<< <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 >>
Its not just a Beckett rule though. For years those two cards have not been treated as rookies because the supplemental set isn't a separate stand alone set. Those cards should never of been selected for those players in the first place.
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>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. >>
That's an opinion. Another being exclusiveness.
The trouble with doing that is, you open pandora's box...Who draws the line on "identical value"? Within a $1? Within $10? Within $100? Everyone would have different opinions and we would end up with a set where every card has 10 options...
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.
Its not just a Beckett rule though. For years those two cards have not been treated as rookies because the supplemental set isn't a separate stand alone set. Those cards should never of been selected for those players in the first place. >>
What set is Emmitt's best rookie in?
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. >>
That's an opinion. Another being exclusiveness.
The trouble with doing that is, you open pandora's box...Who draws the line on "identical value"? Within a $1? Within $10? Within $100? Everyone would have different opinions and we would end up with a set where every card has 10 options...
If we can vote on a card when there are multiple ones available then why can't we vote on a specific value or price range?
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.
Its not just a Beckett rule though. For years those two cards have not been treated as rookies because the supplemental set isn't a separate stand alone set. Those cards should never of been selected for those players in the first place. >>
What set is Emmitt's best rookie in?
Jason >>
The supplemental set which is a continuation of the base Score set. The numbering might be different but its an extension of the base Score set.
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.
If we can vote on a card when there are multiple ones available then why can't we vote on a specific value or price range? >>
Because the set you want already exists.
If you don't want to collect ONLY the best of the best of each player...Switch to the all inclusive set and you can add any card you want! Easy fix.
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.
Its not just a Beckett rule though. For years those two cards have not been treated as rookies because the supplemental set isn't a separate stand alone set. Those cards should never of been selected for those players in the first place. >>
What set is Emmitt's best rookie in?
Jason >>
The supplemental set which is a continuation of the base Score set. The numbering might be different but its an extension of the base Score set. >>
Exactly. And it is a "Beckett" rule that a card in Series 2 can't be a rookie if the player had a card in Series 1.
It's moronic. It's like saying the only true "rookie" is the first card produced of a player. So if Topps releases in July, but the more valuable SP Authentic comes out in August, only the July can be considered the rookie...
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.
If we can vote on a card when there are multiple ones available then why can't we vote on a specific value or price range? >>
Because the set you want already exists.
If you don't want to collect ONLY the best of the best of each player...Switch to the all inclusive set and you can add any card you want! Easy fix.
Jason >>
How can it be the best of the best if a player has two rookie cards of the same value? Wouldn't both be the best of the best?
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.
Its not just a Beckett rule though. For years those two cards have not been treated as rookies because the supplemental set isn't a separate stand alone set. Those cards should never of been selected for those players in the first place. >>
What set is Emmitt's best rookie in?
Jason >>
The supplemental set which is a continuation of the base Score set. The numbering might be different but its an extension of the base Score set. >>
Exactly. And it is a "Beckett" rule that a card in Series 2 can't be a rookie if the player had a card in Series 1.
It's moronic. It's like saying the only true "rookie" is the first card produced of a player. So if Topps releases in July, but the more valuable SP Authentic comes out in August, only the July can be considered the rookie... >>
I don't understand the comparision. Series 1 and 2 would be the same set while SP and Topps are separate sets so it doesn't matter when they are released.
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.
If we can vote on a card when there are multiple ones available then why can't we vote on a specific value or price range? >>
Because the set you want already exists.
If you don't want to collect ONLY the best of the best of each player...Switch to the all inclusive set and you can add any card you want! Easy fix.
Jason >>
How can it be the best of the best if a player has two rookie cards of the same value? Wouldn't both be the best of the best? >>
RARELY (if ever) does a player have a card with the EXACT same value. But in that case, the more popular set would likely be chosen.
Do you have a specific example of this? Or you just throwing out bogus hypotheticals?
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 don't understand the comparision. Series 1 and 2 would be the same set while SP and Topps are separate sets so it doesn't matter when they are released. >>
What does it matter if they are in the same set or not? Still released during the rookie year and was the most valuable of each player at the time. If Series 2 is more valuable than series 1, wouldn;t you want to collect series 2?
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.
If we can vote on a card when there are multiple ones available then why can't we vote on a specific value or price range? >>
Because the set you want already exists.
If you don't want to collect ONLY the best of the best of each player...Switch to the all inclusive set and you can add any card you want! Easy fix.
Jason >>
How can it be the best of the best if a player has two rookie cards of the same value? Wouldn't both be the best of the best? >>
RARELY (if ever) does a player have a card with the EXACT same value. But in that case, the more popular set would likely be chosen.
Do you have a specific example of this? Or you just throwing out bogus hypotheticals?
Jason >>
Wasn't there a point where Martin and Davis had two rookies (SP and Select Certified) where the values were close?
Right now its hypothetical but with current players easily having over 30 rookie cards its bound to happen.
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 don't understand the comparision. Series 1 and 2 would be the same set while SP and Topps are separate sets so it doesn't matter when they are released. >>
What does it matter if they are in the same set or not? Still released during the rookie year and was the most valuable of each player at the time. If Series 2 is more valuable than series 1, wouldn;t you want to collect series 2?
Jason >>
Because a player can't have two rookies in the same set. If a player appeared in the first series that would be their rookie.
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.
Because a player can't have two rookies in the same set. If a player appeared in the first series that would be their rookie. >>
Opinion, not fact. Because wouldn't the 1st car, the "rookie" typically be worth more? Cause in the case of Seau and Kennedy, the Supplemental are worth more.
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.
Wasn't there a point where Martin and Davis had two rookies (SP and Select Certified) where the values were close?
