Posted By:
JayLeon--You raise an interesting point that, if you don't mind, I would like to pursue. If thickness is a determinant of whether something is a card then it should be noted that the M101-1s are closer in thickness to an N167 than an N167 is to an N172. Personally, I don't think thickness or rigidity can be part of the definition. If something is too thin to be a card can something else be too thick to be a card? I think the definition of a card might be based on size, method of distribution, and purpose for its issuance. Should a store display piece be a card? If not, is a Boston Garter a card? If yes, I have seen large cardboard beer signs in the local liquor store with players pictures on them. Are these cards? My bank used to give out calendars which were the size of Topps cards with Derek Jeter's picture on one side. Are these cards? If not, why are schedules with player's pictures on one side cards? Don't get me wrong on this; I'm not trying to convince anyone that M101-1s are cards. I love them as collectibles because they represent the earliest representations of many players and because they have neat bios on the back. Whether they are called cards or not will not change my feeling about them one iota.