 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11
05-30-2012, 10:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Mike, none taken....Cobb/Cobb has always been a card that has been one way or the other for most collectors. I guess it's all where you draw the line as for the book it's labeled as a T206. This has been discussed many times etc.
I guess Dan's question is more in general terms. Said it before don't feel it's a T206 for a number of reasons but love to have one regardless. Cheers, John 
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| T206 upside down backs "should they be on the back run?" | mrvster | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 41 | 03-08-2012 01:22 PM |
| PSA T206 Back Registry set active | jtschantz | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 11-14-2011 08:12 AM |
| T206 Framed Back Reprint Sets - Framing Quote | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 21 | 12-07-2006 08:43 AM |
| Complete or near-complete N172 player sets? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 45 | 07-06-2005 07:14 PM |
| 2002 T206 Cobb w/ Bazooka back vs. T206 Cobb w/ Ty Cobb back | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 29 | 03-13-2002 05:40 PM |
Threaded Mode