Right now its hypothetical but with current players easily having over 30 rookie cards its bound to happen. >>
As i suspected..Nothing more than conjecture.
You are incorrect on the Davis. The Select, at one point in time, was more valuable. Then by the time it came to add Davis to the Future HOF set, the SP was most valuable.
They were never exact. The best of the best was selected.
So rather than throwing out hypotheticals, lets cross that bridge when we get there. We are 20 years into the modern card explosion and it hasn;t happened to any HOFers yet.
If it aint broke, why are we fixing it?
Lets find something better to talk about shall we. This is a non-issue.
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.
Because a player can't have two rookies in the same set. If a player appeared in the first series that would be their rookie. >>
Opinion, not fact. Because wouldn't the 1st car, the "rookie" typically be worth more? Cause in the case of Seau and Kennedy, the Supplemental are worth more.
Jason >>
Its the opinion held by many collectors and it has nothing to do with value but when a player makes their first appearance in a set.
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.
Wasn't there a point where Martin and Davis had two rookies (SP and Select Certified) where the values were close?
Right now its hypothetical but with current players easily having over 30 rookie cards its bound to happen. >>
As i suspected..Nothing more than conjecture.
You are incorrect on the Davis. The Select, at one point in time, was more valuable. Then by the time it came to add Davis to the Future HOF set, the SP was most valuable.
They were never exact. The best of the best was selected.
So rather than throwing out hypotheticals, lets cross that bridge when we get there. We are 20 years into the modern card explosion and it hasn;t happened to any HOFers yet.
If it aint broke, why are we fixing it?
Lets find something better to talk about shall we. This is a non-issue. >>
Thanks for the information on the Davis. In that case if the card was selected before the price change would the difference need to be addressed later in the set?
You might not see the value in the discussion but its a very real possibility with the number of sets produced in recent years that a few rookie cards will have similar pricing. The matter isn't pressing at the moment but I think it will come up w/ in the next few years and it never hurts to look ahead.
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.
Wasn't there a point where Martin and Davis had two rookies (SP and Select Certified) where the values were close?
Right now its hypothetical but with current players easily having over 30 rookie cards its bound to happen. >>
As i suspected..Nothing more than conjecture.
You are incorrect on the Davis. The Select, at one point in time, was more valuable. Then by the time it came to add Davis to the Future HOF set, the SP was most valuable.
They were never exact. The best of the best was selected.
So rather than throwing out hypotheticals, lets cross that bridge when we get there. We are 20 years into the modern card explosion and it hasn;t happened to any HOFers yet.
If it aint broke, why are we fixing it?
Lets find something better to talk about shall we. This is a non-issue. >>
Thanks for the information on the Davis. In that case if the card was selected before the price change would the difference need to be addressed later in the set?
You might not see the value in the discussion but its a very real possibility with the number of sets produced in recent years that a few rookie cards will have similar pricing. The matter isn't pressing at the moment but I think it will come up w/ in the next few years and it never hurts to look ahead. >>
What about the crappy Pacific rookie of Kurt Warner? there has to be a better issue produced of him in 1999 then the one of him and Tony Horne together.
<< <i>What about the crappy Pacific rookie of Kurt Warner? there has to be a better issue produced of him in 1999 then the one of him and Tony Horne together >>
I'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
<< <i>This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.. >>
Can you point me to factual info that shows these cards print runs?
Are the cards number /1000?
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'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>Can you point me to factual info that shows these cards print runs?
Are the cards number /1000? >>
I dont have any becketts or digest's to say for certain, but I have seen it mentioned several times over the last several years. The print run is listed at 1825
<< <i>I'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
>>
that card is tons nicer. I am not a fan of autographed cards in the registry. Even the Bowman's Best is better than the Pacific.
<< <i>Can you point me to factual info that shows these cards print runs?
Are the cards number /1000? >>
I dont have any becketts or digest's to say for certain, but I have seen it mentioned several times over the last several years. The print run is listed at 1825
And again....... see card #19 Warner is one of the very few PC cards that have a print run of 999 or greater (romo and torry holt are the other 2) >>
Dave, glad you posted these..The big problem with the Warner is that the true print run is UNKNOWN. Which to me I find hard to beleive he autographed 1800 of the same card...What about the Ed Reed you mentioned?
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'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
>>
that card is tons nicer. I am not a fan of autographed cards in the registry. Even the Bowman's Best is better than the Pacific. >>
This set isn't about the most beautiful card, because there are 10000 different opinions. The Pacific, for whatever reason, is/was the most valuable. I do not and will not be an advocate of any of the current cards on the set(s) changing. But for all future adds, by all means you are welcome to voice your opinion and place your votes. In the end, the card chosen will be selected by the GROUP and not by you or I based on our individual opinions. It's the only fair way IMO.
For those who disagree with the cards or want multiple cards eligible, there are other sets out there for you. For those who want autos, hey, their are sets that are ALL/ONLY autographs just for you too. The bright side of the 8 billion similar sets, no need to go trying to change what we have. There are sets you can do exactly what you are asking to do already ready and waiting for you.
By the way we are at 113 currently active sets. THE most collected football set on the ENTIRE REGISTRY...So forgive me if I seem defensive to those looking to re-invent the wheel every few months.
Let's stick with what we got and be happy shall we?
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'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
>>
that card is tons nicer. I am not a fan of autographed cards in the registry. Even the Bowman's Best is better than the Pacific. >>
I don't mind the Pacific Warner rookie but was/is there a price difference between the Bowman's Best and Pacific rookie?
I also do not want to see auto rookies in the set.
