different sets.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Yeah but in how many of these cases were all of a player's RCs worth basically the same and then once one of them gets picked for this set, its value goes way up?!
The card choices for the Allen, Strahan, Roaf, and Ruben Brown are baffling to me. And I'll never understand using Action Packed Rookie Update instead of Score regular for the 1990 cards. Of course Action Packed had more value at one point in time...it's nearly an oddball set!! They were hard slightly harder to find because no kids wanted them in 1990...because they are awful.
Obviously I'm factoring in aesthetics too much (the Reuben Brown is quite possibly the ugliest football card in history) and I don't expect to change anyone's mind here. Just venting.
<< <i>Yeah but in how many of these cases were all of a player's RCs worth basically the same and then once one of them gets picked for this set, its value goes way up?!
>>
To my knowledge...NONE....
All were more valuable prior to being picked. The Action Packed are similar to the Playoff. They are condition sensitive, buy a box and send some in, you'll see what I mean. The Roaf was more valuable because it was a FOIL..His 1993 SP was a NON-foil, and not as valuable. Do you get why condition sensitive cards are typically more valuable than cards that are not condition sensitive? The fact that you can't find a Larry Allen easily in PSA 10 is why the card was/is more valuable than his 1994 Topps or Stadium Club.
ZERO cards are chosen for their looks. That's simply not what this set is about. Most valuable base set issued card. Simple as that. In cases where two cards were equal to or close to equal in price, we voted here (on the boards) to decide which card to use. Example: 1995 Terrell Davis. We voted SP over Select Certified because the SP were selling for higher in PSA 10 on ebay.
Easy stuff. To select a LESS valuable card simply because it's pretty or because it is in a set where finding PSA 10's is common would have ruined this set, along with the Future HOF sets. The credibility would have been shot and we wouldn't have so many collectors chasing them.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Speaking of Hutchinson, a raw one ended for $142.50 yesterday. WOW. I remember a PSA 9 on eBay several months back that didn't sell at a reasonable starting bid TWICE. I believe it sold the third time around. Just goes to show, timing really is everything.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
<< <i>Speaking of Hutchinson, a raw one ended for $142.50 yesterday. WOW. I remember a PSA 9 on eBay several months back that didn't sell at a reasonable starting bid TWICE. I believe it sold the third time around. Just goes to show, timing really is everything. >>
That will only make sense if it comes back a PSA 10...lol
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Yeah but in how many of these cases were all of a player's RCs worth basically the same and then once one of them gets picked for this set, its value goes way up?!
>>
To my knowledge...NONE....
All were more valuable prior to being picked. The Action Packed are similar to the Playoff. They are condition sensitive, buy a box and send some in, you'll see what I mean. The Roaf was more valuable because it was a FOIL..His 1993 SP was a NON-foil, and not as valuable. Do you get why condition sensitive cards are typically more valuable than cards that are not condition sensitive? The fact that you can't find a Larry Allen easily in PSA 10 is why the card was/is more valuable than his 1994 Topps or Stadium Club.
ZERO cards are chosen for their looks. That's simply not what this set is about. Most valuable base set issued card. Simple as that. In cases where two cards were equal to or close to equal in price, we voted here (on the boards) to decide which card to use. Example: 1995 Terrell Davis. We voted SP over Select Certified because the SP were selling for higher in PSA 10 on ebay.
Easy stuff. To select a LESS valuable card simply because it's pretty or because it is in a set where finding PSA 10's is common would have ruined this set, along with the Future HOF sets. The credibility would have been shot and we wouldn't have so many collectors chasing them.
Jason >>
Were raw Bowman Mawaes going for 35 cents a piece on Ebay while the Playoff Mawaes were going for 30 cents?
C'mon man...of course I understand condition sensitivity being tangentially related to value. And value is obviously the factor one would want to use to identify the key cards in this set (even if you are de-prioritizing value for the most modern player cards). But condition sensitivity does not ensure value. Supply and demand does. And once a card makes it into the HOF registry, it is going to be the one in the most demand regardless of condition sensitivity.
Not trying to be combative here. I just disagree that the set is a pure reflection of the market. I think the set composition choices made here set the market and once that is done, you're never allowing a player's RC values to ebb and flow the way they would in a vacuum. Put the Stadium Club Larry Allen in the HOF and All-Time Cowboys sets and tell me how many people will still keep the very valuable, very condition-sensitive Playoff Larry Allen card on their wantlist? The value would plummet and it would just be an odd-looking, often flawed RC from an unpopular set.
<< <i>Yeah but in how many of these cases were all of a player's RCs worth basically the same and then once one of them gets picked for this set, its value goes way up?!
>>
To my knowledge...NONE....
All were more valuable prior to being picked. The Action Packed are similar to the Playoff. They are condition sensitive, buy a box and send some in, you'll see what I mean. The Roaf was more valuable because it was a FOIL..His 1993 SP was a NON-foil, and not as valuable. Do you get why condition sensitive cards are typically more valuable than cards that are not condition sensitive? The fact that you can't find a Larry Allen easily in PSA 10 is why the card was/is more valuable than his 1994 Topps or Stadium Club.
