Tell me about it. Hester is absolutely amazing, qb's are horrible (nothing new for Chicago), and the defense is having issues also. Benson reminds me of Salaam. A waste of money. It's driving me crazy. I'm not sure if it's the team or something I am doing, so I have stopped wearing my jersey on Sunday and now wear it on Saturday. ( the games we won I wore on Sat and games we loss on Sun) Vince
Been close on a couple of Stenerud's, but I've got to see the Selmon 10. Never seen anything close.
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've got a PSA 9 R. Moss SP rookie for sale (machine stamped). PM if you're interested. Thanks.
Andy
"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."
Nope, not yet, but it sure wasnt for lack of trying. I had a couple of dealers who submit 5000+ cards a month look at all of my Largent 9's for possible bumps, they picked out 4 that were solid. I sent them in for regrade, got nothin. I had a friend take them to the PSA invitational in Vegas and personally submit them, PSA took them back to world headquarters, looked at them and I got nothing.
Against Josh's advice, I cracked them out and sent them in for an unbiased opinion, Got back 3 9's and an 8. Funny.
I have one more shot, a friend of mine is going to walk them into PSA himself and submit them. After that, Im done trying.
Soooo, if in the next month you see the population of the Largent go to a 5, you'll know he was successful.
<< <i>I just noticed -- two new HOF Rookie PSA 10's both Pop 1's:
1970 Jan Stenerud PSA 10 1977 Leroy Selmon PSA 10
Congratulations go to somebody.
Marc. >>
Just ran an update to my POP tracking spreadhseet. Here are some other notable new grades since 9 August:
PSA 8 1935 Chicle Cliff Battles PSA 8 1948 Bowman Alex Wojciechowicz PSA 8 1948 Leaf Doak Walker (POP 5) PSA 9 1955 Bowman Bob St. Clair (Yes a PSA 9..POP 2) PSA 8 1957 Topps Raymond Berry PSA 9 1963 Fleer Len Dawson PSA 9 1965 Philly Paul Krause PSA 9 1969 Topps Larry Csonka PSA 9 1971 Topps Ken Houston (2 newly graded) PSA 9 1971 Topps Roger Wehrli (POP 1) PSA 10 1972 Topps Gene Upshaw (POP 1) PSA 9 1972 Topps Roger Staubach PSA 10 1976 Topps Randy White PSA 10 1977 Topps Dave Casper (POP 2) PSA 10 1978 Topps Tony Dorsett (POP 3) PSA 10 1984 Topps Dwight Stephenson (POP #2) PSA 10 1984 Topps USFL Steve Young
Not a bad couple of months for the high end football collectors..lol
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 know the proud owner of the Upshaw 10 (don't think it's for sale). It wasn't a bump either. Went straight from a (previously) unopened pack to PSA.
"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 can take credit for the Alex Wojciechowicz PSA 8. I bought it about 2 months ago in a PSA 7 holder and tried resubmiting as an upgrade with no Luck. So I cracked the card , it appeared way to nice for a 7 holder.
Jason I bought a 9 55 St. Clair about a month ago from TonyTrade. It was pop 2 then. Paid dearly for it....as it is probably one of the hardest cards to get in even a 8. Andy I'll give ya $300 for the 10 upshaw...how can you possibly turn such a generous offer down from your best friend in Albany!!! Jay
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>Andy I'll give ya $300 for the 10 upshaw...how can you possibly turn such a generous offer down from your best friend in Albany!!! >>
I'd be happy to turn down your offer if I owned the card, Jay, but I don't.
"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."
not trying to clog the thread up with HOF cards for sale but if anyone could help me with the VCP pricing on the last few Hickerson 66 Philly's PSA 8 I would appreciate it. I would also be looking to sell in the low-mid average since I have 2 of them now.
Hey guys have a 5 day sub at PSA (all HOF RC), I added a card at the last minute (EXMYT 1948 Leaf Dudley) and had the sub filled out incorrectly(1 card short). PSA waited 5 working days after the sub was corrected to enter it and it has been 7 working days since it was entered.
My latest sub from the football special. Not bad on the turnaround. I think if you submit early in the specials you do alot better turnaround wise
Grades were overall about what I expected, some higher some lower
The 1971's are brutal!! I thought all of these had a shot at 9!
The 1979 Campbell will definately be resubmitted.
The rest are for sale except where noted, after I figure out what there worth, pops, etc
1 08208583 1960 FLEER 66 BILLY CANNON N/A 8 (found this in a page binder of Heisman rookie cards I had collected back in 1989) 2 08208584 1961 TOPPS 45 HENRY JORDAN N/A 6 ($2 local show) 3 08208585 1966 PHILADELPHIA 45 GENE HICKERSON N/A 8 ($2 local show (before he was inducted)) 4 08208586 1966 PHILADELPHIA 134 BOB BROWN N/A 7 ($1 local show) 5 08208587 1967 TOPPS 22 DICK HUDSON N/A 8 6 08208588 1967 TOPPS 41 BOB SCARPITTO N/A 7 7 08208589 1969 TOPPS 210 DAVE EDWARDS N/A 8 8 08208590 1969 TOPPS 212 ERNIE WRIGHT N/A 8 9 08208591 1970 TOPPS 20 LEROY KELLY N/A 9 (bought a large lot of really nice 70's in 1992, have just started submitting them) 10 08208592 1970 TOPPS 35 MATT SNELL N/A 8 11 08208593 1970 TOPPS 46 ANDY LIVINGSTON N/A 8 12 08208594 1970 TOPPS 93 CHRIS HANBURGER N/A 8 13 08208595 1970 TOPPS 125 DEACON JONES N/A 8 14 08208596 1970 TOPPS 131 GALE GILLINGHAM N/A 8 15 08208597 1971 TOPPS 22 KEN AVERY N/A 8 (bought all these 71's at a local show recently for .50 each, 2nd batch ive submitted) 16 08208598 1971 TOPPS 34 CARL GARRETT N/A 8 17 08208599 1971 TOPPS 56 BAKE TURNER N/A 7 18 08208600 1971 TOPPS 61 JAN STENERUD N/A 8 19 08208601 1971 TOPPS 71 ALAN PAGE N/A 7 20 08208602 1971 TOPPS 80 MIKE CURTIS N/A 7 21 08208603 1971 TOPPS 88 JOHNNY ROBINSON N/A 8 22 08208604 1971 TOPPS 119 MIKE GARRETT N/A 7 23 08208605 1971 TOPPS 170 JIM NANCE N/A 7 24 08208606 1971 TOPPS 210 CHARLIE SANDERS N/A 7 (upgrade for my HOF RC set, $2 on ebay) 25 08208607 1973 TOPPS 367 BOB KUECHENBERG N/A 8 (.50 at local show 8/9 quality) 26 08208608 1976 TOPPS 148 WALTER PAYTON N/A 6 (had this card forever) 27 08208609 1977 TOPPS 29 LEROY SELMON N/A 7 ( from someones .10 box at a local show 7/8 quality) 28 08208610 1977 TOPPS 195 LYNN SWANN N/A 8 29 08208611 1977 TOPPS 479 DARRYL STINGLEY N/A 9 30 08208612 1978 TOPPS 94 CHRIS BAHR N/A 9 (busted an old 1978 pack I had laying around, submitted these 4) 31 08208613 1978 TOPPS 123 HASKEL STANBACK N/A 8 32 08208614 1978 TOPPS 139 JIMMY ROBINSON N/A 9 33 08208615 1978 TOPPS 339 JOE FERGUSON N/A 10 34 08208616 1979 TOPPS 390 EARL CAMPBELL N/A 8 ( 9 quality IMO) 35 08208617 1981 TOPPS 216 JOE MONTANA N/A 8 (from a complete set I bought in 89, just found the binder!!) 