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>Dave, glad you posted these..The big problem with the Warner is that the true print run is UNKNOWN. Which to me I find hard to beleive he autographed 1800 of the same card...What about the Ed Reed you mentioned? >>
Remember, Kurt was bagging groceries at the time, so im sure he had plenty of spare time on his hands. I've seen a ton of these for sale over the last few years so I would have no problem believing the 1825 #.
<< <i>I'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
>>
that card is tons nicer. I am not a fan of autographed cards in the registry. Even the Bowman's Best is better than the Pacific. >>
This set isn't about the most beautiful card, because there are 10000 different opinions. The Pacific, for whatever reason, is/was the most valuable. I do not and will not be an advocate of any of the current cards on the set(s) changing. But for all future adds, by all means you are welcome to voice your opinion and place your votes. In the end, the card chosen will be selected by the GROUP and not by you or I based on our individual opinions. It's the only fair way IMO.
For those who disagree with the cards or want multiple cards eligible, there are other sets out there for you. For those who want autos, hey, their are sets that are ALL/ONLY autographs just for you too. The bright side of the 8 billion similar sets, no need to go trying to change what we have. There are sets you can do exactly what you are asking to do already ready and waiting for you.
By the way we are at 113 currently active sets. THE most collected football set on the ENTIRE REGISTRY...So forgive me if I seem defensive to those looking to re-invent the wheel every few months.
Let's stick with what we got and be happy shall we?
Jason >>
I am not wanting to change anything, just thought the Warner choice was curious since it was from a garbage set with a card that he had to share with Tony Horne. I actually already own the card so I would rather see it remain. No reason to get all worried about it.
<< <i>I'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
>>
I personally wouldn't have a problem considering autoed cards in the future, as long as they are company issued, over a thousand print run, and all autos on card no stickers. David
It is always easier to fight for one’s principles than to live up to them-Adlai Stevenson
<< <i>I personally wouldn't have a problem considering autoed cards in the future, as long as they are company issued, over a thousand print run, and all autos on card no stickers. David
>>
Welcome to the minority. I didnt realize any one else shared my opinion.
I just think the most valuable card should be used regardless if it just happens to be autographed. I see the autograph as an added bonus.
<< <i>I'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
>>
+1 on this card. The non-auto rule seems arbitrary to me if the regular-issued RC for a set is auto'd by the player I don't see a reason for excluding it unless the stated or serial #/d print run is under the #/999. We no longer live in the days of base Topps as the only available RC. The card companies have evolved and I belive this set needs to as well if it is to continue its great popularity when these new RCs start becoming part of the set. I think the Warner contenders should have been the card for this set, but the (again, to ME) arbitrary "no auto" rule would have prevented that card from being voted on when it is clearly his most valuable RC and does not violate the #/999 rule. My 2 cents.
I certainly understand the arguments made for autographed cards with a print run of 1,000+ as key rookies. But as an old school collector I just do not like writing on cards, autograph or not. I actually agree with PSA on this one.
"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>I certainly understand the arguments made for autographed cards with a print run of 1,000+ as key rookies. But as an old school collector I just do not like writing on cards, autograph or not. I actually agree with PSA on this one. >>
I feel exactly the same way. I respect the argument for them but I prefer to stay with unsigned rookies.
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.
Why would it be hard to believe someone autographed 1800 of the same card? Except for the shortprints, exeryone in 2000 SPx signed 2000 of their cards - and those were serial numbered. IIRC, most if not all of the rookies in 1999 SPx signed 1999 of their cards. Meanwhile, 2000 Playoff Contenders football had unnumbered signed rookies, with print runs supposedly below 1000, but they seem to show up on ebay a good deal more often than the SP Authentic (#/1250) or SPx cards from that year.
I do have a worry that there may be HOF players in the future with no rookie cards that aren't excluded from the set by reason of low numbering, jersey pieces, or autographs.
<< <i>I certainly understand the arguments made for autographed cards with a print run of 1,000+ as key rookies. But as an old school collector I just do not like writing on cards, autograph or not. I actually agree with PSA on this one. >>
I feel exactly the same way. I respect the argument for them but I prefer to stay with unsigned rookies. >>
I think we will have to vote on this sometime in the near future. It is just the way the industry is going. Like it or not. David
It is always easier to fight for one’s principles than to live up to them-Adlai Stevenson
I believe we included the SP Reed on his addition to the Modern set. The Topps Chrome was selected by a long shot. Like I said, we are currently the minority. Not to say it wont come up 20 years down the road when all the 'old school' collectors move on to other things.
Dave
Edited to add.. ... Here is how the voting went down when reed was added to the HOF modern set 2 years ago.
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.
The other point of this...There is a SPECIFIC SET geared to accept ONLY AUTOGRAPHED CARDS...Can I add my non-auto rookies to those sets? Nope..So keep the autos off of this one...Autos have there only little niche.
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.
This is a quote of yours from Jan 10th, 2009. Have you changed your mind since then?
Jay wrote
<< <i>I kinda agree with dave..I would be ok with some sp auto'd cards. Don't have any at this point......like the 2005's >> >>
you responded
<< <i>Jay do you know what the cards are numbered to? I wouldn't have a problem with them either as long as there are at least /999 produced of the players specific card. And it is a base set card. I really don't know anything about 2005-present stuff.
Jason
>>
Again, Like i said earlier, I realize i'm in the minority with this and I'm just fighting a no win battle, but hey, this is fun discussion, huh? Especially when the upcoming NFL season is up in the air.
Why do you have doubts? It's not like this is ever going to make it in the set. This is all just nice healthy discussion regarding our set. >>
FYI, the * stands for ESTIMATED. Hey, I didn't bring it up, just giving an alternate side to the story.
I agree, will never make the set anyway, so honestly not sure why it even got brought up. But at least anyone who did not have knowledge of the situation now understands both sides of the issue. So kudos.
