What is the Junkiest of Junk Wax

bziddy

In your opinion, what is the junkiest of junk wax? I'm personally leaning towards something 1990, Donruss maybe.

Planemonkey

1991 Fleer

mygotta

I would think 1988 Donruss or 1991 Fleer. Those are my two initial thoughts.

Largentcollector

I would go with 1990-91 hoops one and two for basketball. 1990 topps baseball it's bad when the back of the card has a better design than the front. 1991 fleer and score for football. Hate to say it because I love all the errors 1990-91 pro set hockey.(must have printed a billion cases)

jeffcbay

1990 Score Baseball

stormtrooper80

1988 Topps...........always been junk.

Even when it was new, it didn't include any of the top rookies from that year like Jefferies, Grace, Alomar etc. Other than the Al Leiter photo mixup, there was never anything remotely interesting about this set.

alnavman

is the 1991 fleer the yellow cards, if so that is my winner...

totallyradd

1991 Fleer for sure. My dad used to bring me back boxes of unopened cards to rip from Sam's Club when I was a kid and occassionally would put one to the side as an "investment." Awhile back he found the box with those cards in them in his basement. 2 boxes of unopened 1991 Fleer and for some reason a box of 1990-91 and 1991-92 Upper Deck Hockey. At least there was also a box of 89 Donruss that I ripped open, that was pretty fun at least. I gave the hockey boxes to my best man and am sitting on the Fleer still. Just waiting for those to boom. Ha!

bziddy

I've been on a late 80s unopened baseball binge lately. Something got into me and I ended up with 26 rack boxes, 22 wax boxes and 1 jumbo case. After laughing at the rediculousness of 40k+ cards of (mostly/probably/likely) worthless cardboard, I was wondering how close to the Junk Wax event horizon I was actually treading.

Thankfully, no 1991F has been purchased.

ChiefsFan1st

I would of thought the popular answer would of been 1988 Donruss. That stuff was everywhere
when it come out.

fur72

<< <i>I would of thought the popular answer would of been 1988 Donruss. That stuff was everywhere
when it come out. >>





I have a rack box sitting here collecting dust. I also have 91 Skybox and 89 Hoops! Thats some real junk wax.

Edit to say: Also 87 sportflics

ReggieCleveland

At least 88 Donruss has some HOF rookies (Alomar, Glavine is in it too, right?) and some iconic cards (Mark Grace rated rookie, Greg Jefferies rookie). 1991 Fleer has nothing redeeming about it at all.

Nathaniel1960

Elite Series saves 1991 Donruss from being tied with 1991 Fleer for the worst of the worst

Estil

<< <i>I would think 1988 Donruss or 1991 Fleer. Those are my two initial thoughts. >>

handyman

My vote

JustinsShoebox

1991 Donruss imo. Worthless.

Justin

fur72

<< <i>My vote >>



Somehow I ended with like 20 packs of Michigan State. Ended up just tossing them.

ChiefsFan1st

<< <i>At least 88 Donruss has some HOF rookies (Alomar, Glavine is in it too, right?) and some iconic cards (Mark Grace rated rookie, Greg Jefferies rookie). 1991 Fleer has nothing redeeming about it at all. >>



You are right about hot rookies of the day. I was just thinking about the fact it was everywhere(in my small world) 1991 Fleer wasn't sold here in my small town. But I can remember picking up 1991 Fleer somewhere. Just reminising about the good ole days, and what I thought would be the common answer.
When I was a youngin, it was always topps baseball. I was a football guy, even in my younger days, they
didnt sell it around here.

JustinsShoebox

<< <i>At least 88 Donruss has some HOF rookies (Alomar, Glavine is in it too, right?) and some iconic cards (Mark Grace rated rookie, Greg Jefferies rookie). 1991 Fleer has nothing redeeming about it at all. >>



Right, I actually am ok with 1988 Donruss these days. Busted one of those display boxes recently. Some cards out of there do sell alright when pulled in good enough condition, not even just talking about rookies. Of course, this is mostly registry induced. Leave it to the registry to add some sense of worth to a worthless set.

Justin

mygotta

This looks like a promising box...

Almost full box of 1991 Fleer

CubsKiller99

<< <i>My vote >>



Don't see the 1989 North Carolina there. That's the one that I like.

CubsKiller99

<< <i>In your opinion, what is the junkiest of junk wax? I'm personally leaning towards something 1990, Donruss maybe. >>



1988-90 Donruss is hard to beat. A lot of folks really hate that 1990 red-border design.
1989 is pretty horrific-looking also, would have been right at home in 1969.

1990 Topps is really an acquired taste too, but there are some cards in that set that people like
despite the design.

Dboneesq

Whatever I own!!!

illinifan912

pro set hockey

saucywombat

<< <i>1991 Fleer >>



Second that motion

eagles33

1991 fleer football by far IMO.

Fergman78

1991 was not a good year for Fleer football and basketball were just as bad as baseball.

EAsports

1988 Topps is actually a nice looking set, when you put it in a binder.

Good use of color, nice (though a little boring) pictures.

CubsKiller99

<< <i>1988 Topps is actually a nice looking set, when you put it in a binder.

Good use of color, nice (though a little boring) pictures.

>>



I feel the same way about 1989 Topps. Not the flashiest but solid.

And I seem to be in a very small minority group that likes it.

Baez578

<< <i>Elite Series saves 1991 Donruss from being tied with 1991 Fleer for the worst of the worst >>



Fleer did have the wonderful "ultra" series in 1991. Oh yeah and the "ultra update"
I'm sitting on a handful of those junk cards/sets.

