When Did RC Become Most Important?

[HistoricNewspapers]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

It was CPU. It was all the rage around 1981-82 when I got out of the hobby as a teen and when I went back into my LCS several years later and asked for one, the owner chuckled and asked where I'd been, then handed me a Beckett magazine.

The RC thing really started to matter in the early 1980s due to the publications pushing it. Before that, RCs were usually multi-player cards and were considered less desirable for that reason. By the mid-1980s the RC thing was in full bloom, and that run of Ripken, Gwynn, Boggs, Sandberg, Mattingly and several others who faded away (1984 Donruss Joe Carter anyone?) reached its apex in 1989 with Griffey and Upper Deck. Those things traded like penny stocks, in bricks. I knew weekend warriors who went all-in early and grossed thousands of dollars a day flipping them. Then we got junk wax...

The biggest RC of them all was Michael Jordan. I remember walking past an entire table of 1986 Fleer around 1987 or so and derisively describing it as crap.

The ironic thing is that the 1986 fleer Jordan is his third year card. All one had to do back then is look at the back of his card and see he has two years worth of stats on the card. Then look at the Star Company cards and one had his college stats and the next year had his NBA rookie stats...then the third year Fleer arrived.

The Star Company cards were also much better sets representing more players from each team.

Imagine how many young people in the 1980's and thought that baseball cards were only made in 1909/11 with T206, 1933, and then 1948. Then they got the year wrong for 1949 Leaf and that stuck too. There were probably people that figured there was nothing in-between those years.

I would say that greatly suppressed the prices of any card not listed in the Beckett Monthly and grossly inflated the ones that were.

The astute collectors knew better of course.

As for Ruth, how on earth could the 1921-1922 Caramel sets not be included? Probably because the people making the decisions to decide RC's didn't have any, or as many, as the more common cards...

[D. Bergin]

I think people forget this, but for the longest time a Rookie card designation was only considered if the card in question was issued in a traditional gum or wax wrapper type "pack", and had a widely accepted distribution model.

Also, oddball sized stuff was not considered (ie, Exhibits, Goudey Premiums, etc.).

Nobody even guessed what the Rookie cards of tobacco era guys were.

Even in the 80's when all those traded sets came out. Darryl Strawberry's Rookie card was 1984, Roger Clemens, Kirby Puckett and Dwight Goodens Rookie cards were in 1985.

The Raines and Ripken traded set cards, may as well have been 2nd year cards of those players.

The earlier "Traded" cards were considered pretty neat, but mostly a novelty if you couldn't pull it from a pack at a convenience store.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by HistoricNewspapers

The ironic thing is that the 1986 fleer Jordan is his third year card. All one had to do back then is look at the back of his card and see he has two years worth of stats on the card. Then look at the Star Company cards and one had his college stats and the next year had his NBA rookie stats...then the third year Fleer arrived.

The Star Company cards were also much better sets representing more players from each team.

The Star Company cards were distributed very poorly. They were considered a novelty back then because there were not sold in Wax Packs. They were essentially sold like Minor League team sets at the time. There were like 10 hobby dealers in the entire country that controlled the entire press run.

The Fleer cards were considered the first nationally and traditionally distributed basketball set since the early 80's Topps sets.

That's not even going into the serious questions about Star Co. repros and possible multiple uses of the printing plates, or if anybody really has a great handle on telling the 1st printing stuff from the later printing stuff.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

The earlier "Traded" cards were considered pretty neat, but mostly a novelty if you couldn't pull it from a pack at a convenience store.

.....and if you remember in the late 80's, Topps and other companies began to combat this perception by finally beginning to issue Traded and end of year 2nd Series releases into Wax Box product, across all the different mainstream sports releases.

[ullmandds]

I was into collecting pretty hardcore in the late 70's-early 80's. As long as I can remember 1st year cards were coveted.

[HistoricNewspapers]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

The Star Company cards were distributed very poorly. They were considered a novelty back then because there were not sold in Wax Packs. They were essentially sold like Minor League team sets at the time. There were like 10 hobby dealers in the entire country that controlled the entire press run.