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>This is a quote of yours from Jan 10th, 2009. Have you changed your mind since then?
Jay wrote
<< <i>I kinda agree with dave..I would be ok with some sp auto'd cards. Don't have any at this point......like the 2005's >> >>
you responded
<< <i>Jay do you know what the cards are numbered to? I wouldn't have a problem with them either as long as there are at least /999 produced of the players specific card. And it is a base set card. I really don't know anything about 2005-present stuff.
Jason
>>
Again, Like i said earlier, I realize i'm in the minority with this and I'm just fighting a no win battle, but hey, this is fun discussion, huh? Especially when the upcoming NFL season is up in the air.
Dave >>
Yes, totally changed my mind...lol
So much so that I RAN THE VOTE AND INCLUDED THE ED REED SP AUTO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CMON MAN...If you are going to quote me, at least give the whole story. Never once did I advocate for the addition of auto cards. But if they are /999 or more CONFIRMED, then I have no problem making them ELIGIBLE. If we vote here and the auto'd cards get the vote, hey add it...
But when they DO NOT, you don't continually bring it up as sour grapes and re-hash the issue. You take it to one of the AUTO sets that are ready and waiting for the addition of all auto cards. Also, this "old school" collector is quite young, and been collecting the HOF RC's since 1999 with no plans on going anywhere. I also have saved the e-mail from PSA saying that NO CARDS ON THE HOF OR FUTURE SETS WOULD BE CHANGED IN THE FUTURE...After the Seau and Kennedy fiasco. I went through each and every card with the Registry crew to verify that they are good to go and would not ever be subject to change...
So, if I were to ever see a poll/vote come across my e-mail request a card change, I would forward that e-mail traffic and squash it. All these cards were voted to the set. If you don't like the selection, sorry. Majority is majority. We can't all get our individual way, and complaining and re-hashing the same issues over and over as if it's something we've never discussed is time wasted. Much rather be discussing something new or enjoyable. These subjects become quite tiresome during round 5 of talking about them.
And this isn't aimed at you particularly. Just a general statement for those who have not been privy to or have not read this thread in its long storied entirety. All of these issues have been discussed ad nauseum. Please in the future, if you see something you disagree with, search this thread for your answer first rather than being redundant.
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.
Hey, no sour grapes from me. I didn't bring up the issue regarding which cards should be used, but i'm entitled to my opinion.
<< <i> Never once did I advocate for the addition of auto cards >>
I never stated that you were advocating for the auto cards. But you did seem more open to the idea than you do now?
It seems as though a few more people agree with me than in years past. I think we have one thing in common and that is making this set the very best it can be. You keep talking about re-inventing the wheel, but even the wheel wasn't done right the first time.
I dont remember a poll for the warner card, but i'll see what i can find.
I'd like to think 8 years into this set, that we've been able to get it right by now.
Again, this isn't the first or even 5th time this issue has been discussed. Is your plan to pound us into submission with your opinion? lol
Ugly day in Hawaii...It rained.
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>This is a quote of yours from Jan 10th, 2009. Have you changed your mind since then?
Jay wrote
<< <i>I kinda agree with dave..I would be ok with some sp auto'd cards. Don't have any at this point......like the 2005's >> >>
you responded
<< <i>Jay do you know what the cards are numbered to? I wouldn't have a problem with them either as long as there are at least /999 produced of the players specific card. And it is a base set card. I really don't know anything about 2005-present stuff.
Jason
>>
Again, Like i said earlier, I realize i'm in the minority with this and I'm just fighting a no win battle, but hey, this is fun discussion, huh? Especially when the upcoming NFL season is up in the air.
Dave >>
Yes, totally changed my mind...lol
So much so that I RAN THE VOTE AND INCLUDED THE ED REED SP AUTO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CMON MAN...If you are going to quote me, at least give the whole story. Never once did I advocate for the addition of auto cards. But if they are /999 or more CONFIRMED, then I have no problem making them ELIGIBLE. If we vote here and the auto'd cards get the vote, hey add it...
But when they DO NOT, you don't continually bring it up as sour grapes and re-hash the issue. You take it to one of the AUTO sets that are ready and waiting for the addition of all auto cards. Also, this "old school" collector is quite young, and been collecting the HOF RC's since 1999 with no plans on going anywhere. I also have saved the e-mail from PSA saying that NO CARDS ON THE HOF OR FUTURE SETS WOULD BE CHANGED IN THE FUTURE...After the Seau and Kennedy fiasco. I went through each and every card with the Registry crew to verify that they are good to go and would not ever be subject to change...
So, if I were to ever see a poll/vote come across my e-mail request a card change, I would forward that e-mail traffic and squash it. All these cards were voted to the set. If you don't like the selection, sorry. Majority is majority. We can't all get our individual way, and complaining and re-hashing the same issues over and over as if it's something we've never discussed is time wasted. Much rather be discussing something new or enjoyable. These subjects become quite tiresome during round 5 of talking about them.
And this isn't aimed at you particularly. Just a general statement for those who have not been privy to or have not read this thread in its long storied entirety. All of these issues have been discussed ad nauseum. Please in the future, if you see something you disagree with, search this thread for your answer first rather than being redundant.
Jason >>
Thanks for the suggestion on searching through the thread but I see no harm in addressing an older issue, that's why we have discussion boards.lol If Collectors Universe has a problem with older topics being brought up then I understand why some might have an issue with it.
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
<< <i>
<< <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 >>
Its not just a Beckett rule though. For years those two cards have not been treated as rookies because the supplemental set isn't a separate stand alone set. Those cards should never of been selected for those players in the first place.