Speaking of junk....what about the 1990 and 1991 classic set home shopping network featured.... I'm ashamed to admit I bought the sets.

sportscardtheory

I'll say 1991 Fleer baseball and football too. No rookies really kills those sets. There is pretty much NOTHING of any value whatsoever. At least some of these other sets people are mentioning have some decent rookie cards. 1991 Fleer is a barren wasteland of ugly and worthless.

Rudedawg

I would have to go with 1991 Fleer simply because it is a double whammy. AWFUL design and one of the weakest rookie offerings ever. As for 1988 Topps, I think the design is actually really soild. If it had a few more good RC's, I think it would be more popular. The biggest downfall is that it doesn't have the Grace, Alomar or Jefferies in the base set, which 1988 Donruss does.

HeadsUp38

<< <i>

<< <i>1988 Topps is actually a nice looking set, when you put it in a binder.

Good use of color, nice (though a little boring) pictures.

>>



I feel the same way about 1989 Topps. Not the flashiest but solid.

And I seem to be in a very small minority group that likes it. >>



I've always thought the '88 and '89 Topps(and '87 for that matter) were some of the better designs Topps had done. I think collectors are turned off because they are so plentiful. In contrast, a lot of collectors are fascinated with the 1949 Leaf set. I don't know if that set would be as popular if it did not have the SPs and were as common as at least '63 Fleer. I think there is a name for the term in which if people know something is scarce, they have the itch to desire it more than something that is common.

Craig H.

CubsKiller99

I agree with that. People will pay ridiculous prices sometimes for what they consider rare, even
if it's not aesthetically pleasing. Classic hardcore collector thinking.

What I object to with Topps currently is their artificial creation of rarity with their "chase cards"
with the autos and reclics and numbered series.

Normal cards are no longer desirable, so the only way to create a market is by this kind of
manipulation. No wonder kids have for the most part opted out of sports cards and
moved on to other things. I only see 35+ guys in the card shops here, the younger
kids can't afford these packs anyway.

saucywombat

<< <i>1988 Topps is actually a nice looking set, when you put it in a binder.

Good use of color, nice (though a little boring) pictures.

>>



Ditto

I was never very impressed with these cards until I put a set into a binder. The design qualities stand out when looking at 9 cards at a time rather than one in isolation.

Estil

<< <i>1991 Donruss imo. Worthless.

Justin >>



But at least with that one the cards do look quite attractive compared to their yawner 1988 and 1990 and 1992 efforts.

mygotta

<< <i>

<< <i>1988 Topps is actually a nice looking set, when you put it in a binder.

Good use of color, nice (though a little boring) pictures.

>>



Ditto

I was never very impressed with these cards until I put a set into a binder. The design qualities stand out when looking at 9 cards at a time rather than one in isolation. >>



Maybe in 1991, Fleer should have examined a sheet before production instead of one card in isolation. The loud yellow with 2 thin black lines makes for a terrible border design, monotonous tone and every card generally looks the same. Very dull.

Rudedawg

Maybe in 1991, Fleer should have examined a sheet before production instead of one card in isolation. The loud yellow with 2 thin black lines makes for a terrible border design, monotonous tone and every card generally looks the same. Very dull


I think this is the best summary of this set I've heard. Monotonous is the most fitting description of 1991 Fleer Baseball. If there weren't an insert into that set, there would be weekly bonfires using unopened boxes of it. 1991 Fleer Football was very weak as well.

CubsKiller99

<< <i>

<< <i>1991 Donruss imo. Worthless.

Justin >>



But at least with that one the cards do look quite attractive compared to their yawner 1988 and 1990 and 1992 efforts. >>



A lot of the 1985-1992 issues were yawners. But given the variety of designs there's something there for everyone.

GB5HOF

Yet people will still buy this.....


1991 Fleer Nolan Ryan

ergoism

Personally, the 1991 Fleer Pro Vision subsets would still make busting 1991 Fleer packs somewhat enjoyable.

Rudedawg

As a buster of dozens of 1991 Fleer boxes, I can safely say that is the ONLY reason I do so Hence, my bitterness toward the color yellow.

mygotta

<< <i>Yet people will still buy this.....


1991 Fleer Nolan Ryan >>



Even in isolation its a boring card. I dont know what I would do if I was the graphic designer to give this card some pep....

ludedude

<< <i>pro set hockey >>




What's odd is because they are considered junk, nobody gets them graded. Therefore they are quite hard to find graded. Not worth anything but I need some for my player sets.

mygotta

<< <i>

<< <i>pro set hockey >>




What's odd is because they are considered junk, nobody gets them graded. Therefore they are quite hard to find graded. Not worth anything but I need some for my player sets. >>



I think cause it cost more to get one card graded than it does to buy an entire box.

gregmo32

Probably 1991 Fleer Football.
Man, was that stuff terrible.
I can think of something redeeming about almost every other set, even if it is just condition sensitivity making star PSA 10's worth chasing.

But 1991 Fleer Football, that stuff was just bad bad bad.

saucywombat

Another tragedy with 91 Fleer is that the backs are great - they have a color portrait photo in a circle ala 1983 Topps, with complete career stats, if they just would have moved that to the front that may have been on to something.

Black borders like the Pro Vision Inserts (or the All Star cards - which are great) and additional player photo on the front of the card - we might be talking an all time great instead of all time worst.