1955 Topps design is so good for all sports. Too bad it wasn't used more.

Options
BuckHunter68
BuckHunter68 Posts: 413 ✭✭✭
in Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

The format plays so well for virtually every sport. Imagine vintage hockey or football, for example, in that format! Beautiful.

"You've gotta be a man to play this game...but you'd better have a lot of little boy in you, too"--Roy Campanella

Comments

  • GroceryRackPack
    GroceryRackPack Posts: 4,182 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Oh Yeah...that 55 Johnny U...Oh yeah that's a cherry one... B)

  • BuckHunter68
    BuckHunter68 Posts: 413 ✭✭✭
    Options

    Even basketball...of course the players are so tall so the images can be skinny...

    "You've gotta be a man to play this game...but you'd better have a lot of little boy in you, too"--Roy Campanella

  • Nathaniel1960
    Nathaniel1960 Posts: 2,341 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Early release 1955 Topps Davy Crockett would be cool in that format.

    Kiss me once, shame on you.
    Kiss me twice.....let's party.
  • mintonlypls
    mintonlypls Posts: 2,908 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2, 2023 7:22PM
    Options

    The 1955 Topps baseball design is one of my six (6) favorite baseball card designs. The other five (5) are 1957, 1963, 1965, and 1967 Topps baseball and 1953 Bowman Color baseball.

    mint_only_pls
  • Cakes
    Cakes Posts: 3,741 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @mintonlypls said:
    The 1955 Topps baseball design is one of my six (6) favorite baseball card designs. The other five (5) are 1957, 1963, 1965, and 1967 Topps baseball and 1953 Bowman baseball.

    I prefer 55. How can you possibly put 57 in there?

    Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.

    Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
  • mintonlypls
    mintonlypls Posts: 2,908 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I like a clean look…less is more as far as graphic design on a card for me. Thus…I like the 1953 Bowman Color, 1957 Topps and 1967 Topps.

    mint_only_pls
  • BuckHunter68
    BuckHunter68 Posts: 413 ✭✭✭
    Options

    I prefer 55. How can you possibly put 57 in there?

    I think a lot of people love '57. It's probably due to the fact they're photo's and have a clean format... (judging by the others on his list, Mintonlypls is actually very consistent. This is how you figure what our friends like.
    I do like how the '57 set was primarily photographed in the Polo Grounds, Ebbets Field and Yankee Stadium. These represented the center of the baseball Universe in that decade.

    "You've gotta be a man to play this game...but you'd better have a lot of little boy in you, too"--Roy Campanella

  • addicted2ebay
    addicted2ebay Posts: 2,107 ✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Super cool, 55 is my favorite vintage year. It was the peak Americana era of James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, Mickey Mantle ect.. They called it happy days for a reason.

  • BuckHunter68
    BuckHunter68 Posts: 413 ✭✭✭
    Options

    @daltex said:
    Sorry. Your mock-ups do nothing for me. I think the '54 hockey is far more attractive:

    INCOMING! Not sure what that shot's about...but...very nice hockey there! Gorgeous set.

    @addicted2ebay said:
    Super cool, 55 is my favorite vintage year. It was the peak Americana era of James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, Mickey Mantle ect.. They called it happy days for a reason.

    Yeah, I get that completely. It's like you say...the "peak"
    Some pret-ty nice cars came along about that time, too Lol

    "You've gotta be a man to play this game...but you'd better have a lot of little boy in you, too"--Roy Campanella

  • georgebailey2
    georgebailey2 Posts: 1,112 ✭✭✭
    Options

    Well, this thread explains the Henri Richard in the hockey card thread. Although, I am not sure why you would have posted that there nor why you wouldn't have responded to the homemade question. It does look nice.

    The 54-55 hockey is the best design ever. The 55 baseball design used above would have worked nicely for the missing 55-56 and, likewise, the 56 baseball design would have made a nice 56-57.

  • Cakes
    Cakes Posts: 3,741 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 3, 2023 7:51AM
    Options

    @BuckHunter68 said:

    I prefer 55. How can you possibly put 57 in there?

    I think a lot of people love '57. It's probably due to the fact they're photo's and have a clean format... (judging by the others on his list, Mintonlypls is actually very consistent. This is how you figure what our friends like.
    I do like how the '57 set was primarily photographed in the Polo Grounds, Ebbets Field and Yankee Stadium. These represented the center of the baseball Universe in that decade.

    Okay, that makes sense. IMHO the 57's always seemed dark and dreary to me. I guess I prefer more color and I really like the hand drawn stuff.

    Edited to add, Buck, I love the artwork/photoshop. Now I understand why the Basketball guys needed Tallboys because those legs on Wilt go on for miles.

    Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.

    Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
  • BuckHunter68
    BuckHunter68 Posts: 413 ✭✭✭
    Options

    Edited to add, Buck, I love the artwork/photoshop. Now I understand why the Basketball guys needed Tallboys because those legs on Wilt go on for miles.

    Ha! They sure do! I wish there were REALLY pretty tall boys around for basketball.

    "You've gotta be a man to play this game...but you'd better have a lot of little boy in you, too"--Roy Campanella

  • BuckHunter68
    BuckHunter68 Posts: 413 ✭✭✭
    Options

    @georgebailey2 said:
    Well, this thread explains the Henri Richard in the hockey card thread. Although, I am not sure why you would have posted that there nor why you wouldn't have responded to the homemade question. It does look nice.

    The 54-55 hockey is the best design ever. The 55 baseball design used above would have worked nicely for the missing 55-56 and, likewise, the 56 baseball design would have made a nice 56-57.

    Not sure what to say. I have not seen the question or else I would certainly try my best to answer it. Which thread? Sorry 'bout that. I DID make a Richard card some time ago. Was it a '61?

    "You've gotta be a man to play this game...but you'd better have a lot of little boy in you, too"--Roy Campanella

  • georgebailey2
    georgebailey2 Posts: 1,112 ✭✭✭
    Options

    @BuckHunter68 said:

    @georgebailey2 said:
    Well, this thread explains the Henri Richard in the hockey card thread. Although, I am not sure why you would have posted that there nor why you wouldn't have responded to the homemade question. It does look nice.

    The 54-55 hockey is the best design ever. The 55 baseball design used above would have worked nicely for the missing 55-56 and, likewise, the 56 baseball design would have made a nice 56-57.

    Not sure what to say. I have not seen the question or else I would certainly try my best to answer it. Which thread? Sorry 'bout that. I DID make a Richard card some time ago. Was it a '61?

    You found it. It was the 57-58 Topps mock-up.

  • daltex
    daltex Posts: 3,486 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @BuckHunter68 said:

    Edited to add, Buck, I love the artwork/photoshop. Now I understand why the Basketball guys needed Tallboys because those legs on Wilt go on for miles.

    Ha! They sure do! I wish there were REALLY pretty tall boys around for basketball.

    Not sure if really modifies "pretty" or "tall", but if it's the latter you might look at the ruler set. I don't remember more than that but will look if you're interested. Otherwise, for pretty I think '76 might be the best you could do. '69, '70, and '65 football all seem really plain.

Categories