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>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. >>
That's an opinion. Another being exclusiveness.
The trouble with doing that is, you open pandora's box...Who draws the line on "identical value"? Within a $1? Within $10? Within $100? Everyone would have different opinions and we would end up with a set where every card has 10 options...
OH WAIT>>>>> We ALREADY HAVE THAT SET:
What you are asking for...
Problem solved.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
Its not just a Beckett rule though. For years those two cards have not been treated as rookies because the supplemental set isn't a separate stand alone set. Those cards should never of been selected for those players in the first place. >>
What set is Emmitt's best rookie in?
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <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. >>
That's an opinion. Another being exclusiveness.
The trouble with doing that is, you open pandora's box...Who draws the line on "identical value"? Within a $1? Within $10? Within $100? Everyone would have different opinions and we would end up with a set where every card has 10 options...
OH WAIT>>>>> We ALREADY HAVE THAT SET:
What you are asking for...
Problem solved.
Jason >>
If we can vote on a card when there are multiple ones available then why can't we vote on a specific value or price range?
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>
Its not just a Beckett rule though. For years those two cards have not been treated as rookies because the supplemental set isn't a separate stand alone set. Those cards should never of been selected for those players in the first place. >>
What set is Emmitt's best rookie in?
Jason >>
The supplemental set which is a continuation of the base Score set. The numbering might be different but its an extension of the base Score set.
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>
If we can vote on a card when there are multiple ones available then why can't we vote on a specific value or price range? >>
Because the set you want already exists.
If you don't want to collect ONLY the best of the best of each player...Switch to the all inclusive set and you can add any card you want! Easy fix.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
Its not just a Beckett rule though. For years those two cards have not been treated as rookies because the supplemental set isn't a separate stand alone set. Those cards should never of been selected for those players in the first place. >>
What set is Emmitt's best rookie in?
Jason >>
The supplemental set which is a continuation of the base Score set. The numbering might be different but its an extension of the base Score set. >>
Exactly. And it is a "Beckett" rule that a card in Series 2 can't be a rookie if the player had a card in Series 1.
It's moronic. It's like saying the only true "rookie" is the first card produced of a player. So if Topps releases in July, but the more valuable SP Authentic comes out in August, only the July can be considered the rookie...
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
<< <i>
If we can vote on a card when there are multiple ones available then why can't we vote on a specific value or price range? >>
Because the set you want already exists.
If you don't want to collect ONLY the best of the best of each player...Switch to the all inclusive set and you can add any card you want! Easy fix.
Jason >>
How can it be the best of the best if a player has two rookie cards of the same value? Wouldn't both be the best of the best?
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>
<< <i>
<< <i>
Its not just a Beckett rule though. For years those two cards have not been treated as rookies because the supplemental set isn't a separate stand alone set. Those cards should never of been selected for those players in the first place. >>
What set is Emmitt's best rookie in?
Jason >>
The supplemental set which is a continuation of the base Score set. The numbering might be different but its an extension of the base Score set. >>
Exactly. And it is a "Beckett" rule that a card in Series 2 can't be a rookie if the player had a card in Series 1.
It's moronic. It's like saying the only true "rookie" is the first card produced of a player. So if Topps releases in July, but the more valuable SP Authentic comes out in August, only the July can be considered the rookie... >>
I don't understand the comparision. Series 1 and 2 would be the same set while SP and Topps are separate sets so it doesn't matter when they are released.
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>
<< <i>
If we can vote on a card when there are multiple ones available then why can't we vote on a specific value or price range? >>
Because the set you want already exists.
If you don't want to collect ONLY the best of the best of each player...Switch to the all inclusive set and you can add any card you want! Easy fix.
Jason >>
How can it be the best of the best if a player has two rookie cards of the same value? Wouldn't both be the best of the best? >>
RARELY (if ever) does a player have a card with the EXACT same value. But in that case, the more popular set would likely be chosen.
Do you have a specific example of this? Or you just throwing out bogus hypotheticals?
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
I don't understand the comparision. Series 1 and 2 would be the same set while SP and Topps are separate sets so it doesn't matter when they are released. >>
What does it matter if they are in the same set or not? Still released during the rookie year and was the most valuable of each player at the time. If Series 2 is more valuable than series 1, wouldn;t you want to collect series 2?
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
If we can vote on a card when there are multiple ones available then why can't we vote on a specific value or price range? >>
Because the set you want already exists.
If you don't want to collect ONLY the best of the best of each player...Switch to the all inclusive set and you can add any card you want! Easy fix.
Jason >>
How can it be the best of the best if a player has two rookie cards of the same value? Wouldn't both be the best of the best? >>
RARELY (if ever) does a player have a card with the EXACT same value. But in that case, the more popular set would likely be chosen.
Do you have a specific example of this? Or you just throwing out bogus hypotheticals?
Jason >>
Wasn't there a point where Martin and Davis had two rookies (SP and Select Certified) where the values were close?
Right now its hypothetical but with current players easily having over 30 rookie cards its bound to happen.
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>
I don't understand the comparision. Series 1 and 2 would be the same set while SP and Topps are separate sets so it doesn't matter when they are released. >>
What does it matter if they are in the same set or not? Still released during the rookie year and was the most valuable of each player at the time. If Series 2 is more valuable than series 1, wouldn;t you want to collect series 2?
Jason >>
Because a player can't have two rookies in the same set. If a player appeared in the first series that would be their rookie.
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>
Because a player can't have two rookies in the same set. If a player appeared in the first series that would be their rookie. >>
Opinion, not fact. Because wouldn't the 1st car, the "rookie" typically be worth more? Cause in the case of Seau and Kennedy, the Supplemental are worth more.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
Wasn't there a point where Martin and Davis had two rookies (SP and Select Certified) where the values were close?
