Master Set Additions... ALL PLAYER CARDS

Bogie

OK - am I the only one that thinks some of the set requests are getting a little out of hand? We now have Rookie Card Sets of players (example Barry Sanders has 3 cards) - There are 8 of us with all three cards at PSA 10. And I have requested that they add the 1989 Detroit Lions card as a fourth. I've requested a Jerry Rice rookie card set (1 card) - that should be interesting. I can't tell if the rookie card sets are Basic or Basic & Collector types? Anyone know? Here's my latest set request: One Card Wonders - the player must have only 1 card ever made (lol). Also - since I made it to 75% on Sanders - do I get a free grading?

Now for the real thread issue: Why can't I request that "ALL" of a players cards be included in the Master Set? I have several HOF players that have over a hundered cards made after their playing years. Rice, Montana, Marino, Elway, E. Smith, Allen, Sanders, etc - Why should I have to keep track of them someplace else? THEY ARE PLAYER CARDS... My Master set is more inclusive than the registry in a lot of cases.

Anyone agree - or disagree. I can understand the top collector of a Master set saying 'no' - But imo that means they are collecting for the wrong reason. I can make cute certificates.

I am serious about this - let me know what everyone thinks - If enough of us want this - we can get it changed. If more people say 'no' - I'll keep trying (lol).

jradke4

Not sure what you mean by ALL of the players cards. For the cards to be added they first have to have one that is PSA graded. Otherwise according to the set registry people the card doesnt exist. So all cards of a player from the years he played that PSA grades can potentially be added to a Master set. I hope that helps you out. I was one of the people that requested the Favre Master set. It started out at the time of birth with all Favre Cards that PSA had graded at the minute in the set. From then on people had to request each additional card, with cards numbered less than 5 not being allowed in. (by that i mean cards serial numbered x/5 or higher).

I do tend to agree that some of the sets are quite redunant. But to each his own I have come to reason. PSA likes it because the registry has been a big boon to their sales.

Boopotts

I still haven't figured out why PSA doesn't just import a checklist from Beckett for each player, and start the Master set that way. If someone has a funky panel card or something that they need added later then whoever's in charge of the registry can do that, but why waste all this time 'adding' cards that should already be included? There's no reason (that I can see) why something like a 1997 Topps insert of one kind or another shouldn't already be in the Master set, even if a copy hasn't yet been graded (or requested to be added).

They could save everyone a ton of time if they didn't wait to add a card, and just started the set with every card that's known to exist.

jradke4

The problem is that they use the PSA spec number data base for the registry. If a card hasnt been graded yet I dont think there is a spec number in their database.

johnny1976

Hi there. My problem with the registry is with all the panels that one needs. For example I have a Johnny Bench master set going and I don't like that you have to get 1 sometimes 2 of the same cards and then the panel. For example the hostess cards. They have a hostess card, a hostess twinkees card and then the panel, all with the same picture and stats on the back. Also with the stamps and the all star game program cards. They now have the single, double and quad panels. I think the panel should be optional. I feel if I am just a player collector I don't want to have to get a panel with other peoples faces on them that I don't care about.

To the o.p. With adding so many cards that were made after the players years, I think it would be an unobtainable(spelling) goal. There are so many cards out there already that I think people would just give up because of the number of cards that they would have to get and the cost.

Just my opinion.

TheVon

I actually like that PSA won't allow cards that wer produced after a player's career ended unless it's from the following year and it includes the player's stats. Your opinion might be that I'm "collecting for the wrong reasons" since I don't care at all about a Jim Rice card from 2003. But he retired in 1989 and I don't really like cards from the 90s and later. I enjoy trying to complete the master set and I'm not doing it for a certificate. I'm doing it because I enjoyed collecting those cards before and I enjoy it now. If you expanded the checklist beyond PSA's current parameters, I would no longer be interested in pursuing a master set.

