CJ's - Do you collect either years or both?

[rainier2004]

I started on my dream set of 1915 Cracker Jack nearly 2 years ago and have made modest progress, but still lacking one of the big 5. I then decided I wanted a single 1914 in my set, any card, just for the twist and add a type...and added a 1914 Mcgraw. Now, I think I could care less if it were a 14 or 1915 as long as I need it.
I definitely cannot ever do a master set as that '14 matty is too much $$$ and maybe my favorite card of all-time, but one day maybe try to get an extended set in the aspect of one of every player, not pose, after I finish my 176 card project ie chance, etc. Does anyone else mix and match the years? Is there a master set guy out there? Is it really Barry, Rich, Marty, Mac and myself that mainly interested in this gorgeous display of cardboard? If you are not inhto the CJs I would love to hear why not.

[Cardboard Junkie]

I don't collect them. Initially I just didn't like the "mostly red" background. I do have one a "Comisky". The other sets that don't apeal to me are most B&W sets. Also I'm not a fan of blank backed issues. But I suppose most are like me and just collect what they like. I'm curious what other sets do you collect? Aloha, dave.

[Kzoo]

Initially I just didn't like the "mostly red" background.

This is what I've always loved about the set. That red background is beautiful and rich when the cards are in nice shape. Unfortunately, I only have a '14 Schalk, but would like more in the future. I also like the fact that there's a lot of 'action' shots as opposed to all the portraits in the t205 and m116 sets.

Matt

[rainier2004]

At the moment Im enthralled with the look of 292s but do own a 1. Im trying for the fan craze, n28s, 1922 e120s, 2nd set of 34 goudey, 40 play ball and 1 rookie clemente shy of my 53-56 topps run. I just started the t200s with a Det card. Not really watching the e120s and 1940 PBs cause of money issues though. I tend to not favor blank backs either. But no matter what set I get into or come back to, CJs seem to always be my favorite. I thought I was going to start a t205 set but bought some cjs...thought i was going to start a t202 set but bought a beautiful cj tinker.

[rainier2004]

I also like the fact that there's a lot of 'action' shots as opposed to all the portraits in the t205 and m116 sets.

Makes the 1914 Matty so great...

[tiger8mush]

I love the CJs! I collect the 1914s cuz they all came out of CJ boxes (except for that one pristine find) whereas the 1915s were able to get from the mail. But the 1915s are just as beautiful!

I've picked up around 35 of them over the past few years so right around 25% done but they've stayed high in price so I don't pick them up too often.

Good luck with your collection! One of my favs ...

Rob
:)

[btkpath]

Well the 1914's have been a passion of mine for the past several years and I am still trying to complete the set. It has been a wonderful journey. I am presently 120 cards into the 1914 set, so only have 24 to go.

Rob, that Cicotte has wonderful eye appeal; I am very jealous.

Thanks Steve for beginning this thread and putting the CJ's back on the "map".

I would love to hear from anyone who might have any CJ's that they are willing to sell or trade.

Barry

[FrankWakefield]

Both. I occasionally pick one up. I've sold a few, given a few away. They aren't a major focus for me. For me, either would be a difficult set to complete.

They are interesting little cards. It's interesting to feel the difference in paper thickness between the two. And they're such a neat piece of card history.

[terjung]

Since you asked the "why don't you" question...

I love the appearance of CJs, but they are just too common for my taste. It is a personal thing and I certainly don't begrudge anyone for collecting them - because they are very cool for a number of reasons. I've just decided to have a more "truly scarce" slant to my collection.

[RichR]

My goal is to have all the 1915s and the variations between the two years. May never happen though...

[tiger8mush]

I love the appearance of CJs, but they are just too common for my taste.

From a casual observer, for some reason there seems to be a number of 1914 CJs that are tougher to find than others. Except for #1 Knabe, the lower numbers - below, say, #75 - seem to easier than the higher numbers. Some of the #90s are close to impossible and if they appear for sale once a year you're lucky.

Rob
:)

[btkpath]

....there seems to be a number of 1914 CJs that are tougher to find than others. Except for #1 Knabe, the lower numbers - below, say, #75 - seem to easier than the higher numbers.


I know that population reports are characteristically inaccurate and change constantly, but the last time I ran the numbers (about a year ago), if one were to combine the totals for SGC and PSA, there are only 6 cards in the second half of the 1914 CJ set (cards #73-144) with cumulative populations of greater than 25 cards......and two of these cards are the Matthewson and the Joe Jackson!