Right now its hypothetical but with current players easily having over 30 rookie cards its bound to happen. >>
As i suspected..Nothing more than conjecture.
You are incorrect on the Davis. The Select, at one point in time, was more valuable. Then by the time it came to add Davis to the Future HOF set, the SP was most valuable.
They were never exact. The best of the best was selected.
So rather than throwing out hypotheticals, lets cross that bridge when we get there. We are 20 years into the modern card explosion and it hasn;t happened to any HOFers yet.
If it aint broke, why are we fixing it?
Lets find something better to talk about shall we. This is a non-issue.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
<< <i>
Because a player can't have two rookies in the same set. If a player appeared in the first series that would be their rookie. >>
Opinion, not fact. Because wouldn't the 1st car, the "rookie" typically be worth more? Cause in the case of Seau and Kennedy, the Supplemental are worth more.
Jason >>
Its the opinion held by many collectors and it has nothing to do with value but when a player makes their first appearance in a set.
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>
Wasn't there a point where Martin and Davis had two rookies (SP and Select Certified) where the values were close?
Right now its hypothetical but with current players easily having over 30 rookie cards its bound to happen. >>
As i suspected..Nothing more than conjecture.
You are incorrect on the Davis. The Select, at one point in time, was more valuable. Then by the time it came to add Davis to the Future HOF set, the SP was most valuable.
They were never exact. The best of the best was selected.
So rather than throwing out hypotheticals, lets cross that bridge when we get there. We are 20 years into the modern card explosion and it hasn;t happened to any HOFers yet.
If it aint broke, why are we fixing it?
Lets find something better to talk about shall we. This is a non-issue. >>
Thanks for the information on the Davis. In that case if the card was selected before the price change would the difference need to be addressed later in the set?
You might not see the value in the discussion but its a very real possibility with the number of sets produced in recent years that a few rookie cards will have similar pricing. The matter isn't pressing at the moment but I think it will come up w/ in the next few years and it never hurts to look ahead.
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>
<< <i>
Wasn't there a point where Martin and Davis had two rookies (SP and Select Certified) where the values were close?
Right now its hypothetical but with current players easily having over 30 rookie cards its bound to happen. >>
As i suspected..Nothing more than conjecture.
You are incorrect on the Davis. The Select, at one point in time, was more valuable. Then by the time it came to add Davis to the Future HOF set, the SP was most valuable.
They were never exact. The best of the best was selected.
So rather than throwing out hypotheticals, lets cross that bridge when we get there. We are 20 years into the modern card explosion and it hasn;t happened to any HOFers yet.
If it aint broke, why are we fixing it?
Lets find something better to talk about shall we. This is a non-issue. >>
Thanks for the information on the Davis. In that case if the card was selected before the price change would the difference need to be addressed later in the set?
You might not see the value in the discussion but its a very real possibility with the number of sets produced in recent years that a few rookie cards will have similar pricing. The matter isn't pressing at the moment but I think it will come up w/ in the next few years and it never hurts to look ahead. >>
What about the crappy Pacific rookie of Kurt Warner? there has to be a better issue produced of him in 1999 then the one of him and Tony Horne together.
<< <i>What about the crappy Pacific rookie of Kurt Warner? there has to be a better issue produced of him in 1999 then the one of him and Tony Horne together >>
+1..........I hate that card
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.. >>
Can you point me to factual info that shows these cards print runs?
Are the cards number /1000?
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>there are others among you that dont mind ink on cards too. but thats how this set was setup. >>
Nothing wrong with that...And for those who enjoy ink, well let me point you in the right direction:
Perfect Solution
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Can you point me to factual info that shows these cards print runs?
Are the cards number /1000? >>
I dont have any becketts or digest's to say for certain, but I have seen it mentioned several times over the last several years. The print run is listed at 1825
Here is a site that list the print run at 1825
And again....... see card #19 Warner is one of the very few PC cards that have a print run of 999 or greater (romo and torry holt are the other 2)
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>I'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
that card is tons nicer. I am not a fan of autographed cards in the registry. Even the Bowman's Best is better than the Pacific.
<< <i>
<< <i>Can you point me to factual info that shows these cards print runs?
Are the cards number /1000? >>
I dont have any becketts or digest's to say for certain, but I have seen it mentioned several times over the last several years. The print run is listed at 1825
Here is a site that list the print run at 1825
And again....... see card #19 Warner is one of the very few PC cards that have a print run of 999 or greater (romo and torry holt are the other 2) >>
Dave, glad you posted these..The big problem with the Warner is that the true print run is UNKNOWN. Which to me I find hard to beleive he autographed 1800 of the same card...What about the Ed Reed you mentioned?
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
that card is tons nicer. I am not a fan of autographed cards in the registry. Even the Bowman's Best is better than the Pacific. >>
This set isn't about the most beautiful card, because there are 10000 different opinions. The Pacific, for whatever reason, is/was the most valuable. I do not and will not be an advocate of any of the current cards on the set(s) changing. But for all future adds, by all means you are welcome to voice your opinion and place your votes. In the end, the card chosen will be selected by the GROUP and not by you or I based on our individual opinions. It's the only fair way IMO.
For those who disagree with the cards or want multiple cards eligible, there are other sets out there for you. For those who want autos, hey, their are sets that are ALL/ONLY autographs just for you too. The bright side of the 8 billion similar sets, no need to go trying to change what we have. There are sets you can do exactly what you are asking to do already ready and waiting for you.
By the way we are at 113 currently active sets. THE most collected football set on the ENTIRE REGISTRY...So forgive me if I seem defensive to those looking to re-invent the wheel every few months.