The Fleer cards were considered the first nationally and traditionally distributed basketball set since the early 80's Topps sets.

That's not even going into the serious questions about Star Co. repros and possible multiple uses of the printing plates, or if anybody really has a great handle on telling the 1st printing stuff from the later printing stuff.

Still were a licensed card made two years prior to Fleer. If it isn't a card, then what is it? Doesn't matter if sold in sets already or packs. They are still licensed cards.

I was buying them within the year they came out so they were definitely printed in that year listed.

As for printing more of them at a later year, that is a different story of which I don't know fact from fiction on that.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by HistoricNewspapers

Still were a licensed card made two years prior to Fleer. If it isn't a card, then what is it? Doesn't matter if sold in sets already or packs. They are still licensed cards.

I was buying them within the year they came out so they were definitely printed in that year listed.

As for printing more of them at a later year, that is a different story of which I don't know fact from fiction on that.

I'm not arguing your logic, just arguing why the Fleer cards of all those players were accepted as Rookie Cards all those years ago...and why they still have cache today.

For the record, though I handled plenty back then when they were barely worth anything, I don't have any Fleer or Star basketball today, so I don't exactly have a stake in the game.

I was always in the earlier the better crowd. I liked minor league sets and minor league cards to. Pre-Rookie vintage photos are one of my favorite things in the world. The general card buying public though....not so much.

[HistoricNewspapers]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

I'm not arguing your logic, just arguing why the Fleer cards of all those players were accepted as Rookie Cards all those years ago...and why they still have cache today.

For the record, though I handled plenty back then when they were barely worth anything, I don't have any Fleer or Star basketball today, so I don't exactly have a stake in the game.

I was always in the earlier the better crowd. I liked minor league sets and minor league cards to. Pre-Rookie vintage photos are one of my favorite things in the world. The general card buying public though....not so much.

I don't have any more of them either.

Some of the minor league cards have really increased in value though. Greg Maddux has an expensive one worth more than any of his MLB cards(condition sensitivity aside). Ripken has a rare minor league card worth a bunch too.

I always thought that if someone got excited over a rookie card, then they should be really excited of that same player's minor league card from a few years prior.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by HistoricNewspapers

The ironic thing is that the 1986 fleer Jordan is his third year card. All one had to do back then is look at the back of his card and see he has two years worth of stats on the card. Then look at the Star Company cards and one had his college stats and the next year had his NBA rookie stats...then the third year Fleer arrived.

The Star Company cards were also much better sets representing more players from each team.

Imagine how many young people in the 1980's and thought that baseball cards were only made in 1909/11 with T206, 1933, and then 1948. Then they got the year wrong for 1949 Leaf and that stuck too. There were probably people that figured there was nothing in-between those years.

I would say that greatly suppressed the prices of any card not listed in the Beckett Monthly and grossly inflated the ones that were.

The astute collectors knew better of course.

As for Ruth, how on earth could the 1921-1922 Caramel sets not be included? Probably because the people making the decisions to decide RC's didn't have any, or as many, as the more common cards...

The 1969 Topps Reggie Jackson has two years of MLB stats on the back. Is it no longer a rookie card?

The hobby adopted the definition of a rookie card to be inclusive. They knew that if the hobby was to grow and survive, a player's best card had to be accessable to everyone, not just to dealers and wealthy adults. That is why Jackie Robinson's RCs are 1949 Leaf and Bowman and Michael Jordan's RC is 1986 Fleer. It doesn't stop you from collecting earlier cards.

The hobby is no different today. Julio Rodriguez's RCs are in the 2022 products. It doesn't matter that he had a 2021 Bowman's Best card.

[bcbgcbrcb]

My indoctrination to the RC thing came in late 1981. One of my elementary school buddies was at my house and we were talking trade for 1981 Topps baseball cards. I needed 3 more commons to complete my set and my friend had all of them. When I asked what he wanted in trade for them, he inquired if I had any of the Los Angeles Dodgers Future Stars cards. I replied that I had three extras of that one and he stated that he would trade the last three cards that I needed for my set in exchange for the 3 Dodgers FS cards. Afterwards, I wondered to myself why someone would want 3 of the same card but I didn't really care, I had just completed my season long journey of putting together a complete 1981 Topps baseball set.

