NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. When you click on links to eBay on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
T206s on eBay
Babe Ruth Cards on eBay
t206 Ty Cobb on eBay
Ty Cobb Cards on eBay
Lou Gehrig Cards on eBay
Baseball T201-T217 on eBay
Baseball E90-E107 on eBay
T205 Cards on eBay
Baseball Postcards on eBay
Goudey Cards on eBay
Baseball Memorabilia on eBay
Baseball Exhibit Cards on eBay
Baseball Strip Cards on eBay
Baseball Baking Cards on eBay
Sporting News Cards on eBay
Play Ball Cards on eBay
Joe DiMaggio Cards on eBay
Mickey Mantle Cards on eBay
Bowman 1951-1955 on eBay
Football Cards on eBay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-27-2017, 07:42 PM
Rookiemonster's Avatar
Rookiemonster Rookiemonster is offline
Dustin
Dustin Mar.ino
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,451
Default Iconic card you Want but you don't like the set/image.

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 .
__________________
Just a collector that likes to talk and read about the Hobby. 🤓👍🏼
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-27-2017, 08:26 PM
swarmee's Avatar
swarmee swarmee is offline
J0hn Raff3rty
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Niceville FL
Posts: 7,117
Default

I figured you were talking about the 1970 Topps Thurman Munson...
__________________
--
PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head
PSA: Regularly Get Cheated
BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern
SGC: Closed auto authentication business
JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC
Oh, what a difference a year makes.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-27-2017, 11:23 PM
Bigdaddy's Avatar
Bigdaddy Bigdaddy is offline
+0m J()rd@N
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: VA
Posts: 1,929
Default

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.
__________________
Working Sets:
Baseball-
T206 SLers - Virginia League (-1)
1952 Topps - low numbers (-1)
1954 Bowman (-3)
1964 Topps Giants auto'd (-2)
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-28-2017, 07:58 AM
Johnny630 Johnny630 is offline
Johnny MaZilli
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 4,261
Default

1972 Topps Clemente. My least favorite set of the post war era.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-28-2017, 09:03 AM
rats60's Avatar
rats60 rats60 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,968
Default

1952 Topps Mickey Mantle. The ugliest card ever made by Topps in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-28-2017, 09:05 AM
DBesse27's Avatar
DBesse27 DBesse27 is offline
Dan Be$$e++e
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,158
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rats60 View Post
1952 Topps Mickey Mantle. The ugliest card ever made by Topps in my opinion.
I don't care for 52 topps at all.
__________________
Actively collecting Carl Yastrzemski !
Also 1964 & 68 Topps Venezuelans
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-28-2017, 10:06 AM
geosluggo geosluggo is offline
George
member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Florida
Posts: 135
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-28-2017, 03:10 PM
bobsbbcards's Avatar
bobsbbcards bobsbbcards is offline
Bob F.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,987
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-28-2017, 03:59 PM
Neal's Avatar
Neal Neal is offline
Ne@l K
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: US
Posts: 1,623
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsbbcards View Post
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.
__________________
Neal

Successful transactions with Peter Spaeth, raulus, ghostmarcelle, Phil Garry, Don Hontz, JStottlemire, maj78, bcbgcbrcb, secondhandwatches, esehobmbre, Leon, Jetsfan, Brian Van Horn, Brian Dwyer, MGHPro, DeanH, canofcorn, Zigger Zagger, conor912, RayBShotz, Jay Wolt, AConte, Halbig Vintage and many others
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-28-2017, 04:53 PM
mintonlyplz mintonlyplz is offline
member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 80
Default Least favorite iconic card...

1959 Bob Gibson...

First...I don't care for the peek a boo design in 1959. Then...add the color pink on the Gibby card and it makes him look like a "Pink Nightmare" similar to Ralphy when he wore the Pink Bunny outfit on 'The Christmas Story'.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 01-28-2017, 06:39 PM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is offline
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 13,534
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mintonlyplz View Post
1959 Bob Gibson...

First...I don't care for the peek a boo design in 1959. Then...add the color pink on the Gibby card and it makes him look like a "Pink Nightmare" similar to Ralphy when he wore the Pink Bunny outfit on 'The Christmas Story'.
Thank you! I so prefer the 60 to the 59.