[FrankWakefield]

Those cards of Mathewson and Jackson would be more likely to be graded...

[Bigb13]

I collect both but have mostly 14's. Rob

[obcmac]

I collect both. I much prefer the 1914's...but have many more 1915's. Being an ultra low grade collector helps a lot with these.

Mac

[Bigb13]

Yes in the 14's the Cobb, Matty and Jackson are very high in any grade when you see them. Rob

[yanks4]

Nice to see another post about CJ's..They to me are magic ...when I was young and saw them I was totally dazzled and now I've been able over the years to put together a 15 set.... But I still need a McInnis believe it or not..... There is a very nice PSA 6 on the bay but I just wont pay $400 for a $225 at most card......Almost every one of my cards have minor staining and were retrieved out of a box ...They (CJ's) are relatively common and perhaps that is why they don't get the press here?...But again so are T206's, 205's and others..... Some CJ commons though do come up very rarely and can be quite challenging.....It also seems as though winners of auction group lots rarely if ever offer cards on the BST here....

I would like to know thoughts on how many unregistered sets might be out there....also

Thanks for the CJ talk, Marty

[yanks4]

By the way Bill Chappell Has a nice group of individual cards for sale on his site......:)

[rainier2004]

By the way Bill Chappell Has a nice group of individual cards for sale on his site......:)

So who's this Bill Chappell and where is his site?

[yanks4]

Chappell Cards....... Google it!....... William always has a nice inventory of prewar

[btkpath]

One thing that I have always wondered about is whether people view the caramel staining typical in the Cracker Jack sets as charming or as an unwanted, necessary evil. Did the staining play a part in guiding one's interest in one set over the other? Obviously, due to them being available as complete sets by mail, it is easier to find cards from the '15 set in unstained, relatively pristine form.

Personally, one of the aspects of the 1914 set that drew me to it was the staining and other imperfections that conjured up thoughts of children buying boxes of Cracker Jacks, opening them, pulling the enclosed card out and collecting and enjoying the cards.

What are others' opinions?

Thanks

Barry

[rainier2004]

Personally, one of the aspects of the 1914 set that drew me to it was the staining and other imperfections that conjured up thoughts of children buying boxes of Cracker Jacks, opening them, pulling the enclosed card out and collecting and enjoying the cards.

Barry, we may have been seperated at birth as I have yet to disagree with you. I LOVE the stains, knowing they came from a kids candy and think the stains give them character. The stains didnt make me pick one set over another...the 1914 jackson, pratt and matty's prices made that decision for me.

[jbsports33]

I collect both, cannot wait for the new book! see story below

http://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/book-on-vintage-cracker-jack-cards-in-planning-stages/


Jimmy

[E93]

I have 1915 set and have considered adding the '14s that are not depicted or different poses for a master set of fronts but have not done so yet. I have other priorities at the moment, but one day maybe.
JimB

[RichR]

I don't mind slight staining as I think it adds a bit of character but heavily stained cards turn me off a wee bit. I decided to focus on the 1915 set as I thought I had a reasonable chance of completing the complete set.

[brickyardkennedy]

Since I'm a single team collector, I collect from both years.

I too, don't mind some staining. Maybe because it's "natural", due to the packaging, rather than poor handling by owners of the cards through the years.

[RichR]

Jimmy,

Thanks for linking that story about the Cracker Jack book. I had heard it was in the works but its nice to see a more official post on it! I know I'll be buying a couple of those!

[btkpath]

Jimmy, thanks for providing the heads-up regarding the upcoming CJ book. I will need to reserve a book or two as well.

[Runscott]

One thing that I have always wondered about is whether people view the caramel staining typical in the Cracker Jack sets as charming or as an unwanted, necessary evil. Did the staining play a part in guiding one's interest in one set over the other? Obviously, due to them being available as complete sets by mail, it is easier to find cards from the '15 set in unstained, relatively pristine form.

Personally, one of the aspects of the 1914 set that drew me to it was the staining and other imperfections that conjured up thoughts of children buying boxes of Cracker Jacks, opening them, pulling the enclosed card out and collecting and enjoying the cards.

What are others' opinions?

Thanks

Barry

Barry, that is such a great point you make. I love the stains because they prove the card was NOT from one of the mail-order 1915 sets. I dislike the 1915 CJ set for the same reason I dislike the Sporting Life cards: you could order them as a set. That's just too sterile for me.

Nothing like a beautiful CJ with nice corners and a few vintage caramel stains, be it '14 or '15.