Of course, after eventually looking up that Dodgers FS card in the price guide and seeing that they sold for $3 each at the time as Fernando Valenzuela's rookie card, I quickly realized that there was tremendous value in "Rookie Cards". I caught on pretty quickly though and by early 1982, I was buying unopened rack and cello packs with Cal Ripken Jr., Kent Hrbek, Johnny Ray, etc. on top and quickly became a major player in the rookie card investing game from there.

[HistoricNewspapers]

Originally Posted by rats60

The 1969 Topps Reggie Jackson has two years of MLB stats on the back. Is it no longer a rookie card?

The hobby adopted the definition of a rookie card to be inclusive. They knew that if the hobby was to grow and survive, a player's best card had to be accessable to everyone, not just to dealers and wealthy adults. That is why Jackie Robinson's RCs are 1949 Leaf and Bowman and Michael Jordan's RC is 1986 Fleer. It doesn't stop you from collecting earlier cards.

The hobby is no different today. Julio Rodriguez's RCs are in the 2022 products. It doesn't matter that he had a 2021 Bowman's Best card.

Jackson's card would most certainly not be a rookie card if he had cards in each of the two year's prior like Jackie Robinson or Michael Jordan did.

If you hold up a 1986 Fleer Jordan and say this is his rookie card....then what the heck are the two cards made two years prior? So they aren't cards? If they are cards and pre-date another card, then it seems awfully foolish to still cling to the third year card as a rookie card. Well, either foolish, or done by design to arbitrarily bump its value. You can still collect the third year card. It just isn't a rookie card, regardless of what the arbitrary 'rules' state.

[Dead-Ball-Hitter]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

The Star Company cards were distributed very poorly. They were considered a novelty back then because there were not sold in Wax Packs. They were essentially sold like Minor League team sets at the time. There were like 10 hobby dealers in the entire country that controlled the entire press run.

The Fleer cards were considered the first nationally and traditionally distributed basketball set since the early 80's Topps sets.

That's not even going into the serious questions about Star Co. repros and possible multiple uses of the printing plates, or if anybody really has a great handle on telling the 1st printing stuff from the later printing stuff.

Nice thought, but perhaps not entirely accurate. There may have been a handful, even "10", so-called master distributors, basically meaning they ordered large numbers of sets and sold directly to other dealers, but the fact remains, if you went to a card shop that carried basketball cards (some had mainly baseball), or you went to decent card shows, and you wanted new cards of NBA players in the mid-80s, you bought the Star cards.

Granted, there weren't a ton of people interested in basketball cards back then, but those of us that were sought out the run of Star cards. These were the nationally available, licensed cards. Many agree that the distribution method, i.e. mystery pack vs. team bag, is irrelevant. Its that simple for me.

Buy the latest October, 2022 Beckett basketball and you will have all the info you need on Star production. Here's a picture, I recommend it.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by HistoricNewspapers

Jackson's card would most certainly not be a rookie card if he had cards in each of the two year's prior like Jackie Robinson or Michael Jordan did.

If you hold up a 1986 Fleer Jordan and say this is his rookie card....then what the heck are the two cards made two years prior? So they aren't cards? If they are cards and pre-date another card, then it seems awfully foolish to still cling to the third year card as a rookie card. Well, either foolish, or done by design to arbitrarily bump its value. You can still collect the third year card. It just isn't a rookie card, regardless of what the arbitrary 'rules' state.

The 1985 Star is an XRC. The 1986 Star is nothing. The 1986 Fleer is a RC. You may think it is foolish, but the hobby does not.

[sreader3]

Originally Posted by ncinin

Rookie Cards may have been a thing in other areas of the country but I never heard of a premium for a rookie card or the importance of a rookie card until 1981.

Tim Raines and Fernando Valenzuela were sought after and I began hearing the importance of a rookie card.

