Is it just me or do these seem undergraded ???
 

I used to think SGC was the more consistent of the grading companies but these couple leave me scratching my head.

Thoughts ?

Just added Danny Murphy MC ??? Trimmed ??? If so not sure why it got a numerical grade or even past a 10/1

Devlin looks to have a small amount of paper loss on the back above the word "series". If it does no matter how small it's an incomplete card and deserves no more than a three in my opinion despite a nice front.

That's a valid point however it's microscopic portions of the card lol.

undergraded
 

Scott looks at least like a 3.5. Delvin's a 4.

I just purchased this "4" tonight :)

SGC will only give a 3 at best with paper loss. I had a NrMint Babe Ruth that I bought from a fellow board member that had a speck of paper loss on the right border and it got a 3.

The Scott could be a high 3 or low 4 I agree with Robert on the Devlin because of the paper loss.

If I sent those in I'd be hoping for a 4 on Devlin and a 3.5 on Scott. Nice cards no matter what the slip of paper says!

The Hoffman has a big '44' written in blue crayon on the back. That could be the reason for the downgrade.

Maybe on the Devlin SGC 40 but otherwise spot on.

Each card seems to have an issue that justifies the grade. I think all three are about right.

These cards
 

absolutely look correctly graded. They have nice eye appeal for their grades but all have issues some fairly serious which dictates their grades. I could honestly see the Devlin getting a lower grade before i could see any of the others grading higher. I wouldn't drop over if i sent the Devlin in and got a 30 or 35.

Just when I thought I had the lower grading down to scale haha. I guess I'm good at a 1-2.5 and not so good at 3 and above. Lots of homework to do. That's why I asked for everyone's help!!!

Thanks for the responsed.