ZERO cards are chosen for their looks. That's simply not what this set is about. Most valuable base set issued card. Simple as that. In cases where two cards were equal to or close to equal in price, we voted here (on the boards) to decide which card to use. Example: 1995 Terrell Davis. We voted SP over Select Certified because the SP were selling for higher in PSA 10 on ebay.
Easy stuff. To select a LESS valuable card simply because it's pretty or because it is in a set where finding PSA 10's is common would have ruined this set, along with the Future HOF sets. The credibility would have been shot and we wouldn't have so many collectors chasing them.
Jason >>
Were raw Bowman Mawaes going for 35 cents a piece on Ebay while the Playoff Mawaes were going for 30 cents?
C'mon man...of course I understand condition sensitivity being tangentially related to value. And value is obviously the factor one would want to use to identify the key cards in this set (even if you are de-prioritizing value for the most modern player cards). But condition sensitivity does not ensure value. Supply and demand does. And once a card makes it into the HOF registry, it is going to be the one in the most demand regardless of condition sensitivity.
Not trying to be combative here. I just disagree that the set is a pure reflection of the market. I think the set composition choices made here set the market and once that is done, you're never allowing a player's RC values to ebb and flow the way they would in a vacuum. Put the Stadium Club Larry Allen in the HOF and All-Time Cowboys sets and tell me how many people will still keep the very valuable, very condition-sensitive Playoff Larry Allen card on their wantlist? The value would plummet and it would just be an odd-looking, often flawed RC from an unpopular set. >>
I think that is an excellent point, once a card has been voted into the registry the value often jumps. If the Stadium Club Allen had been chosen it would be drawing the higher prices.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys - Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2 touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL title.
I think that is an excellent point, once a card has been voted into the registry the value often jumps. If the Stadium Club Allen had been chosen it would be drawing the higher prices. >>
No doubt...But I'm not sure what the point here is....Do away with all the sets until the player makes the HOF? As you've seen, the set requesters are on full tilt lately, adding every possible set and side set on the planet...
Bottom line is the cards selected were the most valuable BEFORE being added. Either via ebay or Beckett price guide. And if there were cards that were close or exactly the same, we voted on which card to add, and went with the majority.
No matter what is chosen, we will never have 100% happy. There will always be dissenting opinions regardless. If you don't like the selections, don't collect them. Pretty simple. And when we have future additions come up, make your opinion known and call for a vote/poll. Majority will decide.
I've heard alot of complaining, but haven't heard one alternate solution.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
mr hallmark There are 100+ of us that collect the rc hof set and many also do the future sets as well. That many can easily sway prices realized. The chosen card rises and the others might drop considerably. What would piss me off is if and when a card gets changed...as in the change to the action packed kennedy and seau.
Most of the card selections are relatively easy. wheather I agree or not, once a card is chosen and the majority have ruled... then to avoid future fights and bickering for the good of the set it should be a forever descision.
An alternative is to allow an either/or selection. Hockey sometimes does. Baeball also. Many times they allow topps or OPC even though the OPC can be worth many times more and far scarcer. we kind did this with the stautner card (psa actually did).
Or a different weighting for cards. However this could turn into a real nightmare and runaway situation. Now 5 different cards have different values. Thats far more work to keep the set going. Keep it to just 2 cards? Say one person chooses 1995 cel certified for Terrell Davis and the majority chooses the sp. Over time with lesser demand for the the minority selection will lose value and the other will increase. If you chose the sel cert card do you really want that? Collect for fun, but do we want our collections to deflate?
I can't think of a solution that would work. I for one think a fre for all approach will ruin the set. Conclusion: what aint broke don't fix.
Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets 1948-76 Topps FB Sets FB & BB HOF Player sets 1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
<< <i>I can't think of a solution that would work. I for one think a fre for all approach will ruin the set. Conclusion: what aint broke don't fix. >>
I Agree. There is already a set, heck TWO sets that allow multiple (any) options for each players card. This set was meant to be the best of the best of each player. ONE singular card. I think the proof of that being the correct decision is in the total numbers of set collectors currnetly registred for this set.
As far as the Seau/Cortez Kennedy deal, that was 1000000% PSA decision. Once they decided to go with Beckett's Ultimate Rookie Card Encycolpedia as the be all, end all reference for deciding what is or is not a rookie card, they chose to do away with the Score Supplemental's because Beckett didn't list them for Seau or Kennedy. Once that happened, if you remember, we voted here on the boards to decide which new Seau and Kennedy we would use based on the available (very similarly priced) options. Action Packed won in a landslide, mainly because of the condition scarcity. Anyone interested can search the database and find that old thread...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I've heard alot of complaining, but haven't heard one alternate solution. >>
You're right on all points. It wasn't constructive criticism, it was just some thoughts loosely thrown together. And given the challenges you guys have with voting cards in when you do, you're doing the best you can.
Again, it's a great set...maybe the best in the registry. I just feel like there are a couple of missteps after 1989 and it's frustrating that they won't ever be changed. Obviously, I don't have to collect those cards I would have voted against...and I don't.
Probably just a difference in approach here but I think that a set like this would have more prestige if it was slightly less rigid in this regard. Sometimes it makes sense to include a card that is a common PSA 10 from an overproduced set (1989 Score). Sometimes it makes sense to ignore the modern cards rule in order to choose the key RCs that are truly valued most by this era's collectors. Sometimes it makes sense to look back and re-evaluate a card's inclusion when it is part of a garbage set that had zero staying power over time.