36 08208618 1989 PRO SET 314 CRIS CARTER N/A 9 (did you ever sub a card, get the grade you wanted then wonder why you subbed in the 1st place !! 37 08208619 1990 PRO SET 408 JOE MONTANA N/A 9 38 08208620 1990 PRO SET 685 EMMITT SMITH N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements (cant get a 10 to save my life!!) 39 08208621 1990 SCORE 302 JUNIOR SEAU N/A 9 (his REAL RC from the score set, not the NON RC update that everyone collects(including me)) 40 08208622 1992 TOPPS 300 BARRY SANDERS GOLD 10 (cool card!) 41 08208623 1992 PRO SET POWER 22 EMMITT SMITH N/A 10 42 08208624 1993 PRO SET POWER 4 BRETT FAVRE N/A 10 43 08208625 1993 SP 123 WILL SHIELDS N/A 9 (for my hof set) 44 08208626 1993 SP 179 WILLIAM ROAF N/A 9 45 08208627 1994 PLAYOFF 300 LARRY ALLEN N/A 9 (for my hof set) 46 08208628 1994 PLAYOFF J. RICE 2 JERRY RICE N/A 9 47 08208629 1999 UD BLACK DIAMOND 126 TORRY HOLT N/A 9 48 08208630 1999 UD CENTURY LEGEND 137 TORRY HOLT N/A 10 49 08208631 1999 DONRUSS ELITE 178 TORRY HOLT N/A 8 50 08208632 1999 BOWMAN CHROME 174 TORRY HOLT REFRACTOR 8
Date Received: 09/17/2007 Date of Grades Posted: 10/19/2007 Date Shipped: No Date Specified
<< <i>39 08208621 1990 SCORE 302 JUNIOR SEAU N/A 9 (his REAL RC from the score set, not the NON RC update that everyone collects(including me)) >>
Amen to that brother!!!
"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's the story on the Seau? I didn't know there was another card that was produced before? or is more popular? >>
The Score Update is Seau's most valuable card from 1990, but a lot of collectors (myself and apparently Gabbs included) don't consider it his true rookie since it's not even his first Score card. There's no problem for '90 Score Update being the key rookie for a player like Emmitt Smith because he did not have a regular Score issue.
Not a big deal or worth making a stink over IMO, but that's the crux of it.
There's a similar issue in baseball where Cal Ripken's most valuable 1982 card is Topps Traded, but rookie card purists consider the regular Topps issue as his true key rookie.
"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."
there there Andy, don't go trying to make sense of things in the registry selection process, some won't like that. You are correct though, and there are other examples of this like you mentioned throughout other sets.
<< <i>Hypothetical question(s) about future HOF hopefuls:
Ogden vs. Pace-what if both of these guys are 'done'. Do either or both get in?
Zach Thomas and Jason Taylor-pretty much the same question, but tying this back to the ineptitude of their current team.
Holt and Shaun Alexander-these guys approached the 'downside' of their really productive years pretty quick. Does either get in at their current pace? >>
I think Ogden's a shoo in. Pace is definitely a longER shot than Ogden. ZT and JT still need to do a decent amount more IMO. I love Holt, so I hope he can get past this knee issue. Give Alexander a couple more good years, and I think he'll have the career stats he'll need. Might not be first ballot, but it'll be tough to ignore that he was the best TD machine in the NFL for a 5- or 6-year period.
"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> Can someone post a picture of the "other" Seau?
Also, why was the Update card chosen over this one? Is it just worth more?? >>
I believe it was chosen because it's worth more.
It's actually not a given that the regular Score card is the one that should have been used over Score Supplemental though. Seau had other 1990 cards including Pro Set, Topps, Topps Traded (which would be excluded for the same reason as Score Supplemental) and Fleer Update issues. My guess is that '90 Fleer Update (as long as Seau didn't have regular '90 Fleer - which I don't think he did) would be considered his most valuable true rookie card. Regardless, I think we should keep the status quo.
"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 think we should just have PSA send out a vote on every card on every HOF and Key card football set. That way we could settle this once and for all, the democratic way. No matter what is chosen though, there will be someone who disagrees or thinks it should be changed for a multitude of different reasons. At least if we have a "once and for all vote" then we will have the easy answer when the next new collector comes in to ask why a certain card was chosen for these sets.
I urged PSA years ago to please set specific guidlines for what cards can and can not be added. To their credit, they did provide some insight by adding the blurb about HOF and key card sets at the bottom of the Set Request page. Guys, that didn't used to be there either. IMO, what they have is still a bit vague. And the fact that they sent out a poll to figure out which 1996 Terrell Owens card would be added tells me everything I need to know about which direction they are going to go in the future. We are going to get a poll for every addition, and for the newer cards we are going to get to choose between the 50 cards of each player. So be prepared to see cards added that none of us expected. It wouldn;t shock me to see the 1996 Bowmans Best T.O. be added to the WR set at this point. But it will be added based on collector vote. So there really will be no argument for changing it.
