Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich Klein
One correction here, Topps and Upper Deck both issued cards from 2006 through 2009, Topps has had the BB Card monopoly since 2010.
Rich
|
Yep. 2010 would be the topps line. I think 2006 is the "official rookie logo" line.. It's one of the main reasons I would probably look at the "pre-rookie/draft pick" craze as a more important cutoff in the early 90's, than inserts.
Although, whether you're looking at inserts or draft picks, we're looking at pretty much a two year window. 1990-1991. 1990 for inserts due to the Reggie Heroes set. And I also feel that both were a direct result of the companies trying to recreate the excitement of the '89 UD Griffey..
The only reason I say 1991 for draft picks rookies, would be the Classic 4 sport set. It might've been the first draft pick set that was pack available. Although 1992 Bowman might be a better set to target for a cutoff, because it was both a MLB release, and solely baseball...
I'd look at 2006 as a more important cutoff that 2010. Partially due to the "rookie logo", and partially due to it being the major point of MLB stepping in and trying to control production. Rookies seem more important because it's the one thing that MLB really addressed to make a change. I don't recall them really taking any steps towards addressing inserts. That's why I tend to lean towards the rookie angle as a breakoff in the 1990s as opposed to inserts. I'll take this quote off of the Donruss wiki page
"In the late summer of 2005, Major League Baseball created new license criteria for cardmakers in response to collectors' complaints that: 1) the market had become too fragmented and confusing; and 2) rookie cards were becoming too scarce, with diminished importance due to the race between makers to feature unknown players first. MLB chose to renew only its licenses with Topps and Upper Deck, tacitly sealing the fate of Donruss and Fleer. The last baseball product shipped by the company was the third series of the Playoff-branded Prime Cuts memorabilia cards."
This is really the first year where collectors now had to pick a side. Do we view the MLB "rookie logo" cards as a rookie, or a player's first card? I've always leaned towards first card(at least in this era).
Prior to this point, we still had all these Just sets, and other assorted draft pick sets. BUT they weren't that big of a deal because(for the most part) most of those players still had MLB licensed cards in those same years... The "rookie logo" change really forced us to give a harder look at the relevance of the "pre-rookie" type sets.. Including Bowman rookies, which from this point on were lumped into that category...