Just my point of view. I know I'm in the minorty here and that's fine.
<< <i>I've heard alot of complaining, but haven't heard one alternate solution. >>
You're right on all points. It wasn't constructive criticism, it was just some thoughts loosely thrown together. And given the challenges you guys have with voting cards in when you do, you're doing the best you can.
Again, it's a great set...maybe the best in the registry. I just feel like there are a couple of missteps after 1989 and it's frustrating that they won't ever be changed. Obviously, I don't have to collect those cards I would have voted against...and I don't.
Probably just a difference in approach here but I think that a set like this would have more prestige if it was slightly less rigid in this regard. Sometimes it makes sense to include a card that is a common PSA 10 from an overproduced set (1989 Score). Sometimes it makes sense to ignore the modern cards rule in order to choose the key RCs that are truly valued most by this era's collectors. Sometimes it makes sense to look back and re-evaluate a card's inclusion when it is part of a garbage set that had zero staying power over time.
Just my point of view. I know I'm in the minorty here and that's fine. >>
But the modern card rule is to most valuable card...Wouldn't the "key" card also be the most valuable? Unless you are talking about adding cards numbered less than /999, I'm not sure how your point of view translates in opposition to any card that we have selected.
Please give some examples of cards that you (your opinion) would rather see on any of the HOF sets. And I will try and give you a specific reason why that card was not, is not included.
As it stands, it seems you are giving hypotheticals, when in the case of these sets, EACH CARD is debated on its own merit. No blanket "Topps Chrome", or generalizations are included. EACH card of EACH player is debated and selected based on most valuable/popular of just that player.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
It's just that in an earlier point you said that selecting a card because PSA 10s of it are more common would ruin the set. Yet for modern cards there are rules about no gimmicky cards and /999 so, in effect, that's exactly what is going to happen.
Modern collectors have determined that they value autos and superfractors and jersey patches and strands of DNA and lord knows what else. The "best" rookie card of modern hall of fame players are likely not going to be /999. The RCs that are out of /999 are not going to be the most valuable. And before you select those cards for this set, they are probably not going to be the most desired/popular, either.
There's a double standard here. The "most valuable" cards are chosen for this set until it becomes less convenient. It's not a personal attack or anything, it's just a fact. And like I said in the last post, I don't have a better solution. I can only tell you that my personal preference would be to make the kind of adjustments that maximize prestige for this set. I'd rather see 100 HOF RC collectors joust with the public in order to acquire a modern player's /100 "best" rc than see everyone and their brother acquire common PSA 10 Topps Chromes or /999 SPAs. To me, neither option ruins the set but I think one option increases the prestige while the other reduces it.
With the 1000 card minimum produced quota (psa rule not ours) it allows most if not all to get and have the card. Yes some of the overproduced sets like 1989 score can have 100's if not 1000's of psa 10's available. All of the top sets will have a psa 10 but the cost is also proportional. It was easy when there was just topps. Now topps chrome can have all kinds of versions: refractors of varying production. Combine that with autos...ect and its possible to get a 1/1 card. That card would odviously be the mosy valuable. Possibilities of only one owner and might not even be a registry guy. Throw in autos, patches, jersey cards...........and you have a real mess.
Weighting of the card (assigning a 1-10 value usually) is based on a psa 8 value. Imagine no psa 8's? Value? These kinds of cards usually have rapid fluctuations in value as collectors get them and don't buy a 2nd card. So after a few years psa redefines these values bases on current market conditions. What then? Some of those values would have dropped like a rock. This is actually quite a lot of work. jason has been doing this for this set for quite a while.
While I also dissagree with some of the selections a final descision needs to be made. PSA does make up the rules as this is thier house and game.
Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets 1948-76 Topps FB Sets FB & BB HOF Player sets 1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
<< <i>With the 1000 card minimum produced quota (psa rule not ours) it allows most if not all to get and have the card. Yes some of the overproduced sets like 1989 score can have 100's if not 1000's of psa 10's available. All of the top sets will have a psa 10 but the cost is also proportional. It was easy when there was just topps. Now topps chrome can have all kinds of versions: refractors of varying production. Combine that with autos...ect and its possible to get a 1/1 card. That card would odviously be the mosy valuable. Possibilities of only one owner and might not even be a registry guy. Throw in autos, patches, jersey cards...........and you have a real mess.
Weighting of the card (assigning a 1-10 value usually) is based on a psa 8 value. Imagine no psa 8's? Value? These kinds of cards usually have rapid fluctuations in value as collectors get them and don't buy a 2nd card. So after a few years psa redefines these values bases on current market conditions. What then? Some of those values would have dropped like a rock. This is actually quite a lot of work. jason has been doing this for this set for quite a while.
While I also dissagree with some of the selections a final descision needs to be made. PSA does make up the rules as this is thier house and game. >>
Perfectly stated. I can't really add any more to his. All of the above.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Just curious as to which specific cards you guys disagree with? and the reason why? >>
LOL..Me too. Which is why I asked. Still no list of specific players and which cards are beleived to not be their most valuable issued card.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>It's just that in an earlier point you said that selecting a card because PSA 10s of it are more common would ruin the set. >>
Never once said this. Please copy and past where I posted that.
jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Just curious as to which specific cards you guys disagree with? and the reason why? >>
I don't have an issue w/ any of the cards selected, but when two cards have nearly identical values I'd rather have both included in the set w/ the collector having the option of choosing which one they want rather than voting in one or the other.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys - Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2 touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL title.