Unfortunately, there are way too many collectors who care more about adding cards because it's either (1) cheaper for them to buy, or (2) it will make them money in the future by having certain cards added. Not saying anyone here would do either, but I've seen the vote totals for some of the past polls where card choice was given, and it is absolutely ridiculous. No rhyme or reason to what some guys will vote for.
Be prepared for anything with these modern cards.
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 everyone keeps up with the voting we should have no problem keeping the sets with the best cards in them. The only problem you will find is those people who don't check their email regularly. If someone gets a voting message they should post saying they got it and the rest of you should check your inbox or clean up your spam filter to make sure you vote counts.
If everyone keeps up with the voting we should have no problem keeping the sets with the best cards in them. The only problem you will find is those people who don't check their email regularly. If someone gets a voting message they should post saying they got it and the rest of you should check your inbox or clean up your spam filter to make sure you vote counts.
Just my two cents.
Troy >>
1000% correct.
Here's an example...The Hines Ward RC that was added to the Super Bowl MVPs set a couple years back. Does anyone remember that poll? You had a choice of about 25 different cards. At the time, there were somewhere around 20 collectors of the set. Only 8 responded to the poll, and only 2 of those 8 choose the Leaf R & S, which is easily his most valuable non-auto rookie. It was a tie between the Leaf and two another cards, which I don't remember at 2 votes each. I helped Cosetta break the tie by providing completed auction prices and Beckett book values showing the Leaf was the clear choice as most valuable.
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 think it might be time to add Moss to the modern future HOF set. Already 10 TD's this season. >>
I would vote YES towards adding him to the All-Time WR set as well at this point. Ditto for adding Tom Brady to the QB set. I think it's time for both of them. I've seen enough..lol
Just hope it is the SP Authentic that gets added and not the Bowman Chrome!!!
Not tracking TDs, but here are the updated catch/yardage WR stats for the top active players. 800/12,000 gets an automatic add to the WR set..Well, automatic for the player, but they still are doing a vote for which card...
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 have a problem voting for which cards should be added to a particular set.
Especially if its a set like the HOF ROOKIE CARD set !!
As long as the cards to vote for are ROOKIE CARDS!
I think Jason's right, there are going to be alot of choices in the coming years on what cards to add.
I hope that Jason is wrong about people voting for a certain card just so they can make some money though.
Gabbs >>
The thing to remember is, that if the vote isn't unanimous, SOMEONE is going to disagree with the choice.
Based on past poll results Gabbs, I can't think of any other explanation. Unless some were voting the wrong cards on purpose simply to try and screw the set up.
We should have the results of the Terrell Owens vote, adding him to the WR set within the next couple of weeks. What would you say if it comes back his 1996 Bowman's Best RC rather than 1996 SP RC? Could you think of any other reasons, because clearly the card is the most valuable.
The Seau isn't much different. Me personally, I like to own the most valuable rookie fo each player. When you have 50 different choices, I don't want to own 50 different cards of the same guy unless I am collecting that particular player. I want the most valuable. The Score Supplemental is clearly the most valuable of any Seau card issued in his rookie season of 1990. I understand where you are coming from with him having earlier issued cards, but because the Emmitt Smith Score Supp. card is so popular/valuable and comes from the same set, you would also have to disqualify the Emmitt card. Smith also had earlier cards issued the same year.
I have no desire to own a $2 Seau rookie when I can own a $20 Seau rookie. For me, it doesn't matter if the card came out in October or December, its his rookie card/rookie season. But, we all have opinions on the subject and that is just mine. Honestly, the only way to solve this is to either abolish the Registry altogether or have a vote for this card (and every other player with more than one possible card) and let the masses decide. No matter what, someone will have issue with it. It is what it is, there are similar instances throughout the Registry. It's not a perfect world, and its only going to get tougher as we get closer to requiring the newer (2001-present) issues on these sets. The more unsure collector's are that a card they purchase for a NON-standard (HOF/Key Card) set whose checklist was invented, your going to see more and more exodus from these sets.
Just my take..I am not the gospel or the authority. PSA themselves change standards on a daily basis, so all I can say is be careful what you wish for...lol
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.
There are always going to be people upset in a democratic vote. But at least everyone gets a chance to be heard.
If there is a chance to vote on which Seau card is added to the HOF RC set, I would not vote for the score supplemental because I don't believe it to be a true "rookie card". I would also campaign other members to vote the same (its the american way)
If the decision went against my veiws, I would just add the card chosen to my set and move on (majority rules)
My only problem is that the Seau card that is currently used is NOT a rookie card.
He already had a card issued by Score that year.
Emmitt Smith's 1990 Score card WAS the 1st card issued by Score of Emmitt that year (not the same as Seau who had 2)
Whichever Seau rookie card is most valuable (i dont know) score(non supplemental), proset, action packed, fleer, topps, is the one I would vote for.
<< <i>There are always going to be people upset in a democratic vote. But at least everyone gets a chance to be heard.
If there is a chance to vote on which Seau card is added to the HOF RC set, I would not vote for the score supplemental because I don't believe it to be a true "rookie card". I would also campaign other members to vote the same (its the american way)
If the decision went against my veiws, I would just add the card chosen to my set and move on (majority rules)
My only problem is that the Seau card that is currently used is NOT a rookie card.
He already had a card issued by Score that year.
Emmitt Smith's 1990 Score card WAS the 1st card issued by Score of Emmitt that year (not the same as Seau who had 2)
Whichever Seau rookie card is most valuable (i dont know) score(non supplemental), proset, action packed, fleer, topps, is the one I would vote for.
Just 1 mans humble opinion,
wish everyone the best of luck with their sets!!
Gabbs >>
Which goes back to my initial response..PSA needs to send out a poll for every card on every HOF and Key Card set. The Seau isn't an isolated event. There are many questionable items in many PSA sets. Some of which I don't agree with either. It seems a new card issue comes up about once a month that someone wants changed. So send out a poll for every card on every set and whatever happens happens. Save up some funds for all the cards others currently own that will end up on ebay after the vote...lol
As myself and gabbs have stated our personal opinions, I'm sure there are 10 more opinions out there on 10 other different cards. Lets campaign PSA to send out a mass poll to vote on every card/every set. When the smoke clears, half the collectors will quit the sets, and the other half will need to sell half of their cards that no longer belong. It will almost be like starting over, and hey I can rarely find anything I need for my sets anymore anyway. Will give me some new $2 cards to collect...lol
So who's spearheading? Someone needs to make this request to PSA.
Lets start a list here of cards that could "possibly" be changed...
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.