Another dog, the 1973 Clemente. WTF were they thinking?



The 1972s are an acquired taste but they do have one of the great cards of all time:



Whoops! Guess little Johnny learned some fun new hand gestures when he pulled this from a pack.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true.

https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/

Or not...

Last edited by Exhibitman; 01-28-2017 at 06:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-28-2017, 08:42 PM
spaidly's Avatar
spaidly spaidly is offline
Sc0tt Sp@id
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Lenoir City, TN
Posts: 309
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by geosluggo View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-29-2017, 11:32 AM
mintonlyplz mintonlyplz is offline
member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spaidly View Post
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 ; )....
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-29-2017, 12:47 PM
rats60's Avatar
rats60 rats60 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,968
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mintonlyplz View Post
I believe the Garvey card was suppose to be the Wes Parker card ; )....
Interesting that Parker, the long time Dodgers first baseman, is greeting his successor at home. It's too bad this photo wasn't take a moment later when Parker wasn't obscuring Garvey.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-29-2017, 01:02 PM
mrmopar mrmopar is offline
Curt
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 1,576
Default

It is a bad shot for Garvey, but I have grown to like it all the same. It is in line with so many of the action shots of that set. I personally like them over the boring batting practice poses they use on so many other cards. The 78 Topps Garvey could have been so much more….

If I saw this card coming out of a pack as a young, first year collector who just discovered Garvey and would go on to collect his stuff for almost 40 years, I would have gone crazy even though you don't see his face. This is a fantasy card another Garvey collector i know created. I love it.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1978 Topps Steve Garvey AS MVP.jpg (75.9 KB, 226 views)
__________________
Looking for: Unique Steve Garvey items, select Dodgers Postcards & Team Issue photos
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-29-2017, 02:00 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 9,150
Default 1953 Bowman

Bob-- it would be awesome if you would take a video of yourself burning your 53 Reese and post it in this thread. Or maybe pasting a different picture on the front of it.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-29-2017, 02:19 PM
Zach Wheat Zach Wheat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,776
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigdaddy View Post
I figured you were talking about the 1963 Pete Rose.......
+1
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-29-2017, 03:53 PM
bobsbbcards's Avatar
bobsbbcards bobsbbcards is offline
Bob F.
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,987
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
Bob-- it would be awesome if you would take a video of yourself burning your 53 Reese and post it in this thread. Or maybe pasting a different picture on the front of it.
Unfortunately, mine is entombed in plastic. Maybe I'll film myself burning your Reese.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-29-2017, 05:38 PM
campyfan39's Avatar
campyfan39 campyfan39 is online now
Chris
Ch.ris Pa.rtin
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,167
Default

Me three. It's one of the most overrated cards of all time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neal View Post
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.
__________________
[FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]CampyFan39
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-29-2017, 09:02 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 9,150
Default Reese

Bob-- I left it at home. You know where to find it.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-30-2017, 04:51 AM
ajquigs's Avatar
ajquigs ajquigs is offline
And*y Quig!ey
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 228
Default

I'm a Mets collector yet I don't have either of their HOF RCs, Seaver or Ryan.
I guess the main reason is that I'm not a big fan of composite rookie cards. Also, while I don't tend to be driven by scarcity, the Ryan card just feels overpriced to me as it seems like there are a billion of them out there.
Part of me would definitely like to have both cards. If he didn't happen to be paired with Ryan, Koosman's RC would be a no-brainer; and Tom is, well, Tom. Plus I like that Tom's paired with the guy they traded (Denehy) to get Gil Hodges as their manager.
Still, thus far I've never come close to buying either card. I prefer my 1969s.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1969 Seaver.jpg (5.1 KB, 183 views)
File Type: jpg 1969 Ryan.jpg (4.3 KB, 186 views)
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-30-2017, 01:54 PM
Rookiemonster's Avatar
Rookiemonster Rookiemonster is offline
Dustin
Dustin Mar.ino
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mintonlyplz View Post
1959 Bob Gibson...