This is how I remember it. Fernando and Raines in 1981. They would sell for $3-5 each when you could get the whole set for $15-20. The card shop in my area (an L.A. suburb) would advertise discounted Fleer sets with “No Nando.”

[HistoricNewspapers]

Originally Posted by rats60

The 1969 Topps Reggie Jackson has two years of MLB stats on the back. Is it no longer a rookie card?

The hobby adopted the definition of a rookie card to be inclusive. They knew that if the hobby was to grow and survive, a player's best card had to be accessable to everyone, not just to dealers and wealthy adults. That is why Jackie Robinson's RCs are 1949 Leaf and Bowman and Michael Jordan's RC is 1986 Fleer. It doesn't stop you from collecting earlier cards.

The hobby is no different today. Julio Rodriguez's RCs are in the 2022 products. It doesn't matter that he had a 2021 Bowman's Best card.

That sure looks like the definition of manipulation. At best, it is an artificial designation. A foolish definition for certain.

Robinson and Jordan third year cards...are not rookie cards.

XRC lol....still says it is a rookie card, just an extra one...and two years earlier.

[midwaylandscaping]

Fun thread. I dabbled with card collecting from 1978-82 before the deep dive in 1983/84.

** Fernando Valenzuela 1981 RC's are the ones I think of first as being sought after. Dale Murphy RC's had a strong following in my area also in 82-83 (S.C)

** One local dealer was a Star Co. seller. Spring of '86 he had quantity of the bagged team & all star sets 83-86. I had no interest, naturally, I needed Dan Paqua 85 Donruss rookies

Late Spring / early Summer of 1987 Fleer basketball wax boxes were readily available in the Roses Dept store in Boone NC for some ridiculous price of 7.99 or that range. Of course I said nah, I need Greenwell rc's not worthless basketball

Ahh, for a time machine

[Leon]

Originally Posted by G1911

Beckett claimed, in writing, that the Goudey was a rookie for years. It’s not a jest.

+1. Not a good moment for them on that one. It made a lot of inexperienced collectors have the wrong information, and then tout it!
.

[Griffins]

I was active in shows, conventions, mail order auctions, etc from '72 to '76, and it was not a thing. Got a table at the first national in '80 to sell off my collection and it was an obsession by then, led by the '75 Rice rookie. I had it has part of 100 card common lots, and got so many requests I pulled it and sold it solo.
So I"m guessing somewhere between '76 and '79.

[Yoda]

While I hold the '51 Bowman Mantle and E102 Cobb, which I believe to be his true RC not PC, my favorite is a PSA 8 of Juan Marichel with a 10 signature.
Juan's signature is in fountain pen ink and just flows unlike the hen scratchings one sees now, especially modern basketball stars. How about others?

[HistoricNewspapers]

Originally Posted by Griffins

I was active in shows, conventions, mail order auctions, etc from '72 to '76, and it was not a thing. Got a table at the first national in '80 to sell off my collection and it was an obsession by then, led by the '75 Rice rookie. I had it has part of 100 card common lots, and got so many requests I pulled it and sold it solo.
So I"m guessing somewhere between '76 and '79.

Fred Lynn around that time too. I always remembered Lynn being one of the earliest chase rookie cards since he won MVP his rookie year.

[quinnsryche]

Being from Chicago originally, my first taste of RC mania was the 1983 Topps Ron Kittle. Tony Gwynn was pretty hot too. Couldn't keep them in stock in my dad's store. After that was the 1984 Fleer updates of Clemens and Gooden. I will say though, the Rose rookie was ALWAYS at the top of most people's list as a gotta have but I don't know exactly when that started.

[Bridwell]

I remember going to the big annual show in the Detroit area. I went every year from 1971 to 1978. It was about 1976, when a few dealers started promoting rookie cards as being worth double or triple the price. It was a gimmick but it gradually caught on. By the mid 1980's it was all the rage.

In 1971, most dealers had about the same price for commons as for star cards, believe it or not. By 1973, the stars were being marked up to maybe double the price of a common. Rookie cards weren't any higher than any other card of the great players.

I still chuckle when dealers call a Cy Young T206 his "rookie card". He was 42 years old and had won almost 500 games by that time!