Not all rookie cards feel the same...thats fer sure! I've never owned a topps MAntle RC...I imagine it'd feel a little more special than most. Whereas I used to have the 51 bowman and it didn't really have that feel...I think partially because the berk ross has similar pose. Not unique like topps. Ryan/Koosman and Seaver rookies feel special to me...but most multi player cards do not.

Interesting point about the Ryan and Seaver rookies. Over the years, I have been conflicted over both. While I still do not own either, I have recently added them to my want list. I see them as products of their era. They both scream 60s to me.

Regarding the '52 Mantle, I have accepted the fact that I will probably never own one, but that doesn't mean that I don't aspire to own one. I love its look. In fact, I love that entire set. However, with the exception of Jackie, I don't own one single card from that set. This may sound sappy, but I am a set builder who loves the look of '52 Topps, and it is just plain painful to me to own cards from that set with the knowledge that I will never be able to complete it.

I too dislike rookie cards shared with other players. I also have hated that collared shirt on the 1958 Robinson. Not crazy about the 1963 Musial either. The weird facial expression does not reflect his personality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've never been a fan of the 1939 or 1940 playball sets

1943 m p & co. R302-1 cards

I've never cared for Cracker Jacks.

The only card in either set which I care to own (from the BST). And definitely not a fan of the 1040 set..

I wholeheartedly agree with the Mantle having a certain mystique that other cards - especially modern - completely lack (1950s and up).

It's surprising many on here are stating it's a card they don't care to own when it's value dictates that it's the hands-down most desirable of all post war cards, and arguably one of if not THE most venerated card in existence (Wagner aside). It's the type of item that transcends baseball card collecting and registers as a cultural icon befitting the greatest specimens of Americana.

I think it has to do with the lore of Mantle. You had an entire generation of people who revered him as a god. He was affable, could do everything well, hell his name just screams Americana. A Son of a coal miner from the middle of nowhere that can hit the ball a country mile. Then all of those kids who grew up loving him, pass that love and those stories down to their children and so on. And as the years go on the legend increases. It doesn't surprise me that people go against the grain. Really when you think about it a 52 right now, even a PSA 1 goes for about 9-10 Grand? You can buy a bunch of different cards for that amount of money. Granted the prices seem to be going up but you could still probably buy a T206 Red Cobb and one of the Ruth's cards from 33 Goudey together, for that money.

Looks like the lost Manning brother in that photo.

1963 Pete Rose. Even though it is his rookie card, the floating heads are always so ugly. And he has to share the spotlight with 3 other guys.

'14's are thinner, 15's are on thicker stock, usually less stained as you could order a complete set that didn't come in box, the bio is flipped and in the sub text there are 176 subjects instead of 144.

Cracker Jack Collecting Cliff Notes.

The only card I will never own.
 

Mariano Rivera rookie card. I am a life long yankee fan, can't stand the card. I'm good with everything else.

to all the leaf haters, I hold those in high regard, flaws and all. Though the Jackie shot is not a great one, (though splitting hairs with the '49 Bowman), when you really dig into the set, as the first full color post war set, the prints and images are pretty great. Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio are ICONIC cards, and the technique and color blocking I would (falsely) claim paved the way for the works of Andy Warhol a decade later. So much more aesthetically pleasing than just a photo, 1953 Bowman I'm looking at you. My two cents, not worth a penny.

I think we all have certain players that are real popular but do nothing for us.

For me, its Ty Cobb and Hank Aaron, for whatever reason, their cards just don't interest me at all.

Felt the same way about my 52T mantle, however Id also add that if you can find one centered which is next to impossible, that makes the card that much more special. To hold that card in your hand and look at it, especially a centered copy is truly an incredible feeling. Also, I think the TYPE 1 52T Mantle looks better than the TYPE 2. Type one has more defined color and registration and I prefer the full surround of the yankees logo.

Mantle affable? In numerous books I've read he was nasty, moody, and usually pretty obnoxious. And that's when he was sober.

I have tried so hard to find a way to like the '33 Goudey set; and I just don't.

My favorite cards have always been from sets with a ton of consistency/simplicity.

1913/14 National Game/Polo Grounds
E98
1914/15 CJ
The '39 Play Ball's

they're all so uniform/simple, I see beauty in that.

It does help to find one centered

You can't collect it all. I really like the T206 HOFers, big name Exhibits, Colgan's, Hank Aaron cards, Assorted random semi-key's of major HOFers. Much, much rather put my money into those rather than rookies. Y'all can go for the rookies, I'll pass. Back when, someone decided that rookies were the deal, and that mentality has stuck along with huge prices, not that rare compared to other early players' cards.

That’s what I’m talking about, very nice!

Richard - I have enjoyed this thread and rather than hijack it, I will start a similar thread with a kind-of opposite subject, 'What do you consider your most Aesthetically pleasing card?'

I was referring more to the way he was projected to the general public. Not how he actually was. Maybe affable is the wrong term.

I agree with everything you stated... he's a beloved cultural icon few if any could equal. And yes, that hefty price tag could definitely get you other great marquee cards. It's expensive to own the very best. :D

Thats exactly it. Theres a reason this card carries the hefty price tag it does. Its the kind of card you sell other big cards to get this one card and hold. Its also the kind of card you regret selling.

1949 Leaf, can't stand them. Ugly and the calling them 1948's really wrecks it for me. Only key set that I refuse to build a Tiger team set for.

Especially the Robinson, Paige, and Newhouser. All 3 are hideous.

I can't say there are any cards I don't want to add to my collection. And none that I haven't wanted.

There are lots of cards that I don't want to add at the usual price....

My impression is that Mantle was a nice, polite guy except when drinking.

Obviously, he drank often.

It's the whole Mantle lovefest combined with the fact that it's his first TOPPS card. When the general public thinks of baseball cards they think of Topps, they're not going to care about Bowman.

I wonder... if Topps had included DiMaggio in their '52 set, would it have eclipsed the Mantle in terms of iconic stature?

I wouldn't wonder too much the answer is no, and it wouldn't even be close. It wouldn't even be near the iconic status of the 52 Mays.

Probably would have ended up about where Ted Williams fits into the mid '50s sets

1948 Leaf. Any of them. I don't like the skip numbering of them, the random player selection or the design of them.

Plus they're overpriced.