However, I do underdstand gabbs view. Many older collectors would share the same view, a RC is a first issue card from the set. Therefore for Seau the RC from Score would be the main/pack issue. Awhile ago Beckett use to refer to traded type rookie cards as XRC or something like that. Not sure if they still do that. People have made the same arguement for and against the Mark McGwire 85 Topps (USA baseball card) vs 87 issues as his true RC. There is even more confusing as all the cards were issued in regular packs.
My view is that we go with the most valuable, ie most sought after RC that fits the guidelines of non-auto'd and numbered about 999. Therefore I would vote for the SP Moss and SP-A Brady.
Packers Fan for Life Collecting: Brett Favre Master Set Favre Ticket Stubs Favre TD Reciever Autos Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set Football HOF Rc's
My view is that we go with the most valuable, ie most sought after RC that fits the guidelines of non-auto'd and numbered about 999. Therefore I would vote for the SP Moss and SP-A Brady. >>
Always seemed the most sensible and simple way to me, but what do I know...Some guys want all one brand and would probably vote 1998 Topps Chrome Moss and 2000 Topps Chrome Brady...Their is no way to solve the debate rather than democratically, and as our US population has shown that voting doesn't always produce the desired/best results. But, hey you can't debate majority rule. Even if we voted, like I said, others would still disagree, blame the hanging chads, whatever...Its the American way of the 21st century!!! The best answer is to probably just delete Registry sets and collect what you want to collect rather than what PSA or the majority or whoever is telling you to collect.
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 don't see a problem with using rookie cards from Rookie and/or Traded sets for "the" rookie card for key card and HOF type sets. I would rather spend money on a Junior Seau Score Supplemental rookie than bust a case of 1990 Score for his regular rookie... Why use a worthless card for a set instead of using the most valuable rookie card, which just happens to be from a Rookie or Traded set?
If we argue along the same lines, then Emmitt Smith's true rookie card should be his regular issue Pro Set card...right? If so, which card would you rather spend your money on...a 1990 Pro Set card, of which 10 million were made, or his more popular and more expensive Score Supplemental rookie from a less mass produced set? I'd vote for the more popular and more expensive card every time!
As for the current rookies, the answer is much less clear cut. The easy answer is to pick the most expensive rookie card which has a serial number of 999 or greater and isn't auto'd or include a game used patch. The downside is that you won't be collecting the most expensive rookie card, however the upside is that a card w/ a 100 or 200 pop won't be used for the sets.
Then again, another argument can be made of what's the difference b/t a modern rookie w/ a serial number of 200 and most 1935 National Chicle of 1948 Leaf cards for example. I'd bet that most cards from those sets have pops of much less than 200, although I'm sure that more than 200 of each card exists.
Fuel for the fire.
Regards,
Greg M.
Collecting vintage auto'd fb cards and Dan Marino cards!!
FYI, that 999 number is something we somewhat agreed on, here on the message board..PSA HAS NOT blessed off on any minimum. This is something i've asked them to do numerous times to try and prevent future issues, but for whatever reason (probably to get more cards sent in for grading) they do not want to lock in a particular number mimimum allowed. There is nothing, as of right now, keeping a 100 or 200 numbered card from being added to a current or future set.
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 I were to dream of a Set Registry 2.0, it would contain the following:
1. Higher granularity in the weight (from the current of 10 to say 100). 2. The ability to add any rookie card of a player and have those weighted appropriately (a 90 Score Supplemental Smith might be 9 whereas a Pro Set would be 3) 3. The ability to add any version of a rookie card (a regular LT2 or a black refractor LT2 with the appropriated weights) 4. People's choice awards
<< <i> I don't see a problem with using rookie cards from Rookie and/or Traded sets for "the" rookie card for key card and HOF type sets. I would rather spend money on a Junior Seau Score Supplemental rookie than bust a case of 1990 Score for his regular rookie... Why use a worthless card for a set instead of using the most valuable rookie card, which just happens to be from a Rookie or Traded set? >>
The way some of us would define a key rookie, Greg, is the most valuable mainstream first-year and first-series issue. That's why Emmitt's '90 Score Supplemental fits the criteria, because it's his first Score issue from his rookie year. It's kinda like each company has only one crack to produce the key rookie card. If the first aint it, then it just won't fit
I think by and large though that PSA has included the right cards in key card sets. A lot of us have gladly provided them with input to make sure the right choice was made. Off the top of my head, '90 Score Seau and Hampton are the only 2 that I disagree with and have collected solely for registry purposes.
For 2001+, (other than Tomlinson) I think it would be best if we voted on which issue to use for specific players here on the boards. If we can all come to some kind of a consensus, that would basically eliminate any surprise additions in the future. Power in numbers! A couple of years ago I conducted a poll here about which Cal Ripken rookie should be added to the HOF rookies set. The overwhelming majority voted for '82 Topps, and I e-mailed that info. to PSA.
All of that said, maybe someone should make a list of players who are strong candidates for additions to key card sets, and we can get a vote going and archive it. I realize there are pre-2001 unresolved issues as well, so I imagine it'll be a pretty lengthy list. But if we get most of the possible candidates for future inclusion in key rookie card sets, we can make things a lot easier for all of us and PSA as well.
I say we get a master list of players put together before we start discussing which cards to use. I don't want to clog up this thread, so I'll start another thread. As players come in I'll just add to the list. I'll start the thread now with just a couple additions (because I have to get back to work! and get the ball rolling.
"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."
As seen with the 1995 Terrell Davis, within a 3 year span, that players most valuable/popular rookie card changed from Select Certified to SP...You can try and clock player cards early if you want, but be aware that until the card addition is requested, and voted on, nothing here is official as cards can change. Its going to be whatever the masses vote for. PSA IS going to send a poll with multiple choices for any additions from this point forward. We here on the boards only comprise of maybe 10-20% of the HOF RC collectors, and around 40-50% of the key card collectors. That isnt going to be enough to decide a vote if someone lobbies the other collectors to vote for a different 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.
If we argue along the same lines, then Emmitt Smith's true rookie card should be his regular issue Pro Set card...right? If so, which card would you rather spend your money on...a 1990 Pro Set card, of which 10 million were made, or his more popular and more expensive Score Supplemental rookie from a less mass produced set? I'd vote for the more popular and more expensive card every time!
