Update to what I thought couldn't bet more Oddball and Butt Ugly! But, not to me.

Stone193

I found these in a box – I don’t have a complete set. I put this is the “oddball” category.

1952 Baseball Emblems

They were made by the C. McDonald MFG, Co, No Wilbraham, Mass. – copyright – 1952.

They can be used to display on your car, bike or used as an ice scraper.

There are 16 teams to the checklist – I put them in the order the teams finished the 1952 season – in the WS – the Dodgers faced the Yanks – Yanks prevailed of course.

American League

1. Yanks
2. Indians
3. White Sox
4. Athletics
5. Senators
6. Red Sox
7. Browns
8. Tigers

National League

1. Dodgers
2. Giants
3. Cardinals
4. Phillies
5. Cubs
6. Reds
7. Braves
8. Pirates













If anyone has any of the ones I’m missing – please post them if ya got the courage!

Please - don't hesitate to comment on which you think are the fugliest!

mike

EAsports

The Tigers one looks like a brain with a face on it.

Very nice.

leftofdial

Stone193,
1st of all , I give you an A+ for your filing system (order of finish in that year) who but us (the forum members) figures out those types of details?

Secondly, if there were copyright laws back in '52 , which I suspect there were, these are obvious attempts at NOT paying any licensing fees for using anything even remotely close to the actual team logos. They are perfectly crappy and I'd cherish them just for that.

Thanks for the pics!!

WinPitcher

1st of all , I give you an A+ for your filing system (order of finish in that year) who but us (the forum members) figures out those types of details?

Huh?

Nice item Mike.

Steve

leftofdial

Wow,
I just looked at your scans again and see that they (the contrived images) are copyrighted.
Maybe this is the year that MLB buckles and tries to buy the rights, huh?
Let's only hope. The dodgers forsake their beloved training camp arrangement, maybe they can get rid of that tired old dodger blue and incorporate that toughie logo into their new paint scheme.
I'll be watching the ocho tonight to stay tuned for any new developments!

MikeyLikesIt

I'm not sure I get the Dodgers logo. So does "Trolly Dodger" also mean "hobo"?

itzagoner

that Dodgers one looks like some guy i know, name's Vinnie...i owe him money

stevek

<< <i>I'm not sure I get the Dodgers logo. So does "Trolly Dodger" also mean "hobo"? >>



The Brooklyn Dodgers were affectionately known as the "Bums" by their fans, so I guess the artist drew a caricature of a bum.

MikeyLikesIt

<< <i>

<< <i>I'm not sure I get the Dodgers logo. So does "Trolly Dodger" also mean "hobo"? >>



The Brooklyn Dodgers were affectionately known as the "Bums" by their fans, so I guess the artist drew a caricature of a bum. >>



Ahhh. Don't know how I missed that one.

1989FleerBillRipkencollector

ahh Dodgers--Dem Bums !!!! Love it. Thanks for sharing.

Southerncards

I've never seen them before but I would imagine the Dodgers and Browns would bring a fair penny on ebay

Stone193

<< <i>I've never seen them before but I would imagine the Dodgers and Browns would bring a fair penny on ebay >>

Southern

These are pretty affordable.

The key is finding the cardboard holders in good shape!

Since, they're generic - I would take the Dodger and Yanks - put them in the best holder if I wanted to sell.

This is an ugly set - worth displaying that way.
mike

Downtown1974

Mike, I think those are pretty cool. Never saw those before. Thanks for sharing!

Morgoth

The Pirates guy looks like a side profile of the Giants guy.

Tedw9

Wow, those are really ugly but really cool! I think the Cardinals emblem has the best eye appeal, but the Yankee one is the ugliest.

Thanks for posting them.

sando69

wow mike-

much like my last wife, these are SO ugly, they're lovable!
hope they hang on to you longer than she kept me...

thanks for sharing

sando69

hey mike-

i see these are "only 15c each"...
would you give me 10% off if i took them all?

your friend

Stone193

<< <i>hey mike-

i see these are "only 15c each"...
would you give me 10% off if i took them all?

your friend >>

That would be cool!