Let's stick with what we got and be happy shall we?
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
that card is tons nicer. I am not a fan of autographed cards in the registry. Even the Bowman's Best is better than the Pacific. >>
I don't mind the Pacific Warner rookie but was/is there a price difference between the Bowman's Best and Pacific rookie?
I also do not want to see auto rookies in the set.
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>Dave, glad you posted these..The big problem with the Warner is that the true print run is UNKNOWN. Which to me I find hard to beleive he autographed 1800 of the same card...What about the Ed Reed you mentioned? >>
Remember, Kurt was bagging groceries at the time, so im sure he had plenty of spare time on his hands. I've seen a ton of these for sale over the last few years so I would have no problem believing the 1825 #.
The ed reed sp authentic is serial #ed to 1150
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
that card is tons nicer. I am not a fan of autographed cards in the registry. Even the Bowman's Best is better than the Pacific. >>
This set isn't about the most beautiful card, because there are 10000 different opinions. The Pacific, for whatever reason, is/was the most valuable. I do not and will not be an advocate of any of the current cards on the set(s) changing. But for all future adds, by all means you are welcome to voice your opinion and place your votes. In the end, the card chosen will be selected by the GROUP and not by you or I based on our individual opinions. It's the only fair way IMO.
For those who disagree with the cards or want multiple cards eligible, there are other sets out there for you. For those who want autos, hey, their are sets that are ALL/ONLY autographs just for you too. The bright side of the 8 billion similar sets, no need to go trying to change what we have. There are sets you can do exactly what you are asking to do already ready and waiting for you.
By the way we are at 113 currently active sets. THE most collected football set on the ENTIRE REGISTRY...So forgive me if I seem defensive to those looking to re-invent the wheel every few months.
Let's stick with what we got and be happy shall we?
Jason >>
I am not wanting to change anything, just thought the Warner choice was curious since it was from a garbage set with a card that he had to share with Tony Horne. I actually already own the card so I would rather see it remain. No reason to get all worried about it.
<< <i>I'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
I personally wouldn't have a problem considering autoed cards in the future, as long as they are company issued, over a thousand print run, and all autos on card no stickers.
David
<< <i>I personally wouldn't have a problem considering autoed cards in the future, as long as they are company issued, over a thousand print run, and all autos on card no stickers.
David
>>
Welcome to the minority. I didnt realize any one else shared my opinion.
I just think the most valuable card should be used regardless if it just happens to be autographed. I see the autograph as an added bonus.
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>I'm a big fan of the on card autographs issued in packs. This is his best RC with a print run of 1K, but has ink on it which no one but me likes. Same issue with the Ed Reed RC.... I'm in the minority and I can live with that. I think this card is absolutly beautiful....
+1 on this card. The non-auto rule seems arbitrary to me if the regular-issued RC for a set is auto'd by the player I don't see a reason for excluding it unless the stated or serial #/d print run is under the #/999. We no longer live in the days of base Topps as the only available RC. The card companies have evolved and I belive this set needs to as well if it is to continue its great popularity when these new RCs start becoming part of the set. I think the Warner contenders should have been the card for this set, but the (again, to ME) arbitrary "no auto" rule would have prevented that card from being voted on when it is clearly his most valuable RC and does not violate the #/999 rule. My 2 cents.
JC
BTW....I found the card listed on Beckett.com confirming the print run of #1825. If we can't believe the almighty beckett, who can we trust?
Linky Dinky Doo
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>I certainly understand the arguments made for autographed cards with a print run of 1,000+ as key rookies. But as an old school collector I just do not like writing on cards, autograph or not. I actually agree with PSA on this one. >>
I feel exactly the same way. I respect the argument for them but I prefer to stay with unsigned rookies.
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 do have a worry that there may be HOF players in the future with no rookie cards that aren't excluded from the set by reason of low numbering, jersey pieces, or autographs.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
<< <i>
<< <i>I certainly understand the arguments made for autographed cards with a print run of 1,000+ as key rookies. But as an old school collector I just do not like writing on cards, autograph or not. I actually agree with PSA on this one. >>
I feel exactly the same way. I respect the argument for them but I prefer to stay with unsigned rookies. >>
I think we will have to vote on this sometime in the near future. It is just the way the industry is going. Like it or not.
David
Dave
Edited to add.. ... Here is how the voting went down when reed was added to the HOF modern set 2 years ago.
Ed Reed
2002 Topps Chrome-11
2002 SP Authentic Auto-4
2002 SPX-0
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>Couldn't have said it better myself JC....
BTW....I found the card listed on Beckett.com confirming the print run of #1825. If we can't believe the almighty beckett, who can we trust?
Linky Dinky Doo >>
AU/1825* RC
Dave, what's the *** for?
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>Dave, what's the *** for?
>>
I've no idea. Maybe you should ask beckett.
It clearly says Print Run :1825.
Why do you have doubts? It's not like this is ever going to make it in the set. This is all just nice healthy discussion regarding our set.
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
Jay wrote
<< <i>I kinda agree with dave..I would be ok with some sp auto'd cards. Don't have any at this point......like the 2005's >>
>>
you responded
<< <i>Jay do you know what the cards are numbered to? I wouldn't have a problem with them either as long as there are at least /999 produced of the players specific card. And it is a base set card. I really don't know anything about 2005-present stuff.
Jason
>>
Again, Like i said earlier, I realize i'm in the minority with this and I'm just fighting a no win battle, but hey, this is fun discussion, huh? Especially when the upcoming NFL season is up in the air.
Dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>
<< <i>Dave, what's the *** for?
>>
I've no idea. Maybe you should ask beckett.
It clearly says Print Run :1825.