First...I don't care for the peek a boo design in 1959. Then...add the color pink on the Gibby card and it makes him look like a "Pink Nightmare" similar to Ralphy when he wore the Pink Bunny outfit on 'The Christmas Story'.
I agree with this to the Bob Gibson rookie is a let down.

many multi player rookie cards have less appeal to them as stated by many here.
__________________
Just a collector that likes to talk and read about the Hobby. 🤓👍🏼
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-30-2017, 02:40 PM
jchcollins's Avatar
jchcollins jchcollins is offline
John Collins
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 3,404
Default

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
__________________
Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Prewar, Bowman & Topps Cubs team endeavors.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-30-2017, 02:50 PM
JustinD's Avatar
JustinD JustinD is offline
Ju$tin D@v3n.por+
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Birmingham, Mi
Posts: 2,884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DBesse27 View Post
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.
__________________
- Justin D.


Player collecting - Lance Parrish, Jim Davenport, John Norlander.

Successful B/S/T with - Highstep74, Northviewcats, pencil1974, T2069bk, tjenkins, wilkiebaby11, baez578, Bocabirdman, maddux31, Leon, Just-Collect, bigfish, quinnsryche...and a whole bunch more, I stopped keeping track, lol.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-30-2017, 02:53 PM
JustinD's Avatar
JustinD JustinD is offline
Ju$tin D@v3n.por+
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Birmingham, Mi
Posts: 2,884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobsbbcards View Post
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.
__________________
- Justin D.


Player collecting - Lance Parrish, Jim Davenport, John Norlander.

Successful B/S/T with - Highstep74, Northviewcats, pencil1974, T2069bk, tjenkins, wilkiebaby11, baez578, Bocabirdman, maddux31, Leon, Just-Collect, bigfish, quinnsryche...and a whole bunch more, I stopped keeping track, lol.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-30-2017, 04:58 PM
Paul S Paul S is offline
P. Sp.ec.tor
member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Landlocked by High Toll Fees
Posts: 2,150
Default

53B Musial - Stan, get out of that safe haven drab dugout and grab the Slaughter pose. Geez, you look like yer rockin' a baby or huggin' yer inner self. BE The Man!

53T Mays - I don't care how high the grade,. In a set full of great headshots, Willie looks like he just came up with a slow roller in short center field.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-30-2017, 05:30 PM
irv's Avatar
irv irv is offline
D@le Irv*n
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada.
Posts: 6,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rats60 View Post
1952 Topps Mickey Mantle. The ugliest card ever made by Topps in my opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DBesse27 View Post
I don't care for 52 topps at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinD View Post
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.
You guys are killing me! It's the most recognized/worldly/universal set in existence! How can you not like them? (j/k, each to their own as was mentioned)

My least favorite, with my limited experience, would have to be the 55 Bowman set. Not sure what they were thinking with the T.V.'s, but going all the way back to the early 50's, I'm sure T.V.'s were the latest rage so Bowman thought they would try and capitalise on that?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-30-2017, 06:02 PM
rats60's Avatar
rats60 rats60 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,968
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by irv View Post
You guys are killing me! It's the most recognized/worldly/universal set in existence! How can you not like them? (j/k, each to their own as was mentioned)

My least favorite, with my limited experience, would have to be the 55 Bowman set. Not sure what they were thinking with the T.V.'s, but going all the way back to the early 50's, I'm sure T.V.'s were the latest rage so Bowman thought they would try and capitalise on that?
I just don't like the Mantle. Who uses a yellow bat? I would have never bought the card except I needed it to complete a run of Topps sets. I would agree that as a set, the 55 Bowman is the worst and the 55 Topps is my favorite.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-30-2017, 06:06 PM
ALR-bishop ALR-bishop is offline
Al Richter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 9,150
Default 1955

Irv-- Not just TVs, but color TVs. Check out how many ( few) color TVs existed in 1955
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-30-2017, 06:51 PM
irv's Avatar
irv irv is offline
D@le Irv*n
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada.
Posts: 6,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ALR-bishop View Post
Irv-- Not just TVs, but color TVs. Check out how many ( few) color TVs existed in 1955
Good point, Al.