Greg, in this instance I disagree with you. The argument isn't quite valid. You are comparing an E. Smith RC from two different products, where one was a base card (Pro Set) and one was a XRC (Traded oe Supplemental RC). In this instance the most valueable card from his RC is his Score Supllemental. It is also the first RC card score issued of E. Smith. With Seau, even though the Supplemental RC is more expensive, he still had a RC issued in the Regular set. The regular set RC is his true RC since it was issued prior to the traded set. That would be the card that I would vote for in a RC set. Just my opinion.
Comments
Benson reminds me of Salaam. A waste of money. It's driving me crazy. I'm not sure if it's the team or something I am doing, so I have stopped wearing my jersey on Sunday and now wear it on Saturday. ( the games we won I wore on Sat and games we loss on Sun)
Vince
<< <i>pm sent Greg >>
PM back
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
1970 Jan Stenerud PSA 10
1977 Leroy Selmon PSA 10
Congratulations go to somebody.
Marc.
------------
BOBBY ORR
THE BEST THERE WAS!
THE BEST THERE EVER WILL BE!
------------
<< <i>Two new HOF Rookie PSA 10's both Pop 1's:
1970 Jan Stenerud PSA 10
1977 Leroy Selmon PSA 10 >>
WOW...Not me this time..lol
Been close on a couple of Stenerud's, but I've got to see the Selmon 10. Never seen anything close.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
<< <i>I agree Jason. The 1977's are the absolute worst trying to find above PSA 8.
Greg M. >>
I can vouch for that, especially #177, the Largent card, nearly impossible to get in a 10
Did you every net your white whale?
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
Andy
<< <i>Joe,
Did you every net your white whale?
Greg M. >>
Nope, not yet, but it sure wasnt for lack of trying. I had a couple of dealers who submit 5000+ cards a month look at all of my Largent 9's for possible bumps, they picked out 4 that were solid. I sent them in for regrade, got nothin. I had a friend take them to the PSA invitational in Vegas and personally submit them, PSA took them back to world headquarters, looked at them and I got nothing.
Against Josh's advice, I cracked them out and sent them in for an unbiased opinion, Got back 3 9's and an 8. Funny.
I have one more shot, a friend of mine is going to walk them into PSA himself and submit them. After that, Im done trying.
Soooo, if in the next month you see the population of the Largent go to a 5, you'll know he was successful.
joe
<< <i>I just noticed -- two new HOF Rookie PSA 10's both Pop 1's:
1970 Jan Stenerud PSA 10
1977 Leroy Selmon PSA 10
Congratulations go to somebody.
Marc. >>
Just ran an update to my POP tracking spreadhseet. Here are some other notable new grades since 9 August:
PSA 8 1935 Chicle Cliff Battles
PSA 8 1948 Bowman Alex Wojciechowicz
PSA 8 1948 Leaf Doak Walker (POP 5)
PSA 9 1955 Bowman Bob St. Clair (Yes a PSA 9..POP 2)
PSA 8 1957 Topps Raymond Berry
PSA 9 1963 Fleer Len Dawson
PSA 9 1965 Philly Paul Krause
PSA 9 1969 Topps Larry Csonka
PSA 9 1971 Topps Ken Houston (2 newly graded)
PSA 9 1971 Topps Roger Wehrli (POP 1)
PSA 10 1972 Topps Gene Upshaw (POP 1)
PSA 9 1972 Topps Roger Staubach
PSA 10 1976 Topps Randy White
PSA 10 1977 Topps Dave Casper (POP 2)
PSA 10 1978 Topps Tony Dorsett (POP 3)
PSA 10 1984 Topps Dwight Stephenson (POP #2)
PSA 10 1984 Topps USFL Steve Young
Not a bad couple of months for the high end football collectors..lol
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 got a PSA 9 R. Moss SP rookie for sale (machine stamped). PM if you're interested. Thanks. >>
I still need this one but not as hot as he is now. Now would be a great time to stick it on ebay..
dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
alex wojociechowicz scan
Andy I'll give ya $300 for the 10 upshaw...how can you possibly turn such a generous offer down from your best friend in Albany!!!
Jay
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
<< <i>Andy I'll give ya $300 for the 10 upshaw...how can you possibly turn such a generous offer down from your best friend in Albany!!! >>
I'd be happy to turn down your offer if I owned the card, Jay, but I don't.
Date Auction Auction Link Price Extra
9/30/07 eBay View Auction $311.00
5/27/07 eBay View Auction $306.19
5/1/07 eBay View Auction $399.00
3/18/07 eBay View Auction $380.66
Most BIN"s I've seen have been at the $300 mark.
On a side note, I'd love to find out who has that PSA 9 Krause. Sure would look nice in my Vikings set.
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
How long before you guys would be calling?
Thanks for the info on the Hickerson, I would sell mine for $280 if anyone is interested.
early in the specials you do alot better turnaround wise
Grades were overall about what I expected, some higher some lower
The 1971's are brutal!! I thought all of these had a shot at 9!
The 1979 Campbell will definately be resubmitted.