Comments
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>I noticed that STeve Owen is listed in the Players HOF set. He was inducted based on his coaching, Correct? >>
Here's his HOF Bio...I think this agrees with your assumption:
To call Steve Owen a pioneer is not an overstatement. The sturdy tackle and head coach was born in Oklahoma before it was a state – it was still a territory in 1898. From little Phillips, a small Oklahoma college, Steve began his pro football career in 1924 with the Kansas City Blues (later Cowboys), a traveling team that played all their games on the road.
After a brief stay with the Cleveland Bulldogs, he was sold to the New York Giants in 1926 for $500. Owen played seven seasons with the Giants, 1926-1931 and 1933. In 1930, he was both a player and the team’s co-coach. Although he continued to play, he was named the sole head coach in 1931.
Then, in 1933, he stopped playing and devoted all his efforts to coaching. Owen and the Mara family, who owned the Giants never had a contract. He coached 23 years, 1930-1953, on just a handshake. Stout Steve Owen believed in basic fundamental football, and he was successful with his basic style. His real strength was in coaching defense.
Under his tutelage, the Giants played in eight of the first 14 championship games of the National Football League. The team’s victory in the 1934 “Sneakers Game” is well documented. He coached the Giants to another title in 1938. He originated the “umbrella defense” – the secondary was likened to an umbrella with four deep defensive backs representing the umbrella’s spokes.
The spokes include future Hall of Famers Emlen Tunnell and Tom Landry. He successfully used this defense to contain the powerful pass-oriented Cleveland Browns when they joined the NFL in 1950. Owen left the Giants following the 1953 season, but before he did he developed some of the greatest players and toughest teams in history. His 155 career victories attest to his success.------------------
Dave, don't make the mistake of trying to make sense of any of these new sets...99% of every new HOF or Key Card set I've seen added the past year or two have been nothing short or moronic...And the only fix, IMO, is to lobotomize whoever is requesting them....The feeling they give me is the same you get when some a=hole cuts you off in traffic...Rides a turn lane to bypass traffic and then cuts you at the last minute into a tiny space not meant to fit another vehicle into...All you can do is shake your head and wonder why people like this exist in the world today...
They are done for no other reason than a play for free gradings...It is a slap in the face to the true spirit of the Registry, and I wish PSA would do away with the free grade deal so we can finally put a stop to the nonsense...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
RIP
Doc
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
<< <i>Jason, I'm still going to request the All-Time Punters Set once I have enough qualifying cards to make the request.
Nick >>
LOL..Whatever floats your boat man..I'm out of the Key Card sets, so luckily won't have to see it.
That being said, after Guy, Lechler and Roby...Pretty worthless set, no?
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Nice hammer price on the 96 SP Ogden this week. Tough card to find with decent edges and I'm glad he's got a little bit of buzz for his upcoming HOF run.
I was really surprised at the end. Hopefully more will start showing up soon.
<< <i>Nice hammer price on the 96 SP Ogden this week. Tough card to find with decent edges and I'm glad he's got a little bit of buzz for his upcoming HOF run. >>
Holy crap! I missed that auction. I picked up my 10 for just $150 just a few months back.
<< <i>Nice hammer price on the 96 SP Ogden this week.
I was really surprised at the end. Hopefully more will start showing up soon. >>
Hey Frank. Yeah I think that we may not see $300+ again as the population approaches double digits. It was sitting at Pop 4 for a really long time before 4SC decided to throw down. Mine is going to be buried with me.
Speaking of Ravens eventual HOFers, I've got one my two 02 Topps Chrome PSA 10 Ed Reeds up for sale right now. I realize the opening bid is high. Just checking for nibbles after the Ogden went nuts. PM if interested.
<< <i>
<< <i>Jason, I'm still going to request the All-Time Punters Set once I have enough qualifying cards to make the request.
Nick >>
LOL..Whatever floats your boat man..I'm out of the Key Card sets, so luckily won't have to see it.
That being said, after Guy, Lechler and Roby...Pretty worthless set, no?
Not if Baugh and Lary are part of the set.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
Doc
I actually needed the Ogden to upgrade my 96 SP set. But, good luck with your Reeds
<< <i>Quite a bit of activity on this thread the last couple of days...folks must be more willing to come out and play with a couple of "bad apples" now banned (Weinhold, you troublemaker
Keith got banned? Wow, crazy...Anyone know the story?
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Instead of naming the auction house, can VCP just keep the results up there with a generic name or something? VCP not having all major auction data would really suck. >>
I think what they dislike is:
1- VCP archives photos of the cards being auctioned. Which makes it quite easy to see which cards the auction houses are "selling" in consecutive auctions.
2- VCP is making money off of it with no kickback to the auction houses.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
On the punters set I don't know who was proposed to be in it and cannot find the archive.
As long as PSA allows the free vouchers and they feel it helps their business model-then why not?