I don't recall how old I was when my folks got a colored T.V., but I can say, the 50's were long gone by then.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 01-31-2017, 03:12 AM
ajquigs's Avatar
ajquigs ajquigs is offline
And*y Quig!ey
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 228
Default

I was born in the 1960s and since I was a kid I loved the kitchiness of the wood paneled "Color TV" theme of the 55 Bowman's.
With the first mainstream color TVs available in 1954, it was an honest attempt to use something cutting edge to compete with Topps. Of course, even if people had color TV sets (in 1964 still only 3% of U.S. houses had one) there were very few color broadcasts.
I guess I'm glad these cards are relatively unpopular as it keeps them more affordable. I'll always consider it a truly classic set that reflects its time more than almost any other. Sort of like the Art Deco design of the Diamond Stars in the mid 30s.

Last edited by ajquigs; 01-31-2017 at 06:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-31-2017, 07:06 AM
geosluggo geosluggo is offline
George
member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Florida
Posts: 135
Default

When the '55 Bowmans were released, holding a color TV in your hand was unimaginable. Aside from the Mays and Aaron, I've never collected them, but I think it's a very cool, of-its-time design.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Mays x2.jpg (69.5 KB, 148 views)
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-31-2017, 07:52 AM
clydepepper's Avatar
clydepepper clydepepper is offline
Raymond 'Robbie' Culpepper
Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Columbus, GA
Posts: 7,026
Default

I don't know if it's iconic as its appearance makes it less desirable. Most of cards in the 1948 Bowman set are ugly, but a Rookie Card Mug Shot of a Hall-of-Famer takes the cake:

1948 bowman spahn.jpg
__________________
.
"A life is not important except in the impact it has on others lives" - Jackie Robinson

“If you have a chance to make life better for others and fail to do so, you are wasting your time on this earth.”- Roberto Clemente
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-31-2017, 08:01 AM
jchcollins's Avatar
jchcollins jchcollins is offline
John Collins
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 3,404
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by irv View Post
Good point, Al.

I don't recall how old I was when my folks got a colored T.V., but I can say, the 50's were long gone by then.
Yeah this is definitely another "each unto his own" set. I absolutely love the '55 Bowmans and have never understood why they aren't more popular. The TV sets just scream 1950's. Yes, it's true that virtually nobody had a color set in 1955, although the technology did exist. I'll take the fact that it's not the most popular set (at least in comparison to '55 and '56 Topps) - just means I can get them for cheaper!
__________________
Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Prewar, Bowman & Topps Cubs team endeavors.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-31-2017, 09:05 AM
Rookiemonster's Avatar
Rookiemonster Rookiemonster is offline
Dustin
Dustin Mar.ino
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,451
Default

I love baseball I love TV I love cards so I'm cool with the 1955 bowman set. I don't however like the umpires. It might as well be a bunch of checklists.
__________________
Just a collector that likes to talk and read about the Hobby. 🤓👍🏼
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-31-2017, 10:25 AM
bnorth's Avatar
bnorth bnorth is online now
Ben North
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 10,226
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rookiemonster View Post
I love baseball I love TV I love cards so I'm cool with the 1955 bowman set. I don't however like the umpires. It might as well be a bunch of checklists.
I love the 55 Bowman set. I agree on the umpires sucking, they are also insanely overpriced. The Mantle and Aaron cards are the only 2 that sell for more than the umpire cards in the same condition. I know I have bought and sold a few Mays cards for less than I paid for several of the umpire cards I have.

I think it was the mid 70's before we had a color TV. Seen several B/W sets being used as second TVs in kids/parents bedrooms through the mid 80's.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-31-2017, 12:45 PM
Puckettfan Puckettfan is offline
Kris
member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: NC
Posts: 138
Default

This will probably be unpopular but I think the 56 Topps Mantle is frightening. The head shot of the Mick makes him look like some kind of frog monster.
Mick 56.jpg

Last edited by Puckettfan; 01-31-2017 at 12:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-31-2017, 01:31 PM
CW's Avatar
CW CW is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,506
Default

You're not the only one, Puckettfan. I love Mantle cards, and I love the '56 set. The '56 Mantle? Not so much.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-31-2017, 03:33 PM
Rookiemonster's Avatar
Rookiemonster Rookiemonster is offline
Dustin
Dustin Mar.ino
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bnorth View Post
I love the 55 Bowman set. I agree on the umpires sucking, they are also insanely overpriced. The Mantle and Aaron cards are the only 2 that sell for more than the umpire cards in the same condition. I know I have bought and sold a few Mays cards for less than I paid for several of the umpire cards I have.