Why do you have doubts? It's not like this is ever going to make it in the set. This is all just nice healthy discussion regarding our set. >>
FYI, the * stands for ESTIMATED. Hey, I didn't bring it up, just giving an alternate side to the story.
I agree, will never make the set anyway, so honestly not sure why it even got brought up. But at least anyone who did not have knowledge of the situation now understands both sides of the issue. So kudos.
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>This is a quote of yours from Jan 10th, 2009. Have you changed your mind since then?
Jay wrote
<< <i>I kinda agree with dave..I would be ok with some sp auto'd cards. Don't have any at this point......like the 2005's >>
>>
you responded
<< <i>Jay do you know what the cards are numbered to? I wouldn't have a problem with them either as long as there are at least /999 produced of the players specific card. And it is a base set card. I really don't know anything about 2005-present stuff.
Jason
>>
Again, Like i said earlier, I realize i'm in the minority with this and I'm just fighting a no win battle, but hey, this is fun discussion, huh? Especially when the upcoming NFL season is up in the air.
Dave >>
Yes, totally changed my mind...lol
So much so that I RAN THE VOTE AND INCLUDED THE ED REED SP AUTO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CMON MAN...If you are going to quote me, at least give the whole story. Never once did I advocate for the addition of auto cards. But if they are /999 or more CONFIRMED, then I have no problem making them ELIGIBLE. If we vote here and the auto'd cards get the vote, hey add it...
But when they DO NOT, you don't continually bring it up as sour grapes and re-hash the issue. You take it to one of the AUTO sets that are ready and waiting for the addition of all auto cards. Also, this "old school" collector is quite young, and been collecting the HOF RC's since 1999 with no plans on going anywhere. I also have saved the e-mail from PSA saying that NO CARDS ON THE HOF OR FUTURE SETS WOULD BE CHANGED IN THE FUTURE...After the Seau and Kennedy fiasco. I went through each and every card with the Registry crew to verify that they are good to go and would not ever be subject to change...
So, if I were to ever see a poll/vote come across my e-mail request a card change, I would forward that e-mail traffic and squash it. All these cards were voted to the set. If you don't like the selection, sorry. Majority is majority. We can't all get our individual way, and complaining and re-hashing the same issues over and over as if it's something we've never discussed is time wasted. Much rather be discussing something new or enjoyable. These subjects become quite tiresome during round 5 of talking about them.
And this isn't aimed at you particularly. Just a general statement for those who have not been privy to or have not read this thread in its long storied entirety. All of these issues have been discussed ad nauseum. Please in the future, if you see something you disagree with, search this thread for your answer first rather than being redundant.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i> Never once did I advocate for the addition of auto cards >>
I never stated that you were advocating for the auto cards. But you did seem more open to the idea than you do now?
It seems as though a few more people agree with me than in years past. I think we have one thing in common and that is making this set the very best it can be. You keep talking about re-inventing the wheel, but even the wheel wasn't done right the first time.
I dont remember a poll for the warner card, but i'll see what i can find.
Its a beautiful day in Indiana.
Dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
Again, this isn't the first or even 5th time this issue has been discussed. Is your plan to pound us into submission with your opinion? lol
Ugly day in Hawaii...It rained.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Hard to believe this things been around for 8 years. Time flies..
Peace out...Its nap time for me.
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>
<< <i>This is a quote of yours from Jan 10th, 2009. Have you changed your mind since then?
Jay wrote
<< <i>I kinda agree with dave..I would be ok with some sp auto'd cards. Don't have any at this point......like the 2005's >>
>>
you responded
<< <i>Jay do you know what the cards are numbered to? I wouldn't have a problem with them either as long as there are at least /999 produced of the players specific card. And it is a base set card. I really don't know anything about 2005-present stuff.
Jason
>>
Again, Like i said earlier, I realize i'm in the minority with this and I'm just fighting a no win battle, but hey, this is fun discussion, huh? Especially when the upcoming NFL season is up in the air.
Dave >>
Yes, totally changed my mind...lol
So much so that I RAN THE VOTE AND INCLUDED THE ED REED SP AUTO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! CMON MAN...If you are going to quote me, at least give the whole story. Never once did I advocate for the addition of auto cards. But if they are /999 or more CONFIRMED, then I have no problem making them ELIGIBLE. If we vote here and the auto'd cards get the vote, hey add it...
But when they DO NOT, you don't continually bring it up as sour grapes and re-hash the issue. You take it to one of the AUTO sets that are ready and waiting for the addition of all auto cards. Also, this "old school" collector is quite young, and been collecting the HOF RC's since 1999 with no plans on going anywhere. I also have saved the e-mail from PSA saying that NO CARDS ON THE HOF OR FUTURE SETS WOULD BE CHANGED IN THE FUTURE...After the Seau and Kennedy fiasco. I went through each and every card with the Registry crew to verify that they are good to go and would not ever be subject to change...
So, if I were to ever see a poll/vote come across my e-mail request a card change, I would forward that e-mail traffic and squash it. All these cards were voted to the set. If you don't like the selection, sorry. Majority is majority. We can't all get our individual way, and complaining and re-hashing the same issues over and over as if it's something we've never discussed is time wasted. Much rather be discussing something new or enjoyable. These subjects become quite tiresome during round 5 of talking about them.
And this isn't aimed at you particularly. Just a general statement for those who have not been privy to or have not read this thread in its long storied entirety. All of these issues have been discussed ad nauseum. Please in the future, if you see something you disagree with, search this thread for your answer first rather than being redundant.
Jason >>
Thanks for the suggestion on searching through the thread but I see no harm in addressing an older issue, that's why we have discussion boards.lol If Collectors Universe has a problem with older topics being brought up then I understand why some might have an issue with it.
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.