The rest are for sale except where noted, after I figure out what there worth, pops, etc
1 08208583 1960 FLEER 66 BILLY CANNON N/A 8 (found this in a page binder of Heisman rookie cards I had collected back in 1989)
2 08208584 1961 TOPPS 45 HENRY JORDAN N/A 6 ($2 local show)
3 08208585 1966 PHILADELPHIA 45 GENE HICKERSON N/A 8 ($2 local show (before he was inducted))
4 08208586 1966 PHILADELPHIA 134 BOB BROWN N/A 7 ($1 local show)
5 08208587 1967 TOPPS 22 DICK HUDSON N/A 8
6 08208588 1967 TOPPS 41 BOB SCARPITTO N/A 7
7 08208589 1969 TOPPS 210 DAVE EDWARDS N/A 8
8 08208590 1969 TOPPS 212 ERNIE WRIGHT N/A 8
9 08208591 1970 TOPPS 20 LEROY KELLY N/A 9 (bought a large lot of really nice 70's in 1992, have just started submitting them)
10 08208592 1970 TOPPS 35 MATT SNELL N/A 8
11 08208593 1970 TOPPS 46 ANDY LIVINGSTON N/A 8
12 08208594 1970 TOPPS 93 CHRIS HANBURGER N/A 8
13 08208595 1970 TOPPS 125 DEACON JONES N/A 8
14 08208596 1970 TOPPS 131 GALE GILLINGHAM N/A 8
15 08208597 1971 TOPPS 22 KEN AVERY N/A 8 (bought all these 71's at a local show recently for .50 each, 2nd batch ive submitted)
16 08208598 1971 TOPPS 34 CARL GARRETT N/A 8
17 08208599 1971 TOPPS 56 BAKE TURNER N/A 7
18 08208600 1971 TOPPS 61 JAN STENERUD N/A 8
19 08208601 1971 TOPPS 71 ALAN PAGE N/A 7
20 08208602 1971 TOPPS 80 MIKE CURTIS N/A 7
21 08208603 1971 TOPPS 88 JOHNNY ROBINSON N/A 8
22 08208604 1971 TOPPS 119 MIKE GARRETT N/A 7
23 08208605 1971 TOPPS 170 JIM NANCE N/A 7
24 08208606 1971 TOPPS 210 CHARLIE SANDERS N/A 7 (upgrade for my HOF RC set, $2 on ebay)
25 08208607 1973 TOPPS 367 BOB KUECHENBERG N/A 8 (.50 at local show 8/9 quality)
26 08208608 1976 TOPPS 148 WALTER PAYTON N/A 6 (had this card forever)
27 08208609 1977 TOPPS 29 LEROY SELMON N/A 7 ( from someones .10 box at a local show 7/8 quality)
28 08208610 1977 TOPPS 195 LYNN SWANN N/A 8
29 08208611 1977 TOPPS 479 DARRYL STINGLEY N/A 9
30 08208612 1978 TOPPS 94 CHRIS BAHR N/A 9 (busted an old 1978 pack I had laying around, submitted these 4)
31 08208613 1978 TOPPS 123 HASKEL STANBACK N/A 8
32 08208614 1978 TOPPS 139 JIMMY ROBINSON N/A 9
33 08208615 1978 TOPPS 339 JOE FERGUSON N/A 10
34 08208616 1979 TOPPS 390 EARL CAMPBELL N/A 8 ( 9 quality IMO)
35 08208617 1981 TOPPS 216 JOE MONTANA N/A 8 (from a complete set I bought in 89, just found the binder!!)
36 08208618 1989 PRO SET 314 CRIS CARTER N/A 9 (did you ever sub a card, get the grade you wanted then wonder why you subbed in the 1st place !!
37 08208619 1990 PRO SET 408 JOE MONTANA N/A 9
38 08208620 1990 PRO SET 685 EMMITT SMITH N/A Not Holdered, Did not meet Minimum Size Requirements (cant get a 10 to save my life!!)
39 08208621 1990 SCORE 302 JUNIOR SEAU N/A 9 (his REAL RC from the score set, not the NON RC update that everyone collects(including me))
40 08208622 1992 TOPPS 300 BARRY SANDERS GOLD 10 (cool card!)
41 08208623 1992 PRO SET POWER 22 EMMITT SMITH N/A 10
42 08208624 1993 PRO SET POWER 4 BRETT FAVRE N/A 10
43 08208625 1993 SP 123 WILL SHIELDS N/A 9 (for my hof set)
44 08208626 1993 SP 179 WILLIAM ROAF N/A 9
45 08208627 1994 PLAYOFF 300 LARRY ALLEN N/A 9 (for my hof set)
46 08208628 1994 PLAYOFF J. RICE 2 JERRY RICE N/A 9
47 08208629 1999 UD BLACK DIAMOND 126 TORRY HOLT N/A 9
48 08208630 1999 UD CENTURY LEGEND 137 TORRY HOLT N/A 10
49 08208631 1999 DONRUSS ELITE 178 TORRY HOLT N/A 8
50 08208632 1999 BOWMAN CHROME 174 TORRY HOLT REFRACTOR 8
Date Received: 09/17/2007
Date of Grades Posted: 10/19/2007
Date Shipped: No Date Specified
Gabbs
<< <i>39 08208621 1990 SCORE 302 JUNIOR SEAU N/A 9 (his REAL RC from the score set, not the NON RC update that everyone collects(including me)) >>
Amen to that brother!!!
dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>What's the story on the Seau? I didn't know there was another card that was produced before? or is more popular? >>
The Score Update is Seau's most valuable card from 1990, but a lot of collectors (myself and apparently Gabbs included) don't consider it his true rookie since it's not even his first Score card. There's no problem for '90 Score Update being the key rookie for a player like Emmitt Smith because he did not have a regular Score issue.
Not a big deal or worth making a stink over IMO, but that's the crux of it.
There's a similar issue in baseball where Cal Ripken's most valuable 1982 card is Topps Traded, but rookie card purists consider the regular Topps issue as his true key rookie.
Its not worth making a big deal out of it, but the card we
are using for Junior Seau, in the RC sets is NOT even a
rookie card.
Gabbs
Ogden vs. Pace-what if both of these guys are 'done'. Do either or both get in?
Zach Thomas and Jason Taylor-pretty much the same question, but tying this back to the ineptitude of their current team.
Holt and Shaun Alexander-these guys approached the 'downside' of their really productive years pretty quick. Does either get in at their current pace?
<< <i>Hypothetical question(s) about future HOF hopefuls:
Ogden vs. Pace-what if both of these guys are 'done'. Do either or both get in?
Zach Thomas and Jason Taylor-pretty much the same question, but tying this back to the ineptitude of their current team.
Holt and Shaun Alexander-these guys approached the 'downside' of their really productive years pretty quick. Does either get in at their current pace? >>
I think Ogden's a shoo in. Pace is definitely a longER shot than Ogden. ZT and JT still need to do a decent amount more IMO. I love Holt, so I hope he can get past this knee issue. Give Alexander a couple more good years, and I think he'll have the career stats he'll need. Might not be first ballot, but it'll be tough to ignore that he was the best TD machine in the NFL for a 5- or 6-year period.
PM SENT
Also, why was the Update card chosen over this one? Is it just worth more??
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i> Can someone post a picture of the "other" Seau?
Also, why was the Update card chosen over this one? Is it just worth more?? >>
I believe it was chosen because it's worth more.
It's actually not a given that the regular Score card is the one that should have been used over Score Supplemental though. Seau had other 1990 cards including Pro Set, Topps, Topps Traded (which would be excluded for the same reason as Score Supplemental) and Fleer Update issues. My guess is that '90 Fleer Update (as long as Seau didn't have regular '90 Fleer - which I don't think he did) would be considered his most valuable true rookie card. Regardless, I think we should keep the status quo.
