View Full Version : Anyone else depressed over this?
Archive
11-27-2001, 08:07 AM
Posted By: <b>Mike Schmidt </b><p><a href="http://www.beckett.com/news" target=_new>http://www.beckett.com/news</a>/<BR><BR>If you read the article on T206, Topps is releasing a T206 set, complete with 180 current players (available in Tolstoi, Cycle or Polar Bear backs) as well as a T206 Wagner reprint with a game-used bat sliver.<BR><BR>My first reaction is sadness. Anyone out there interested in this?
Archive
11-27-2001, 08:32 AM
Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>It would be interesting if they gave away a few forgeries by mistake...
Archive
11-27-2001, 08:33 AM
Posted By: <b>HalleyGator</b><p>I don't think any of us would be interested in it ... <BR><BR>but maybe it will get more of the modern collectors interested in the vintage card market. New blood into this particular part of the hobby could be a good thing to make sure the interest grows rather than fades as some of us get old and get put out to pasture!!
Archive
11-27-2001, 08:36 AM
Posted By: <b>Jaime Leiderman</b><p>Another Low Punch for Vintage Collectors...<BR>
Archive
11-27-2001, 09:02 AM
Posted By: <b>john</b><p>I think it sounds like a great idea...might get people who might not know about these cards interested like Hal said,and also i think it would be pretty cool to get a T206 in a pack of cards....that being said,at $4 a pack i doubt ill be buying anymore than a few packs,just to see what they look like.....the only thing new that ive bought alot of in the last 8 years has been the 2001 Topps Archives set,really nice set,other than that just maybe 1 pack a week/month for the hell of it.....a bad thing that just thought of is,just think how much is going to show up on ebay under T206 search now <img src="/images/sad.gif" height=14 width=14>
Archive
11-27-2001, 10:27 AM
Posted By: <b>JMK</b><p>to their credit, it appears that the way Topps is doing this will make it difficult for someone to 'age' the card and try to sell it as original. Having relics, a 'Topps' logo prominent on card front and a totally different (modern) size for cards of players from the original T206 set will help protect the hobby.<BR><BR>Also, ebay should be ok if people are conscious of where they list their auctions and keep these out of the pre-1950 categories.<BR><BR>Joann
Archive
11-27-2001, 02:00 PM
Posted By: <b>vorthian</b><p><< My first reaction is sadness. >> <BR><BR>At least BGS won't be grading these specimens. It was very interesting to note that they STILL aren't grading T206 sized cards - a rep. told me at the Rosemont show that the "inner piece" is still delayed.
Archive
11-28-2001, 11:48 AM
Posted By: <b>Kevin Cummings</b><p>I know from a purist's point of view the reprints are anathema, but they <b>do</b> give people who might not otherwise be able to afford the the real thing the opportunity to enjoy the feel. And, as John says, it <b>does</b> expose people who heretofore have only dealt with UV-coated, foil-embossed, die-cut material to the beauty of the old material and stars. <BR><BR>I also happen to like the relic cards and the cut signatures, again, because of the opportunity they present. I have to admit to owning an Upper Deck Joe Jackson bat piece card and wouldn't mind having a Wagner bat piece card, too.<BR><BR>After our recent trip to the Baseball Hall of Fame, I showed the Jackson card to my 11 year old daughter and she was absolutely amazed that somone as poor as her father could have something so cool! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>
Archive
11-28-2001, 12:18 PM
Posted By: <b>Mike Schmidt</b><p>Kevin -- <BR><BR>I certainly see your point, and I do think it can be good for new collectors to get interested in vintage cards, as you have said.<BR><BR>However, I truly have an issue with the game-used bat card thing. How many existing game-used bats of Joe Jackson and Honus Wagner are there? Less than six for Joe Jackson, correct? Is that little slice of wood so important that it is worthwhile to destroy it into hundreds of little pieces for everyone else to have a "slab"? When you are dealing with such rare items like that, I feel that a museum is appropriate, not a baseball card. <BR><BR>If there is a sufficient supply of game-used bats (read: dozens) of a Hall of Famer, I can understand some of the lesser bats being cut up. But there, frankly, is not enough Joe Jackson bats in my mind to ever make it a reasonable thing to do.
Archive
11-28-2001, 07:51 PM
Posted By: <b>Vognar Julie</b><p>I'm glad about the reprints, and horrified at the bat slabs. 6 Joe Jackson bats and they shaved one to make slabs? RRRrrrr.Julie
Archive
11-28-2001, 08:44 PM
Posted By: <b>Kevin Cummings</b><p>...but whoever owns a relic can choose to do with it whatever they want. It's like that article on Lew Lipset's site about how Don McPherson trimmed his Old Judges so they'd fit nice and neat into the plastic sheets he stored them in. I certainly wouldn't do that, but that's just me.<BR><BR>That having been said, no one at Topps or Upper Deck or any other company that does relic pieces asked you or me what we thought. Not that they would have listened anyway. My personal opinion is that significant relics <b>all</b> belong in the Hall of Fame or should be kept intact by a single owner to be saved for posterity.<BR><BR>But since someone already went and destroyed the relic anyway, why not share in a piece of it?