Iconic card you Want but you don't like the set/image.

[Rookiemonster]

So what do you do here guys ?

Do you purchase the card just because?

Do you say, I think I'll get the second year card?

Do you just move on?

And I guess you could also ask the reverse question.

How about a set you love but a valuable card that you don't like in the set/image.

The first card that come to my mind is 1948 Bowman phil rizzuto rc .
This is a iconic card I don't really care for . I even like the 1949 Bowman Berra over the 1948 Bowman Yogi Berra .

[swarmee]

I figured you were talking about the 1970 Topps Thurman Munson...

[Bigdaddy]

I figured you were talking about the 1963 Pete Rose.

One of my fav's growing up and I have all his cards except the '63.

[Johnny630]

1972 Topps Clemente. My least favorite set of the post war era.

[Zach Wheat]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

I figured you were talking about the 1963 Pete Rose.......

+1

[rats60]

1952 Topps Mickey Mantle. The ugliest card ever made by Topps in my opinion.

[DBesse27]

Originally Posted by rats60

1952 Topps Mickey Mantle. The ugliest card ever made by Topps in my opinion.

I don't care for 52 topps at all.

[geosluggo]

The '73 Schmidt rookie comes to mind. Not a bad card itself, but part of my least-favorite set. I was 8 years old when the 1973 cards came out and remember being hugely disappointed in them after the exuberant 1972 set. My feelings toward the '73 set, and 1973 in general, were largely influenced by the death of my favorite player, Roberto Clemente, on New Year's Eve and the first-series card of him that didn't acknowledge his passing (I was too young to appreciate printing schedules; but couldn't they have put out a commemorative card in the later series?). Years later, I still think the 1973 design was poor and many of the action photos were terrible. To me, the decline from 787 cards in 1972 to 660 cards in 1973 fits right in with Watergate, the tail end of Vietnam, gas shortages, avocado-colored appliances and other early-1970s blights.

[bobsbbcards]

Realizing I might be pummeled for the following opinion, but here goes. I would have loved to call the 53 Bowman Color set complete without buying the Pee Wee Reese card. I hate it.

[Neal]

Originally Posted by bobsbbcards

Realizing I might be pummeled for the following opinion, but here goes. I would have loved to call the 53 Bowman Color set complete without buying the Pee Wee Reese card. I hate it.

LOL

Same here, and one of the biggest reasons I stopped working on it - I knew that I would have to not only buy that card, but also the horrible Berra, Bauer, Mantle card as well.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by bobsbbcards

Realizing I might be pummeled for the following opinion, but here goes. I would have loved to call the 53 Bowman Color set complete without buying the Pee Wee Reese card. I hate it.

Bob!

...if I didn't owe you forever for giving me the card I was looking 10 years for.

lol.

[spaidly]

Originally Posted by geosluggo

The '73 Schmidt rookie comes to mind. Not a bad card itself, but part of my least-favorite set. I was 8 years old when the 1973 cards came out and remember being hugely disappointed in them after the exuberant 1972 set. My feelings toward the '73 set, and 1973 in general, were largely influenced by the death of my favorite player, Roberto Clemente, on New Year's Eve and the first-series card of him that didn't acknowledge his passing (I was too young to appreciate printing schedules; but couldn't they have put out a commemorative card in the later series?). Years later, I still think the 1973 design was poor and many of the action photos were terrible. To me, the decline from 787 cards in 1972 to 660 cards in 1973 fits right in with Watergate, the tail end of Vietnam, gas shortages, avocado-colored appliances and other early-1970s blights.

I feel the same way about the 1973 set.Steve Garvey was my hometown hero and that year's card is not only the worst Garvey of them all card but the worst in the entire 1973 set. Maybe one of the worst cards of all time. Thankfully, his 1974 card made up for it. The photo on that card is epic.

[mintonlyplz]

Originally Posted by spaidly

I feel the same way about the 1973 set.Steve Garvey was my hometown hero and that year's card is not only the worst Garvey of them all card but the worst in the entire 1973 set. Maybe one of the worst cards of all time. Thankfully, his 1974 card made up for it. The photo on that card is epic.

I believe the Garvey card was suppose to be the Wes Parker card ; )....

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by DBesse27

I don't care for 52 topps at all.

Yep, not a fan of the rushed cut and paste look and poorly colorized photos. I only have the Zernial because I like the pic.

To each their own.

[jchcollins]

1957 Topps. Yes, the famous first "genuine color" Topps set, and it has a few great cards, but on the whole I think the photography is dull and listless, and I can't imagine anything much more boring than trying to put a '57 Topps set together. Don't get me wrong, if anyone wants to give me the Mantle or Ted Williams (the #407 Mantle / Berra is really nice too...) I'd jump at the chance, but on the whole I'm just not a fan of the set. Also annoying that some cards when printed with the right colors can be beautiful, but the same card often turned out dull and ugly because of differences in (the ink? The cardboard? Something?) the printing process. I'll go out on a limb even to say I like '58 Topps more than '57 because on the whole, they are more colorful.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk