View Full Version : Joe Jackson
Archive
07-23-2002, 08:22 AM
Posted By: <b>twofoolish2b</b><p>Hey everybody, I'm sure this has been talked about before and all but I'm wondering if anyone has any ideas why Joe Jackson was left out of the T206 set. Anyone know or have any ideas? Thanks.
Archive
07-23-2002, 08:50 AM
Posted By: <b>John(z28jd)</b><p>my best guess would be because he wasnt an established major leaguer at the time of these cards being produced(115 total at bats from 08-1910),although he was a good player for new orleans at the time and could have been included in the southern leaguer cards.Proof cards have been found of southern leaguers that werent distributed and theres a chance that he could have(or had and it doesnt exist anymore) a proof card
Archive
07-23-2002, 08:57 AM
Posted By: <b>Chris Stufflestreet</b><p>Perhaps Shoeless Joe never signed a consent form to feature his image in the set. It's common knowledge that Jackson was illiterate, and in those days he may not have had somebody checking his mail.<BR><BR>Before anybody points out that there wasn't supposed to have been a Honus Wagner card for lack of consent, remember that by 1909 Wagner had already established himself as a great player, but Jackson was just getting started.
Archive
07-23-2002, 10:04 AM
Posted By: <b>John(z28jd)</b><p>by not checking his mail youre also saying that he wouldnt have known other players he was teammates with had contract offers? because i know if other players are getting paid to appear on cards i would at least wonder why no one offered me a deal.....Jackson didnt play for new orleans till 1910 so maybe thats why he doesnt have a card with them as southern league cards were issued in the 350 series produced in 1910,and im sure they had the cards planned out before he had the great season down there,but still he wasnt an established major leaguer till the 1911 season,which would make more sense to ask why hes not in the t207 set,but that sets missing alot of great players anyway. I really think he just came around one year too late,but hes also not in any of the tobacco sets (or in the m116 set) issued around that time. maybe he just really liked caramel so they put him in the e90 set
Archive
07-23-2002, 12:47 PM
Posted By: <b>Chris Stufflestreet</b><p>That's why the first word I used was "perhaps" when I mad the posting. Maybe his teammates weren't too excited about takling to rookies. Perhaps they thought of him as having the intelligence of a bag of batting practice balls.<BR><BR>I think you're probably right about the timing, however. I also mentioned that by 1909, Jackson wasn't an established major leaguer.
Archive
07-23-2002, 12:59 PM
Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>I have often wondered whether/what the players received for use of their images in the T206 and other sets. Has anyone seen any consent form or player contract outling the arrangement? Seems at least one specimen would have survived. Also, did any player write in his bio an explanation of whether/how he got paid for letting a company use his image? I do not recall ever reading anything about this. Any info appreciated.<BR>Regards...................Todd
Archive
07-23-2002, 01:00 PM
Posted By: <b>RobertS</b><p>I think I pointed this out on another string, so forgive me if you've read this before, but...<BR><BR>Joe Jackson is mentioned on the back of the T207 Henry Butcher card (if memory serves correct, it says they both came up together, or something to that effect).<BR><BR>This is even more confusing -- he wasn't an established star, yet. So why wasn't he included -- like Max Carey was, who was also a promising up-and-comer?<BR><BR>Does anyoe know of other T207 cards that mention Jackson?<BR><BR>
Archive
07-23-2002, 01:01 PM
Posted By: <b>nolemmings (Todd)</b><p>oops- forgot to ID myself (EOM)
Archive
07-23-2002, 01:21 PM
Posted By: <b>John(z28jd)</b><p>Im sure someone else here has seen and might know more about it but ive seen a letter sent to neal ball,that mentioned including him in the t206 set(didnt mention t206 because it wasnt called that then) but it included something about payment.maybe david rudd knows about it,if not bother him anyway till he makes up a good story about it
Archive
07-23-2002, 01:34 PM
Posted By: <b>David</b><p>I would have told you about it, but now I'm keeping my mouth shut
Archive
07-23-2002, 01:34 PM
Posted By: <b>Chris Stufflestreet</b><p>Thanks for jogging my memory, John. I had remembered seeing that letter online and had lost the URL when my PC crashed a few months ago. Thanks to you giving Neal Ball's name, I have summoned the gods of Google and found this page with a reproduction of that letter:<BR><BR><a href="http://www.t206museum.com/page/periodical_10.html" target=_new>http://www.t206museum.com/page/periodical_10.html</a><BR><BR>
Archive
07-23-2002, 01:42 PM
Posted By: <b>Bob Lemke</b><p>A nearly contemporary (Oct. 24, 1912) article in The Sporting News reported that one of the Pittsbutgh beat writers was contracted to obtain signed player releases for an unnamed cigarette company. Said he was "paid handsomely" for the job. Wagner opted out but gave the sportswriter $50 so he wouldn't lose his commission on the deal.
Archive
07-23-2002, 01:51 PM
Posted By: <b>David</b><p>Thanks for nothing, Chris and Bob. I had leverage against John until you spilled the beans.
Archive
07-23-2002, 02:15 PM
Posted By: <b>John(z28jd)</b><p>stop lurking around the board david, and find my autographs! please <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><BR>how come no one ever wonders why jack coombs wasnt in the set when he led the league in wins in 1910 and then won 3 world series games also.Kind of makes you think,when exactly was the last series made if he wasnt included
Archive
07-26-2002, 07:32 AM
Posted By: <b>James Walker, Jr.</b><p>Here's the card back that mentions Shoeless...<BR><BR><img src="http://memory.loc.gov/pnp/bbc/1800/1880/1882br.jpg">