What If Bowman issued a '42 Play Ball Set...Sets that never were

[Phil68]

This is...kind of a pre-war thread...it's intended for creative guys and I hope it's somewhat informative...

Gum, Inc of Philadelphia produced all sorts of trading cards to offer with their Blony bubble gum. Production ceased for WW2. In addition, legal battled with a partner made production difficult along the way, as well.

So, obviously, Jacob Bowman issued sets from '48-'55 upon his return after WW2. He issued them--not as Play Ball--which was wildly successful from '39-'41--but under his name that were relatively poorly received. Most folks had no idea that Bowman WAS Philadelphia-based Gum, Inc.
Today, we adore them. However, back in 1952, the market shifted back to Topps Gum. Jacob Bowman eventually would sell to Topps in 1956.

In 2018, my company issued a 1942 Play Ball set. It's scaled back considerably from the actual '41 set. We figured war-time rations would have scaled back production quite a bit, so color was abandoned with exception to the pale flag on the reverse. But we designed them as they likely would have looked back in the spring of' 42.

Today, my company is producing a retro-set of 1952 Play Ball cards that would have gone toe-to-toe with Topps in the spring of '52. They are larger and using full color oil and crude air brush along with inconsistent color plates. The result is like the 49's & 51's had an oversized baby. Topps made a HUGE departure from their inaugural '51 issue. Dry and air-brush colorization of photos added a life-like feel and the close-ups of player's faces helped make them more popular...had Bowman made such a departure (their 52's are quite similar to their '51's--although beautiful), they may have looked like our retro-set.

In the end, Bowman would have still sold to Topps, eventually, but it's fun to think about a Play Ball set. I'm a huge collector of post-war Bowman's, and I'm having a blast with this '52 set. It is scheduled for 132 cards and will debut in March.

Finally, I enjoy when people do "cards that never were" with existing formats. I get it. But, for me, SETS that never were are my favorite.
I'd love to see everyone's original card designs. Please share them here.

[familytoad]

While I haven't acquired any of these gems (yet), I think these Banty Red cards are simply terrific. An outstanding aesthetic product!!

[Tripredacus]

TCMA released a 1942 Play Ball set in 1983.
https://www.tcdb.com/ViewSet.cfm/sid...1942-Play-Ball

[Phil68]

Originally Posted by Tripredacus

TCMA released a 1942 Play Ball set in 1983.
https://www.tcdb.com/ViewSet.cfm/sid...1942-Play-Ball

Those are...interesting. No. Ours is different. It's all original--a 54-card set...here's a scatter of the cards...
I tried like 10 times to upload a 3-card panel and it simply wouldn't work.
This forum is great, but glitches when sharing pictures is definitely a shortcoming.

[Phil68]

Here is a sample of front and back of a card..I use the EXACT same method of posting both images...one comes up fine. The York card comes up like a postage stamp no matter what I do

[rhettyeakley]

Not to be a buzzkill or anything but do you have permission to use the images of players like Ted Williams and Joe DiMaggio? The estates of many of the players in your "set" would be a bit upset at your use of their images if you didn't have permission to do so.

Also there is thought that Gum Inc actually did produce cards into 1942 and that is why some 1941 Play Ball cards can be found with and without 1941 copyrights on the first series cards, and potentially making the second series cards a 1942 production.

[Phil68]

Originally Posted by familytoad

While I haven't acquired any of these gems (yet), I think these Banty Red cards are simply terrific. An outstanding aesthetic product!!

You are so kind! Thank you!