I urged PSA years ago to please set specific guidlines for what cards can and can not be added. To their credit, they did provide some insight by adding the blurb about HOF and key card sets at the bottom of the Set Request page. Guys, that didn't used to be there either. IMO, what they have is still a bit vague. And the fact that they sent out a poll to figure out which 1996 Terrell Owens card would be added tells me everything I need to know about which direction they are going to go in the future. We are going to get a poll for every addition, and for the newer cards we are going to get to choose between the 50 cards of each player. So be prepared to see cards added that none of us expected. It wouldn;t shock me to see the 1996 Bowmans Best T.O. be added to the WR set at this point. But it will be added based on collector vote. So there really will be no argument for changing it.
Unfortunately, there are way too many collectors who care more about adding cards because it's either (1) cheaper for them to buy, or (2) it will make them money in the future by having certain cards added. Not saying anyone here would do either, but I've seen the vote totals for some of the past polls where card choice was given, and it is absolutely ridiculous. No rhyme or reason to what some guys will vote for.
Be prepared for anything with these modern cards.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
If everyone keeps up with the voting we should have no problem keeping the sets with the best cards in them. The only problem you will find is those people who don't check their email regularly. If someone gets a voting message they should post saying they got it and the rest of you should check your inbox or clean up your spam filter to make sure you vote counts.
Just my two cents.
Troy
<< <i>Jason,
If everyone keeps up with the voting we should have no problem keeping the sets with the best cards in them. The only problem you will find is those people who don't check their email regularly. If someone gets a voting message they should post saying they got it and the rest of you should check your inbox or clean up your spam filter to make sure you vote counts.
Just my two cents.
Troy >>
1000% correct.
Here's an example...The Hines Ward RC that was added to the Super Bowl MVPs set a couple years back. Does anyone remember that poll? You had a choice of about 25 different cards. At the time, there were somewhere around 20 collectors of the set. Only 8 responded to the poll, and only 2 of those 8 choose the Leaf R & S, which is easily his most valuable non-auto rookie. It was a tie between the Leaf and two another cards, which I don't remember at 2 votes each. I helped Cosetta break the tie by providing completed auction prices and Beckett book values showing the Leaf was the clear choice as most valuable.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
Especially if its a set like the HOF ROOKIE CARD set !!
As long as the cards to vote for are ROOKIE CARDS!
I think Jason's right, there are going to be alot of choices in the coming years on what cards to add.
I hope that Jason is wrong about people voting for a certain card just so they can make some money though.
Gabbs
<< <i>I think it might be time to add Moss to the modern future HOF set. Already 10 TD's this season. >>
I would vote YES towards adding him to the All-Time WR set as well at this point. Ditto for adding Tom Brady to the QB set. I think it's time for both of them. I've seen enough..lol
Just hope it is the SP Authentic that gets added and not the Bowman Chrome!!!
Not tracking TDs, but here are the updated catch/yardage WR stats for the top active players. 800/12,000 gets an automatic add to the WR set..Well, automatic for the player, but they still are doing a vote for which card...
Harrison- 1039--13,928 (still has tonights game)
Bruce- 904--13,631
Owens- 835--12,271
Moss- 720--11,432
Rod Smith- 849--11,389
McCardell- 865--11,186
Holt- 752--11,141
Galloway- 639--10,007
Moulds- 747--9,770
Muhammed- 719--9,589
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 have a problem voting for which cards should be added to a particular set.
Especially if its a set like the HOF ROOKIE CARD set !!
As long as the cards to vote for are ROOKIE CARDS!
I think Jason's right, there are going to be alot of choices in the coming years on what cards to add.
I hope that Jason is wrong about people voting for a certain card just so they can make some money though.
Gabbs >>
The thing to remember is, that if the vote isn't unanimous, SOMEONE is going to disagree with the choice.
Based on past poll results Gabbs, I can't think of any other explanation. Unless some were voting the wrong cards on purpose simply to try and screw the set up.
We should have the results of the Terrell Owens vote, adding him to the WR set within the next couple of weeks. What would you say if it comes back his 1996 Bowman's Best RC rather than 1996 SP RC? Could you think of any other reasons, because clearly the card is the most valuable.
The Seau isn't much different. Me personally, I like to own the most valuable rookie fo each player. When you have 50 different choices, I don't want to own 50 different cards of the same guy unless I am collecting that particular player. I want the most valuable. The Score Supplemental is clearly the most valuable of any Seau card issued in his rookie season of 1990. I understand where you are coming from with him having earlier issued cards, but because the Emmitt Smith Score Supp. card is so popular/valuable and comes from the same set, you would also have to disqualify the Emmitt card. Smith also had earlier cards issued the same year.
I have no desire to own a $2 Seau rookie when I can own a $20 Seau rookie. For me, it doesn't matter if the card came out in October or December, its his rookie card/rookie season. But, we all have opinions on the subject and that is just mine. Honestly, the only way to solve this is to either abolish the Registry altogether or have a vote for this card (and every other player with more than one possible card) and let the masses decide. No matter what, someone will have issue with it. It is what it is, there are similar instances throughout the Registry. It's not a perfect world, and its only going to get tougher as we get closer to requiring the newer (2001-present) issues on these sets. The more unsure collector's are that a card they purchase for a NON-standard (HOF/Key Card) set whose checklist was invented, your going to see more and more exodus from these sets.
Just my take..I am not the gospel or the authority. PSA themselves change standards on a daily basis, so all I can say is be careful what you wish for...lol
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
least everyone gets a chance to be heard.
If there is a chance to vote on which Seau card is added to the HOF RC set, I would not
vote for the score supplemental because I don't believe it to be a true "rookie card".
I would also campaign other members to vote the same (its the american way)
If the decision went against my veiws, I would just add the card chosen to my set and move on (majority rules)
My only problem is that the Seau card that is currently used is NOT a rookie card.
He already had a card issued by Score that year.
Emmitt Smith's 1990 Score card WAS the 1st card issued by Score of Emmitt that year (not the same as Seau who had 2)
Whichever Seau rookie card is most valuable (i dont know) score(non supplemental), proset, action packed, fleer, topps, is the one I
would vote for.
Just 1 mans humble opinion,
wish everyone the best of luck with their sets!!
Gabbs
<< <i>There are always going to be people upset in a democratic vote. But at
least everyone gets a chance to be heard.
If there is a chance to vote on which Seau card is added to the HOF RC set, I would not
vote for the score supplemental because I don't believe it to be a true "rookie card".
I would also campaign other members to vote the same (its the american way)
If the decision went against my veiws, I would just add the card chosen to my set and move on (majority rules)
My only problem is that the Seau card that is currently used is NOT a rookie card.
