1948-1955 Bowman series divisions and sheet layouts

[G1911]

Originally Posted by toppcat

Topps finalized the deal to buy Bowman on January 20, 1956 and announced it on February 18th. The effective date of the sale was April 1st and it included contracts in force, production machinery and all trademarks. They paid $200,000 and I believe it strapped them for most of the rest of the year.

I think a couple of Bowman designs went into sets Topps produced for other parties but my notes are scattered on those right now.

Do you know Mike Thomas? He's pieced together virtual sheets which just recreate the 32 player blocks but also collects miscuts he uses to ID sheet positions. He's not as active as he used to be but does seem to update his website still; he was pretty focused on grabbing miscuts back in the day. You may want to give him a shout:

https://www.footballcardgallery.com/set/55b/1955-bowman-football-cards/?cat=bowman

Thank you, that makes a lot of sense. The 1956 footballs are very close in design to the last bowman set and use a ton of the same pictures even, feels very hastily thrown together from Bowman's material, as do a lot of the 1956 Topps issues. I figured you would know the details sir. A couple Bowman designs were used for other parties; off the top of my head the 1958 Hires Root Beer cards Topps produced use one of the three 1956 Bowman Baseball prototype designs that I believe Mr. Olbermann has. I'm sure there are others I do not realize.


I posted the same OP on a football board too, where Mr. Thomas was upset that I did not privately contact him instead of sharing information publicly, and believed my counter evidence disproving Ted's theory, the 'more modern rendition of the story', was a cheap shot insult to himself because his site reposts Ted's theory for each Bowman set. I like when research is only about showing facts and not who found what.

[king11]

For the 1953 Bowman set, it looks like the card underneath the miscut of #96 Cross is #8 Averno. This could suggest that the group of cards 1-32 could be beneath the group 65-96.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by king11

For the 1953 Bowman set, it looks like the card underneath the miscut of #96 Cross is #8 Averno. This could suggest that the group of cards 1-32 could be beneath the group 65-96.

It is 100% Averno, the back lines up too with the text on Averno’s card, so 8 was printed below 96 on at least one slot on the sheet. Almost certainly 1-32 appeared below this 65-96 section at least once. Definitely a 1 series set now, not 3.

[toppcat]

Originally Posted by G1911

I posted the same OP on a football board too, where Mr. Thomas was upset that I did not privately contact him instead of sharing information publicly, and believed my counter evidence disproving Ted's theory, the 'more modern rendition of the story', was a cheap shot insult to himself because his site reposts Ted's theory for each Bowman set. I like when research is only about showing facts and not who found what.

That is unfortunate, yikes!

[JustinD]

Seems like a well thought discussion. For instance if Lansford was in the lower right hand position would we have this -

[G1911]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Seems like a well thought discussion. For instance if Lansford was in the lower right hand position would we have this -

That is a very nice find. 52 Large's narrative, which is the one most often cited alongside 1948, is definitely also wrong. I think we will also find in 1952 that the 'short printed' columns are also not as has been claimed. The POP report strongly suggests the short prints are a fantasy.

On the large size Bowman's, the 'internal rows' miscuts all suggest that they are in 32 card sequential sequences, as far as I have seen (with Bowman's 1955 baseball stratagem, possibly used in 1954 too, of replacing blocks of cards with new cards to have a 'living sheet' instead of a Topps style full replacement sheet, we may well find a counter-example, but I have not succeeded in locating such a card). I would love to see a card that does not follow that pattern.

Lansford would likely be above either #117 O'Donohue (representing "series 4"), 81 Kastan (representing "series 3"), #45 Steve Van Buren (representing "series 2"), or #9 Spencer. It is not Kastan, that card has a purple backdrop that does not match the sliver. So this Lansford looks to me like it is probably over another block of "series 1", "series 2" or "series 4".

[G1911]

And here is the #126 Lansford (supposed to be bottom row, column 5). Can see just a tiny sliver of the card below, which is not a sheet mark or line as it begins exactly where the edge of a next card would instead of intruding into the margin. I can't deduce the color, but maybe a dark red?

The options to be beneath him, if what we have seen holds consistent are
Hugh Taylor (light purple)
Tank Younger (dark red)
Jim Ringo (Yellow)
Al Carmichael (same block, so less likely - darker yellow)
Ernie Stautner (blue)


97-160 do seem to be better centered so far, I am having an issue finding miscuts in the border cards going the right direction.

[G1911]

And here is an interesting Bednarik. Bednarik is at the bottom of the 5th 32 card grouping, in the same position relatively as Lansford. The only Red card at the top of a grouping in the corresponding slot is Tank Younger, #38. This matches the red and the white glow of the Younger card.

This one seems to confirm that the 1955 Bowman's had all the series on sheets together; though I suspect that it is probably a situation like the baseball series that preceded it, some cards replacing others as time went on, with multiple layouts. That will be very difficult to prove or disprove with only miscuts.

I am going to try and find 1952/1954 examples too, but those are a more difficult design to match like this.

[G1911]

And matching Bednarik, 159 Colo above 39 Flanagan