The set is no longer in the 2007 Standard Catalog - it was in last year's tho. I threw it out and had to get this info from Griffins.

The set lists for 250$ - Nm - commons at 25 each - Dodger and Yanks at 35$. Browns and Senators at 30$.

The grade is most likely based on the cardboard holder - good luck finding them Nm!

mike

perkdog

I love the Dodger Bum!

sando69

The set lists for 250$ - Nm - commons at 25 each - Dodger and Yanks at 35$. Browns and Senators at 30$.

mike-

would that not make these just about the most valuable ice-scrapers in captivity?

Stone193

<< <i>The set lists for 250$ - Nm - commons at 25 each - Dodger and Yanks at 35$. Browns and Senators at 30$.

mike-

would that not make these just about the most valuable ice-scrapers in captivity? >>

Fer sure dude!

nightcrawler

<< <i>The Tigers one looks like a brain with a face on it. >>


......................................



It sure does.

Thanks for sharing Stone.
Great stuff

Stone193

I've picked up a few more over the past few months and thought I'ld show a few:

The Indians and the Braves:



And the Reds:



For anyone new here who has never seen this set before - it's Ugly! But I like it!

Thanx for viewing
mike

Elemenopeo

Congrats on those pickups, Mike. I'm curious as to what size those are. About how big are the card backings?

rube26105

you are right mike, those are ugly -sell em before it rubs off lol-in original package that might get a ebay battle going on for some of em,i ve never seen em before!!
randy


<< The Tigers one looks like a brain with a face on it. >> -yup thats it alright!!!!!
ugly party!!!!!!!
we should have ugly parties more often

Stone193

<< <i>Congrats on those pickups, Mike. I'm curious as to what size those are. About how big are the card backings? >>

They're 5.25 x 5.25" squares - I've seen whole sets go up and they're totally affordable.

If anyone wants such ugliness - just google "1952 baseball emblem" into ebay.

The only one I need to complete the set is the Phillies.

Next to my sports related whiskey decanters - it's just about the most "odd-ball" thing I've collected.

mike

dontippet

Can anybody tell me why I won this for so little?

I won this auction

PoppaJ

<< <i>Can anybody tell me why I won this for so little?

I won this auction >>



/////////////////////

Hi Don,

Looks like you got lucky!

Those emblems normally sell in the $20-$40 range per emblem in NM condition.

Great pickup!

Congrats...

PoppaJ

dontippet

Thanks for the info. I was wondering if there was something I wasn't seeing. My maximum was higher, but I didn't think I stood a chance. I thought the last set went for well over $100.

Stone193

I decided to add this to an old oddball thread on the emblem set I completed - this one is also a charmer.

I thought the 1952 Baseball emblems were flat ugly but this tops it!

These are generally referred to as 1941 Suttle and Rittgers figures. I've been starting to find info and the net is not helping - I did find a guy who collect them - has written a catalog on them in 2000 - I may try to get a copy of the reference.

The individual who started the company is Lafayette L. Rittgers. The company is also referred to as Rittgers Novelties. The figures are dated from 1939 to 1954.

The set I picked up is in poor shape - nicely priced - the orginal set is different from later sets - and - of course - an orignal set in good shape will bring some righteous bucks.

One can order the sets with the teams of their area - I saw a set with Cubs and White Sox.

In the 50's, the uniform colors were reversed - so the batter is in white.





If I decide to collect the FB and non-sport items, I'll probably get the new edition of the book on them.

Now this is the kind of stuff ya gotta have a 'taste' fer - I like them! They look good on the shelf.

mike

BunchOBull

I think they're rather novel. I like them, thanks for sharing.

nightcrawler

<< <i>
Thanks for sharing Stone.
Great stuff >>