[jrlebert]

I love the 1915's. As a teacher, they are a bit more affordable than the 14's, but you have the added challenge of the 32 more cards. With the red background, even collecting them in PSA 1, as I am, the cards usually still pop and have nice eye appeal. Also, something about holding a 100 year old piece of cardboard with the caramel stains on them is just pretty darn cool.

[rp12367]

I love the 1915's. As a teacher, they are a bit more affordable than the 14's, but you have the added challenge of the 32 more cards. With the red background, even collecting them in PSA 1, as I am, the cards usually still pop and have nice eye appeal. Also, something about holding a 100 year old piece of cardboard with the caramel stains on them is just pretty darn cool.

JR, That's a nice group of PSA 1' s...

[RichR]

I agree those are some really solid 1s with great eye appeal JR!

[ScottFandango]

2 very different sets...

the 1914 is simply a bear to find above 3...

the 1915 there are many above 7....

i like the stains and the RAT EATEN EDGES of the 1914's.....

[jrlebert]

JR, That's a nice group of PSA 1' s...

I agree those are some really solid 1s with great eye appeal JR!

Thanks guys! I am pretty picky when it comes to my PSA 1's... I guess beggars can be choosers sometimes.

[71buc]

Sorry for reviving an older thread. Although I have a few pre-war cards I have little knowledge of them. I'm sure that the answer that I am seeking is terribly obvious so forgive my ignorance. I own one CJ and have had it for quite awhile. How do I determine if this is a 1914 or 1915 Sam Crawford? I know that SMR is no more than reference tool and does not reflect real world value. However, the difference in the values listed between the 1914 and 1915 card is pretty significant. After reading this thread I now understand why. That being said how do I distinguish between the two years as they look the same to me? I have no desire to sell it nor do I ever plan on grading it but I would like to know what I have. The vertical lines to the left and right of the boarders are from my scanner. There are no creases on it. Any opinions on what it's value would interest me as well. Thanks in advance for any assistance or information.

[rainier2004]

Nice Crawford, and you dont have to aplogize for talking about cjs.

That is definitely a 1914. The ad on the back reads "10 million copies" versus the redemtion offer on the 1915, plus the back is oriented properly to the front versus upside down on the 1915s...if that card isnt trimmed (standard measurements are 3" x 2 1/4"), it is worth a pretty penny...Ill let the 1914 guys give a better approximation.

[btkpath]

Hi Mike,

First off, your Crawford is a great card......good color, nicely centered, no edge nicks/tears/chips. It is definitely a 1914 for the reasons that Steve already mentioned. I would imagine that it probably would grade a 3 or 4, which would come with a value in the $400-$500 range (IMHO).

There are only 143 more to go if you decide to finish off the set.

Best of luck in your collecting endeavors.

[Vintagecatcher]

I'm partial to the 1915 Cracker Jacks. I just picked up my 5th one. I like the heavier paper and the chance of having a high end one without the caramel stains. I also like the "all red " background cards better than the ones with the grass. It's also a cool set in that you can collect Federal League Players. I'm waiting to receive a nice Frank "Yip" Owens, Brooklyn Tip Tops.

Fact of the day: Did you know that Wigley Field was created for a Federal League Team?


Patrick

[T206Collector]

I would love to own a signed CJ one day -- there are a few out there. Marquard, Otis, Strunk, Rousch and Hooper are the ones I am aware of.

I have often considered collecting CJs. I am somewhat concerned about the the abundance of red, but I more often run into the same problem I have with the M116s -- a large stash of them were never put in with the caramel corn and were preserved over a great period of time in an envelope. Thus, you have quite a few sharp and clean CJs that unfortunately overshadow the caramel corned ones, in my opinion. You don't have the same distribution curve that you would expect based on condition of other contemporaneously produced sets.

Still, one day I may take the plunge on unsigned CJs. They are beautiful to behold.

[71buc]

Thanks for the information everybody. I think I will settle wth the one I have. I lack the knowledge and funds to feel comfortable enough to attempt a set. I do remember paying almost $100 for it at a show in tacoma during the early 90s. I remember because at the time it was the most I had ever spent on a card. I purchased it from mark McRae. I recall listening to him talk to other collectors and being impressed, if not a bit intimidated by his knowledge and passion for vintage cards. I almost purchased some zee-nuts after listening to him. However, the cracker jacks on his table were irresistable and this was the cheapest hall of famer he had. It remains one of my favorite cards in my own collection simply because of it's aesthetic appeal. Thanks again!

Mike