As NO punter has made the HOF and probably none ever will (as I see the voting and results of Ray Guy) this set would not be a duplicate as most of us collect HOFers
or likely HOFers. Is Reggie Roby HOF material?
However Lechler is statistically the best punter EVER. His carear is still far from over. Realistically what if?.......he gets 10 1st team all pros(has 6 now-any player not in the HOF that has that many?), leads the nfl in yards/punt again ....and still 1st all time and doesn't get many blocked at all (only 3 so far for a carear). Quite frankly he has surpassed Ray Guy statisticaly already. Is he HOF then?
His card is very hard to find in PSA. He is on set of decade and all time raiders now and extra demand (if any) might bring mor epeople to getting this card graded.
As I never heard of bucky i did a check. He never lead the nfl in any punting category. I did find a decent trivia question. OK no cheating and look it up.
What player not known for his punting has the 3rd longest punt in nfl history? Man did it have to have a very good bounce and roll!!!!
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>What would be considered Lechlers best card? >>
Check the 2000 Team of the Decade set. I believe his best rookie is listed there.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Lechlers card on the registry is the 2000 fleer tradition. he is on card with Janakowski.
So few of them out there Raiders set collectors have been asking for sellers to find them one.
I am fortunate a fellow raider collector had dups and offered me one.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
There might be few of them graded, but 200 Fleer tradition is not a rare product. I'm surprised the Raider collectors haven't subbed more of this card. The product is cheap and available, plus it grades well. Should be no problem to get 10's
<< <i>Lechlers card on the registry is the 2000 fleer tradition. he is on card with Janakowski.
There might be few of them graded, but 200 Fleer tradition is not a rare product. I'm surprised the Raider collectors haven't subbed more of this card. The product is cheap and available, plus it grades well. Should be no problem to get 10's >>
Yeah, I feel the same about many of the modern RC's..2002-2004 Topps Chrome. 2001 Upper Deck XL Faneca RC...All very easy to find product. And the cards are not limited or individually numbered or anything...None of them are condition sensitive either. There should be, and likely will be TONS of these graded rookies out there at some point. Which is why I can't typically stomach spending big bucks on them...Just a matter of being patient until the POPS meet the demand.
Why 4SC hasn't jumped on these like they jumped on the 80's-90's stuff a few years ago is beyond me...Anyone else remember when the 93 Bowman Roaf was under pop 5 for PSA 10? (now 26)....Or the 89 Dirt Dawson that is now pop 48??? I do..And they were selling well into the $100's...Now they are $10-$20..lol
It will happen with much of the easy to find, non- numbered 2000's product as well...Just a matter of time.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I chimed in about the Lechler card because the 2000 Fleer Tradition product reminds me of the cards we collected as kids, but better (60-70's). The card stock is the same, but with much clearer photography. Since the grading issue are the same, it should be easier to cull the product for hi grade samples.
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>Steve Hutchinson may be the exception. Why is that card so hard to find? A raw one is currently on ebay with bidding at $71! >>
To my knowledge, they aren't limited or numbered. My guess is, the card is treated as a common by most collectors, and they simply don't understand what they have. Which is the case with most of the modern. Once a few collectors see the prices, or a 4SC sees these prices, we could see a nice grip of them come out.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
a 10?
so to get one graded u probably need to get a 10 .
a raw hutchinson went 4 $81 last night. Yikes!!!!!
lesons learned...remember the 84 stephenson.
I bought a 74 Joe d 9 for about $400 and recently a 10 for less than half that..... once 4sc got subbing it on a much larger basis.
The 93 roaf...bought a 10 from a fellow member for $125 and now am buried into it. Note: not badmouthing the member..it was was going 4 that back then.
As pops of relatively easy 2 get cards go up.....well you all know the rest.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
Bought a box of 1994 Playoff to try to get a gradeable Larry Allen. I'm not familiar with this product at all but the box I got from BBCE was brutal. All of the cards in every pack were stuck together. Even if I had gotten a Larry Allen, which I didn't, there's no way it would've been a 10 candidate. Are all those boxes that way?
Why on earth is his Playoff card his key RC, anyway? It's really annoying that the mid-90s future HOF key rcs are all over the place in terms of brands.
<< <i>Speaking of modern HOF cards that are going to be a pain in the arse to find in PSA 10...
Bought a box of 1994 Playoff to try to get a gradeable Larry Allen. I'm not familiar with this product at all but the box I got from BBCE was brutal. All of the cards in every pack were stuck together. Even if I had gotten a Larry Allen, which I didn't, there's no way it would've been a 10 candidate. Are all those boxes that way?
Why on earth is his Playoff card his key RC, anyway? It's really annoying that the mid-90s future HOF key rcs are all over the place in terms of brands. >>
Not all, but 95% of the Playoff boxes they are stuck together. I finally found the Larry Allen rookie at a card shop when I lived in Dallas. A card that didn;t get stored for 15+ years, but was opened in 1994 and then cared for because he was a local Dallas Cowboys rookie...The Playoff RC in PSA 10 is ALWAYS gonna be tough...There are exceptions. My statements above were in general and not 100% inclusive..Just 99%..lol
The Playoff card is the most valuable of the 3 Larry Allen rookie cards. Unfortunately, there were just A TON of different products in the 90's, And if our goal is to collect the most valuable base issue rookie of each player, then there are going to be differences. It got easier in the 2000's because now there are sooo many that are numbered less than 1,000 (999 is the consensus cutoff), but there are still situations where different base rookies carry different values in different sets.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
The card choices for the Allen, Strahan, Roaf, and Ruben Brown are baffling to me. And I'll never understand using Action Packed Rookie Update instead of Score regular for the 1990 cards. Of course Action Packed had more value at one point in time...it's nearly an oddball set!! They were hard slightly harder to find because no kids wanted them in 1990...because they are awful.
