Archive
03-27-2004, 08:57 AM
Posted By: <b>dan mckee</b><p>Are the only differences on these blue print front Nadja's the 3 different teams? If that is the case, then there should only be 1 E104. The E92 Nadja's have different teams but are not split. Please be patient with me, I am new to "E" card specifics and trying to learn. Thanks Dan.
Archive
03-27-2004, 11:46 AM
Posted By: <b>petecld</b><p>Dan,<BR>Good question as there is very little separating some of these sets which I feel is due to these cards being printed by the same printer at the same time and they just needed subtle differences for each advertiser but do deserve the three different set designations. The differences are mentioned in Lew's book.<BR><BR><BR>E104-1: <BR>Fronts match T208 and D359 sets. This set deserves a separate listing because all of the cards are from one team (Philadelphia) and these say "Athletics". The blue, blocky, small caps type style matches E104-3s.<BR><BR><BR>E104-2 (Most interesting to me):<BR>For the reason mentioned in Lew's book I feel this set might be mis-classified. I understand why the ACC has this set listed the way it is since backs are blank or with Nadja ads on the backs and that would makes these "E104s" but if you go by the fronts the art and style of the type matches the E90-2 set, not the other E104 sets. If you follow fronts these should be classified as "E90-2 Nadjas". If you use the backs they are different from E104-1s and E104-3s so they deserve their own listing.<BR><BR>If anyone has a Nadja and blank backed Pittsburg player with type matching a E104-1s and E104-3s I would love to see it. It certainly would be an unique card. <BR><BR><BR>E104-3:<BR>Deserves it own because it's the only E104 style set featuring multiple teams. What differentiates E104-3 Philadelphia players from the type 1s is that these say "Philadelphia" but use the same type style as the type 1s.<BR>