I doubt I'm alone in this. If you allowed cards after a player's career ended, I think you'd kill the set registry for vintage collectors. Do you really think that guys that spend thousands on a single vintage Mantle card are going to want to track down every lame $1 Mickey Mantle insert that Upper Deck has ever made?

jradke4

well if someone really wanted to they could either start their own collectors showcase with the post-playing year cards or request a line of ultimate sets.

i too am glad that they dont include the post playing year cards. with my Favre set probably now over 8000 (sans a few low pops) possible cards and counting i would never attmept to collect anything after he finally retires for good. i will never collect them all any. but i do like the hunt.

NickM

Football players have had nowhere near the number of tribute cards made of the biggest stars that baseball players have.

Most Mickey Mantle collectors, for example, see no need to collect the thousands of Mantle inserts recently made by Topps (Mickey Mantle Story, Mantle Home Run History with 536 different cards, etc.) or the hundreds more from Upper Deck.

It would ruin the usefulness of the Set Registry to clutter Player Sets with vast (and continually growing) numbers of cards that most of the player collectors involved don't have an interest in collecting.

Nick

K

I'd also like to add how impossible it would be to complete a set with a lot of Rare newer cards. Take for instance all the 1 of 1's on the market these days that weren't around 10 years ago. It would simply be unrealistic to acquire some of the cards. Also when one did hit the open market on say EBAY, it would go for a rediculous amount of money that would drive away average collectors who can't afford to go compete with wealthy people like a Dimitri Young for instance, and eventually ruin the hobby.

NickM

K - PSA already has a rule that cards with less than 5 produced will not be counted for registry sets.

Nick

Bogie

Thanks for the responses - I was very busy the last few days.

PSA does have a lot of sets that contain cards that have never been graded. The Marcus Allen Basic (72 cards) set lists 3 cards that have never been graded.

I view a master set as containing all cards of a player, hence the term master. Perhaps a 'Playing Years Set' should be set up for those only wanting to collect playing years.

Or, add the extra cards but don't count them in the registry totals.

Just trying to find a way to get all my cards in the registry.

MeteoriteGuy

I understand why someone might not like all the cards in a set they collect. Not sure why anyone would care or be so annoyed about a set, or in this case sets, they do not collect.

Bogie

Metior, I do not understand your post, please elaborate.

Alfiewt

No way would I want PSA to add post playing year cards to the master sets. I think the success of the registry is that it gives collectors a checklist that they can complete. I know that most master sets have not been completely filled out yet, but they will be someday. It would also be absurd for vintage players. Because of the amount of new cards that are being produced of vintage players, someone could simply grade a bunch of new cards of a player and jump ahead of a collection that took decades to put together.

That being said I think it would be great if PSA added post playing year sets of players. There are a lot of cool cards from the 60s, 70s, and 80s of great players that don't fit into the players sets because the are post playing year cards. I would love to see separate sets for these cards. I think they should make sets by decade so these cards don't get included with all the new serial numbered game used refractor cards. PSA could also add "ultimate sets" of all cards, but I think there will always be more interest in set that can be completed.

MeteoriteGuy

<< <i>Metior, I do not understand your post, please elaborate. >>



You seemed to be very concerned about the content of sets you have no desire in collecting. Why would you care if PSA had 15 different Dan Marino registry sets? If you don't like the sets....well, don't collect them. That seems pretty simple to me.

joelsabi

joelsabi

maybe its trying to get consistancy across player sets. if you see regional cards and food issues in one set and not another, how can psa determine which sets should awards and stuff.

MeteoriteGuy

<< <i>maybe its trying to get consistancy across player sets. if you see regional cards and food issues in one set and not another, how can psa determine which sets should awards and stuff. >>




Getting rid of "Basic and Collectors" sets and adding an everything set would not effect regional or food issues, or add "consistancy" (sic). Also, it is not hard to figure out who should get the yearly award.....the winning, if you wish to call that set, is the set listed at the top.

To me, complaining about the sets, with no desire to collect them, would be like me writing Topps and complaining about the subsets within hockey cards. I don't collect hockey, have no plans or desires to, which would mean I am not their market. Topps would be stupid to change because I think I know better.