Obviously I'm factoring in aesthetics too much (the Reuben Brown is quite possibly the ugliest football card in history) and I don't expect to change anyone's mind here. Just venting.
<< <i>Yeah but in how many of these cases were all of a player's RCs worth basically the same and then once one of them gets picked for this set, its value goes way up?!
>>
To my knowledge...NONE....
All were more valuable prior to being picked. The Action Packed are similar to the Playoff. They are condition sensitive, buy a box and send some in, you'll see what I mean. The Roaf was more valuable because it was a FOIL..His 1993 SP was a NON-foil, and not as valuable. Do you get why condition sensitive cards are typically more valuable than cards that are not condition sensitive? The fact that you can't find a Larry Allen easily in PSA 10 is why the card was/is more valuable than his 1994 Topps or Stadium Club.
ZERO cards are chosen for their looks. That's simply not what this set is about. Most valuable base set issued card. Simple as that. In cases where two cards were equal to or close to equal in price, we voted here (on the boards) to decide which card to use. Example: 1995 Terrell Davis. We voted SP over Select Certified because the SP were selling for higher in PSA 10 on ebay.
Easy stuff. To select a LESS valuable card simply because it's pretty or because it is in a set where finding PSA 10's is common would have ruined this set, along with the Future HOF sets. The credibility would have been shot and we wouldn't have so many collectors chasing them.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Speaking of Hutchinson, a raw one ended for $142.50 yesterday. WOW. I remember a PSA 9 on eBay several months back that didn't sell at a reasonable starting bid TWICE. I believe it sold the third time around. Just goes to show, timing really is everything. >>
That will only make sense if it comes back a PSA 10...lol
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
<< <i>Yeah but in how many of these cases were all of a player's RCs worth basically the same and then once one of them gets picked for this set, its value goes way up?!
>>
To my knowledge...NONE....
All were more valuable prior to being picked. The Action Packed are similar to the Playoff. They are condition sensitive, buy a box and send some in, you'll see what I mean. The Roaf was more valuable because it was a FOIL..His 1993 SP was a NON-foil, and not as valuable. Do you get why condition sensitive cards are typically more valuable than cards that are not condition sensitive? The fact that you can't find a Larry Allen easily in PSA 10 is why the card was/is more valuable than his 1994 Topps or Stadium Club.
ZERO cards are chosen for their looks. That's simply not what this set is about. Most valuable base set issued card. Simple as that. In cases where two cards were equal to or close to equal in price, we voted here (on the boards) to decide which card to use. Example: 1995 Terrell Davis. We voted SP over Select Certified because the SP were selling for higher in PSA 10 on ebay.
Easy stuff. To select a LESS valuable card simply because it's pretty or because it is in a set where finding PSA 10's is common would have ruined this set, along with the Future HOF sets. The credibility would have been shot and we wouldn't have so many collectors chasing them.
Jason >>
Were raw Bowman Mawaes going for 35 cents a piece on Ebay while the Playoff Mawaes were going for 30 cents?
C'mon man...of course I understand condition sensitivity being tangentially related to value. And value is obviously the factor one would want to use to identify the key cards in this set (even if you are de-prioritizing value for the most modern player cards). But condition sensitivity does not ensure value. Supply and demand does. And once a card makes it into the HOF registry, it is going to be the one in the most demand regardless of condition sensitivity.
Not trying to be combative here. I just disagree that the set is a pure reflection of the market. I think the set composition choices made here set the market and once that is done, you're never allowing a player's RC values to ebb and flow the way they would in a vacuum. Put the Stadium Club Larry Allen in the HOF and All-Time Cowboys sets and tell me how many people will still keep the very valuable, very condition-sensitive Playoff Larry Allen card on their wantlist? The value would plummet and it would just be an odd-looking, often flawed RC from an unpopular set.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Yeah but in how many of these cases were all of a player's RCs worth basically the same and then once one of them gets picked for this set, its value goes way up?!
>>
To my knowledge...NONE....
All were more valuable prior to being picked. The Action Packed are similar to the Playoff. They are condition sensitive, buy a box and send some in, you'll see what I mean. The Roaf was more valuable because it was a FOIL..His 1993 SP was a NON-foil, and not as valuable. Do you get why condition sensitive cards are typically more valuable than cards that are not condition sensitive? The fact that you can't find a Larry Allen easily in PSA 10 is why the card was/is more valuable than his 1994 Topps or Stadium Club.
ZERO cards are chosen for their looks. That's simply not what this set is about. Most valuable base set issued card. Simple as that. In cases where two cards were equal to or close to equal in price, we voted here (on the boards) to decide which card to use. Example: 1995 Terrell Davis. We voted SP over Select Certified because the SP were selling for higher in PSA 10 on ebay.