I think it was the mid 70's before we had a color TV. Seen several B/W sets being used as second TVs in kids/parents bedrooms through the mid 80's.
I picked up a 1955 Bowman Mays for 25 buck last year. Obviously not mint but far from a beater for sure. And I've been eyeing up 1955 Bowman Aaron of late.


Puckett fan I also hate that head shot but love the leaping image in the back round. He looks odd to say the least in the head shot.
__________________
Just a collector that likes to talk and read about the Hobby. 🤓👍🏼
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-31-2017, 06:03 PM
ajquigs's Avatar
ajquigs ajquigs is offline
And*y Quig!ey
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 228
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckettfan View Post
This will probably be unpopular but I think the 56 Topps Mantle is frightening. The head shot of the Mick makes him look like some kind of frog monster.
Attachment 259723
I admit I'm far from being a Mantle collector (the only one I have ... '55 Bowman) but I'm with you that the '56 picture is one of his worst. To me, his mouth is almost clown like.

Last edited by ajquigs; 01-31-2017 at 06:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 01-31-2017, 07:04 PM
irv's Avatar
irv irv is offline
D@le Irv*n
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada.
Posts: 6,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckettfan View Post
This will probably be unpopular but I think the 56 Topps Mantle is frightening. The head shot of the Mick makes him look like some kind of frog monster.
Attachment 259723
We all have different tastes and likes, and that's a good thing, trust me, but personally, I love the 56 Mantle card. Next to my 52 Topps copy, that is definitely my next favorite.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01-31-2017, 08:27 PM
ValKehl's Avatar
ValKehl ValKehl is offline
Val Kehl
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Manassas, VA (DC suburb)
Posts: 3,672
Default

I think the 1956 Topps Mantle is the ugliest of all the regular-issue Bowman and Topps cards of Mantle. This said, I still have this 1956 Topps Mantle card that I pulled from a pack when I was a kid! But, I'll happily trade it for a pre-War cards I want.

1955 may have been the year my folks got our first (b&w) TV set. Perhaps this is why I have always liked the 1955 Bowmans. Bowman cards weren't available where I bought my cards as a kid, but I was able to get some from my buddies via trades. IMHO, the 1955 Bowman Mantle is a much nicer looking card!
Val
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 1956T Mantle - front.jpg (78.0 KB, 131 views)
File Type: jpg 1955B Mantle - front.jpg (77.7 KB, 135 views)
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 01-31-2017, 09:01 PM
campyfan39's Avatar
campyfan39 campyfan39 is online now
Chris
Ch.ris Pa.rtin
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,167
Default

It is fascinating the way different people view things. 56 Mantle is in my all time top 5 favorite and maybe #1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ValKehl View Post
I think the 1956 Topps Mantle is the ugliest of all the regular-issue Bowman and Topps cards of Mantle. This said, I still have this 1956 Topps Mantle card that I pulled from a pack when I was a kid! But, I'll happily trade it for a pre-War cards I want.

1955 may have been the year my folks got our first (b&w) TV set. Perhaps this is why I have always liked the 1955 Bowmans. Bowman cards weren't available where I bought my cards as a kid, but I was able to get some from my buddies via trades. IMHO, the 1955 Bowman Mantle is a much nicer looking card!
Val
__________________
[FONT="Lucida Sans Unicode"]CampyFan39
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01-31-2017, 11:34 PM
JollyElm's Avatar
JollyElm JollyElm is offline
D@rrΣn Hu.ghΣs
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Cardboard Land
Posts: 7,802
Default

To me, there's a bit of a weighted balancing act in play with regard to the '56 Mantle card. I, personally, think he looks quite creepy in the headshot. Yowza. But that background is one of the greatest in-action images in the history of baseball cards. So it's easy to give less weight to his face and a helluva lot more weight to him catching that ball in the stands to deem it a beautiful card overall.
__________________
All the cool kids love my YouTube Channel:
Elm's Adventures in Cardboard Land

https://www.youtube.com/@TheJollyElm

Looking to trade? Here's my bucket:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706

“I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.”
Casey Stengel

Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980s.