He already had a card issued by Score that year.
Emmitt Smith's 1990 Score card WAS the 1st card issued by Score of Emmitt that year (not the same as Seau who had 2)
Whichever Seau rookie card is most valuable (i dont know) score(non supplemental), proset, action packed, fleer, topps, is the one I
would vote for.
Just 1 mans humble opinion,
wish everyone the best of luck with their sets!!
Gabbs >>
Which goes back to my initial response..PSA needs to send out a poll for every card on every HOF and Key Card set. The Seau isn't an isolated event. There are many questionable items in many PSA sets. Some of which I don't agree with either. It seems a new card issue comes up about once a month that someone wants changed. So send out a poll for every card on every set and whatever happens happens. Save up some funds for all the cards others currently own that will end up on ebay after the vote...lol
As myself and gabbs have stated our personal opinions, I'm sure there are 10 more opinions out there on 10 other different cards. Lets campaign PSA to send out a mass poll to vote on every card/every set. When the smoke clears, half the collectors will quit the sets, and the other half will need to sell half of their cards that no longer belong. It will almost be like starting over, and hey I can rarely find anything I need for my sets anymore anyway. Will give me some new $2 cards to collect...lol
So who's spearheading? Someone needs to make this request to PSA.
Lets start a list here of cards that could "possibly" be changed...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
However, I do underdstand gabbs view. Many older collectors would share the same view, a RC is a first issue card from the set. Therefore for Seau the RC from Score would be the main/pack issue. Awhile ago Beckett use to refer to traded type rookie cards as XRC or something like that. Not sure if they still do that. People have made the same arguement for and against the Mark McGwire 85 Topps (USA baseball card) vs 87 issues as his true RC. There is even more confusing as all the cards were issued in regular packs.
My view is that we go with the most valuable, ie most sought after RC that fits the guidelines of non-auto'd and numbered about 999. Therefore I would vote for the SP Moss and SP-A Brady.
Collecting:
Brett Favre Master Set
Favre Ticket Stubs
Favre TD Reciever Autos
Football HOF Player/etc. Auto Set
Football HOF Rc's
<< <i>
My view is that we go with the most valuable, ie most sought after RC that fits the guidelines of non-auto'd and numbered about 999. Therefore I would vote for the SP Moss and SP-A Brady. >>
Always seemed the most sensible and simple way to me, but what do I know...Some guys want all one brand and would probably vote 1998 Topps Chrome Moss and 2000 Topps Chrome Brady...Their is no way to solve the debate rather than democratically, and as our US population has shown that voting doesn't always produce the desired/best results. But, hey you can't debate majority rule. Even if we voted, like I said, others would still disagree, blame the hanging chads, whatever...Its the American way of the 21st century!!! The best answer is to probably just delete Registry sets and collect what you want to collect rather than what PSA or the majority or whoever is telling you to collect.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
If we argue along the same lines, then Emmitt Smith's true rookie card should be his regular issue Pro Set card...right? If so, which card would you rather spend your money on...a 1990 Pro Set card, of which 10 million were made, or his more popular and more expensive Score Supplemental rookie from a less mass produced set? I'd vote for the more popular and more expensive card every time!
As for the current rookies, the answer is much less clear cut. The easy answer is to pick the most expensive rookie card which has a serial number of 999 or greater and isn't auto'd or include a game used patch. The downside is that you won't be collecting the most expensive rookie card, however the upside is that a card w/ a 100 or 200 pop won't be used for the sets.
Then again, another argument can be made of what's the difference b/t a modern rookie w/ a serial number of 200 and most 1935 National Chicle of 1948 Leaf cards for example. I'd bet that most cards from those sets have pops of much less than 200, although I'm sure that more than 200 of each card exists.
Fuel for the fire.
Regards,
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
1. Higher granularity in the weight (from the current of 10 to say 100).
2. The ability to add any rookie card of a player and have those weighted appropriately (a 90 Score Supplemental Smith might be 9 whereas a Pro Set would be 3)
3. The ability to add any version of a rookie card (a regular LT2 or a black refractor LT2 with the appropriated weights)
4. People's choice awards
<< <i> I don't see a problem with using rookie cards from Rookie and/or Traded sets for "the" rookie card for key card and HOF type sets. I would rather spend money on a Junior Seau Score Supplemental rookie than bust a case of 1990 Score for his regular rookie... Why use a worthless card for a set instead of using the most valuable rookie card, which just happens to be from a Rookie or Traded set? >>
The way some of us would define a key rookie, Greg, is the most valuable mainstream first-year and first-series issue. That's why Emmitt's '90 Score Supplemental fits the criteria, because it's his first Score issue from his rookie year. It's kinda like each company has only one crack to produce the key rookie card. If the first aint it, then it just won't fit
I think by and large though that PSA has included the right cards in key card sets. A lot of us have gladly provided them with input to make sure the right choice was made. Off the top of my head, '90 Score Seau and Hampton are the only 2 that I disagree with and have collected solely for registry purposes.
For 2001+, (other than Tomlinson) I think it would be best if we voted on which issue to use for specific players here on the boards. If we can all come to some kind of a consensus, that would basically eliminate any surprise additions in the future. Power in numbers! A couple of years ago I conducted a poll here about which Cal Ripken rookie should be added to the HOF rookies set. The overwhelming majority voted for '82 Topps, and I e-mailed that info. to PSA.
All of that said, maybe someone should make a list of players who are strong candidates for additions to key card sets, and we can get a vote going and archive it. I realize there are pre-2001 unresolved issues as well, so I imagine it'll be a pretty lengthy list. But if we get most of the possible candidates for future inclusion in key rookie card sets, we can make things a lot easier for all of us and PSA as well.
I say we get a master list of players put together before we start discussing which cards to use. I don't want to clog up this thread, so I'll start another thread. As players come in I'll just add to the list. I'll start the thread now with just a couple additions (because I have to get back to work!
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Greg, in this instance I disagree with you. The argument isn't quite valid. You are comparing an E. Smith RC from two different products, where one was a base card (Pro Set) and one was a XRC (Traded oe Supplemental RC). In this instance the most valueable card from his RC is his Score Supllemental. It is also the first RC card score issued of E. Smith.
With Seau, even though the Supplemental RC is more expensive, he still had a RC issued in the Regular set. The regular set RC is his true RC since it was issued prior to the traded set. That would be the card that I would vote for in a RC set. Just my opinion.