Easy stuff. To select a LESS valuable card simply because it's pretty or because it is in a set where finding PSA 10's is common would have ruined this set, along with the Future HOF sets. The credibility would have been shot and we wouldn't have so many collectors chasing them.
Jason >>
Were raw Bowman Mawaes going for 35 cents a piece on Ebay while the Playoff Mawaes were going for 30 cents?
C'mon man...of course I understand condition sensitivity being tangentially related to value. And value is obviously the factor one would want to use to identify the key cards in this set (even if you are de-prioritizing value for the most modern player cards). But condition sensitivity does not ensure value. Supply and demand does. And once a card makes it into the HOF registry, it is going to be the one in the most demand regardless of condition sensitivity.
Not trying to be combative here. I just disagree that the set is a pure reflection of the market. I think the set composition choices made here set the market and once that is done, you're never allowing a player's RC values to ebb and flow the way they would in a vacuum. Put the Stadium Club Larry Allen in the HOF and All-Time Cowboys sets and tell me how many people will still keep the very valuable, very condition-sensitive Playoff Larry Allen card on their wantlist? The value would plummet and it would just be an odd-looking, often flawed RC from an unpopular set. >>
I think that is an excellent point, once a card has been voted into the registry the value often jumps. If the Stadium Club Allen had been chosen it would be drawing the higher prices.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys -
Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2
touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys
defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL
title.
<< <i>
I think that is an excellent point, once a card has been voted into the registry the value often jumps. If the Stadium Club Allen had been chosen it would be drawing the higher prices. >>
No doubt...But I'm not sure what the point here is....Do away with all the sets until the player makes the HOF? As you've seen, the set requesters are on full tilt lately, adding every possible set and side set on the planet...
Bottom line is the cards selected were the most valuable BEFORE being added. Either via ebay or Beckett price guide. And if there were cards that were close or exactly the same, we voted on which card to add, and went with the majority.
No matter what is chosen, we will never have 100% happy. There will always be dissenting opinions regardless. If you don't like the selections, don't collect them. Pretty simple. And when we have future additions come up, make your opinion known and call for a vote/poll. Majority will decide.
I've heard alot of complaining, but haven't heard one alternate solution.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
There are 100+ of us that collect the rc hof set and many also do the future sets as well.
That many can easily sway prices realized. The chosen card rises and the others might drop considerably.
What would piss me off is if and when a card gets changed...as in the change to the action packed kennedy and seau.
Most of the card selections are relatively easy. wheather I agree or not, once a card is chosen and the majority have ruled...
then to avoid future fights and bickering for the good of the set it should be a forever descision.
An alternative is to allow an either/or selection. Hockey sometimes does. Baeball also.
Many times they allow topps or OPC even though the OPC can be worth many times more and far scarcer.
we kind did this with the stautner card (psa actually did).
Or a different weighting for cards. However this could turn into a real nightmare and runaway situation. Now 5 different cards have different
values. Thats far more work to keep the set going. Keep it to just 2 cards? Say one person chooses 1995 cel certified for Terrell Davis and the majority chooses the sp.
Over time with lesser demand for the the minority selection will lose value and the other will increase. If you chose the sel cert card do you really want that? Collect for fun, but do we want our collections to deflate?
I can't think of a solution that would work. I for one think a fre for all approach will ruin the set.
Conclusion: what aint broke don't fix.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
<< <i>I can't think of a solution that would work. I for one think a fre for all approach will ruin the set.
Conclusion: what aint broke don't fix. >>
I Agree. There is already a set, heck TWO sets that allow multiple (any) options for each players card. This set was meant to be the best of the best of each player. ONE singular card. I think the proof of that being the correct decision is in the total numbers of set collectors currnetly registred for this set.
As far as the Seau/Cortez Kennedy deal, that was 1000000% PSA decision. Once they decided to go with Beckett's Ultimate Rookie Card Encycolpedia as the be all, end all reference for deciding what is or is not a rookie card, they chose to do away with the Score Supplemental's because Beckett didn't list them for Seau or Kennedy. Once that happened, if you remember, we voted here on the boards to decide which new Seau and Kennedy we would use based on the available (very similarly priced) options. Action Packed won in a landslide, mainly because of the condition scarcity. Anyone interested can search the database and find that old thread...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I've heard alot of complaining, but haven't heard one alternate solution. >>
You're right on all points. It wasn't constructive criticism, it was just some thoughts loosely thrown together. And given the challenges you guys have with voting cards in when you do, you're doing the best you can.
Again, it's a great set...maybe the best in the registry. I just feel like there are a couple of missteps after 1989 and it's frustrating that they won't ever be changed. Obviously, I don't have to collect those cards I would have voted against...and I don't.
Probably just a difference in approach here but I think that a set like this would have more prestige if it was slightly less rigid in this regard. Sometimes it makes sense to include a card that is a common PSA 10 from an overproduced set (1989 Score). Sometimes it makes sense to ignore the modern cards rule in order to choose the key RCs that are truly valued most by this era's collectors. Sometimes it makes sense to look back and re-evaluate a card's inclusion when it is part of a garbage set that had zero staying power over time.
Just my point of view. I know I'm in the minorty here and that's fine.