Overpaying yesterday is simply underpaying tomorrow.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 02-01-2017, 05:50 AM
SAllen2556's Avatar
SAllen2556 SAllen2556 is offline
Scott
Scott All.en
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Detroit
Posts: 629
Default

About 4 years ago I bought a starter set of about 350 '69 Topps. I loved the photography of the cards especially compared to my sets from the 70's. It seemed like a great set to put together because the high numbers weren't expensive. But what I didn't realize was that were a ton of just ugly, strange cards that year. The Houston cards and all the other black-hatted / no hatted cards made for a pretty disappointing set to collect the entire thing. I wish I had just collected the hall of famers. The Bench card is still one of my favorites.

s-l400.jpg

Last edited by SAllen2556; 02-01-2017 at 05:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 02-01-2017, 01:18 PM
Rookiemonster's Avatar
Rookiemonster Rookiemonster is offline
Dustin
Dustin Mar.ino
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,451
Default

I wonder if they would have made a 1955 topps mantle if it would have had that
Face shot. As I know that the 1955 -56 share the head shot image. We could have had two years of that mug !!!! Aaaaahhhhhh shucks
__________________
Just a collector that likes to talk and read about the Hobby. 🤓👍🏼
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 02-02-2017, 12:50 PM
Drift Drift is offline
member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 58
Default

E95 caramel Ty Cobb, I'm torn because it looks like he has lipstick on and can go transgender. If it wasn't for that it'd be my favorite Cobb issue next to the T206 portrait.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 02-02-2017, 01:26 PM
pokerplyr80's Avatar
pokerplyr80 pokerplyr80 is offline
je.sse @rnot
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: California
Posts: 3,915
Default

63 Rose is an obvious choice. I'm also not crazy about the image on the e90-1 Joe Jackson but would still love to own one. Hopefully some day I will have both.
__________________
Successful transactions with peter spaeth, don's cards, vwtdi, wolf441, 111gecko, Clydewally, Jim, SPMIDD, MattyC, jmb, botn, E107collector, begsu1013, and a few others.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 02-02-2017, 02:30 PM
Rookiemonster's Avatar
Rookiemonster Rookiemonster is offline
Dustin
Dustin Mar.ino
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Nj
Posts: 1,451
Default 1955 topps mantle

https://www.google.com/search?q=1955...KDEbZ1iDaf9CM:
__________________
Just a collector that likes to talk and read about the Hobby. 🤓👍🏼
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 02-02-2017, 02:58 PM
jchcollins's Avatar
jchcollins jchcollins is offline
John Collins
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 3,404
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by campyfan39 View Post
It is fascinating the way different people view things. 56 Mantle is in my all time top 5 favorite and maybe #1.
Have to agree with you. The '56 Mantle is an iconic card and one of his best looking issues, period. His face looks weird how? He's smiling, and that's what Mick looked like when he smiled, you can see it in film too from that period. That is also one sweet catch he's reaching out to make in the action shot. '56 Topps is generally considered one of the best looking sets of all time - and the Mantle is one of the best looking cards in it.
__________________
Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Prewar, Bowman & Topps Cubs team endeavors.
Reply With Quote
Reply




Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
With the crazy market, what will this iconic card bring? PowderedH2O Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 31 07-11-2016 11:29 PM
1876 Boston Base Ball trade card; earliest game image on a card? bbpostcards Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 5 06-15-2013 08:12 PM
1876 Boston Base Ball trade card; earliest game image on a card? bbpostcards Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used 0 06-15-2013 08:43 AM
The Last Iconic Baseball Card Yankeefan51 Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 20 08-22-2009 11:36 AM
Favorite Iconic Card Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 1 05-22-2008 10:11 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:25 PM.


ebay GSB