<< <i>
<< <i>I've heard alot of complaining, but haven't heard one alternate solution. >>
You're right on all points. It wasn't constructive criticism, it was just some thoughts loosely thrown together. And given the challenges you guys have with voting cards in when you do, you're doing the best you can.
Again, it's a great set...maybe the best in the registry. I just feel like there are a couple of missteps after 1989 and it's frustrating that they won't ever be changed. Obviously, I don't have to collect those cards I would have voted against...and I don't.
Probably just a difference in approach here but I think that a set like this would have more prestige if it was slightly less rigid in this regard. Sometimes it makes sense to include a card that is a common PSA 10 from an overproduced set (1989 Score). Sometimes it makes sense to ignore the modern cards rule in order to choose the key RCs that are truly valued most by this era's collectors. Sometimes it makes sense to look back and re-evaluate a card's inclusion when it is part of a garbage set that had zero staying power over time.
Just my point of view. I know I'm in the minorty here and that's fine. >>
But the modern card rule is to most valuable card...Wouldn't the "key" card also be the most valuable? Unless you are talking about adding cards numbered less than /999, I'm not sure how your point of view translates in opposition to any card that we have selected.
Please give some examples of cards that you (your opinion) would rather see on any of the HOF sets. And I will try and give you a specific reason why that card was not, is not included.
As it stands, it seems you are giving hypotheticals, when in the case of these sets, EACH CARD is debated on its own merit. No blanket "Topps Chrome", or generalizations are included. EACH card of EACH player is debated and selected based on most valuable/popular of just that player.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Modern collectors have determined that they value autos and superfractors and jersey patches and strands of DNA and lord knows what else. The "best" rookie card of modern hall of fame players are likely not going to be /999. The RCs that are out of /999 are not going to be the most valuable. And before you select those cards for this set, they are probably not going to be the most desired/popular, either.
There's a double standard here. The "most valuable" cards are chosen for this set until it becomes less convenient. It's not a personal attack or anything, it's just a fact. And like I said in the last post, I don't have a better solution. I can only tell you that my personal preference would be to make the kind of adjustments that maximize prestige for this set. I'd rather see 100 HOF RC collectors joust with the public in order to acquire a modern player's /100 "best" rc than see everyone and their brother acquire common PSA 10 Topps Chromes or /999 SPAs. To me, neither option ruins the set but I think one option increases the prestige while the other reduces it.
Yes some of the overproduced sets like 1989 score can have 100's if not 1000's of psa 10's available.
All of the top sets will have a psa 10 but the cost is also proportional.
It was easy when there was just topps. Now topps chrome can have all kinds of versions: refractors of varying production.
Combine that with autos...ect and its possible to get a 1/1 card. That card would odviously be the mosy valuable.
Possibilities of only one owner and might not even be a registry guy.
Throw in autos, patches, jersey cards...........and you have a real mess.
Weighting of the card (assigning a 1-10 value usually) is based on a psa 8 value. Imagine no psa 8's? Value?
These kinds of cards usually have rapid fluctuations in value as collectors get them and don't buy a 2nd card.
So after a few years psa redefines these values bases on current market conditions. What then? Some of those values would have dropped like a rock.
This is actually quite a lot of work. jason has been doing this for this set for quite a while.
While I also dissagree with some of the selections a final descision needs to be made. PSA does make up the rules as this is thier house and game.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>With the 1000 card minimum produced quota (psa rule not ours) it allows most if not all to get and have the card.
Yes some of the overproduced sets like 1989 score can have 100's if not 1000's of psa 10's available.
All of the top sets will have a psa 10 but the cost is also proportional.
It was easy when there was just topps. Now topps chrome can have all kinds of versions: refractors of varying production.
Combine that with autos...ect and its possible to get a 1/1 card. That card would odviously be the mosy valuable.
Possibilities of only one owner and might not even be a registry guy.
Throw in autos, patches, jersey cards...........and you have a real mess.
Weighting of the card (assigning a 1-10 value usually) is based on a psa 8 value. Imagine no psa 8's? Value?
These kinds of cards usually have rapid fluctuations in value as collectors get them and don't buy a 2nd card.
So after a few years psa redefines these values bases on current market conditions. What then? Some of those values would have dropped like a rock.
This is actually quite a lot of work. jason has been doing this for this set for quite a while.
While I also dissagree with some of the selections a final descision needs to be made. PSA does make up the rules as this is thier house and game. >>
Perfectly stated. I can't really add any more to his. All of the above.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Just curious as to which specific cards you guys disagree with? and the reason why? >>
LOL..Me too. Which is why I asked. Still no list of specific players and which cards are beleived to not be their most valuable issued card.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>It's just that in an earlier point you said that selecting a card because PSA 10s of it are more common would ruin the set. >>
Never once said this. Please copy and past where I posted that.
jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Just curious as to which specific cards you guys disagree with? and the reason why? >>
I don't have an issue w/ any of the cards selected, but when two cards have nearly identical values I'd rather have both included in the set w/ the collector having the option of choosing which one they want rather than voting in one or the other.
Super Bowl XXVIII: Buffalo Bills vs Dallas Cowboys -
Running back Emmitt Smith rushed for 132 yards and 2
touchdowns earning Super Bowl MVP honors as the Cowboys
defeated the Bills 30-13 to win their second consecutive NFL
title.