O/T The concept of a non-sports "rookie card"

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Don't people call 50-51 Toleteros Josh Gibson (issued after he died) his rookie card? There are certainly a number of first football cards issued years after the player's rookie season that are commonly called RCs.

This has never made any sense to me. Post-war vintage football is replete with "rookies" of long-time veterans. HOFer Frank Gatski's "rookie card" is a 1955 Bowman, his last year as a professional, as just one example (the 1946 Sears isn't a rookie because reasons). 1955 Topps All-American, 1952 Bowman, and 1948 Leaf cards that feature college players can be rookies, even posthumously, but the 1951 Topps Magic's are not. The inconsistent rules, the small set sizes, football rookies are more of a mess than baseball.

It seems to me some players just don't have a rookie card.

"First card" makes more sense to me to use for these things. The silliest is the fictional character rookies. I collect (i.e. hoard) the 1977 Topps Star Wars, or at least I used to do when I could buy bulk for a dime a pop. Ever since the 2020 increases, the younger crowd has been hyping "Luke Skywalker RC" and "Boba Fett RC" in the 1980 set in the Discord groups. Seems kind of silly to me. I suppose every single card in the 1977 set is a "first card/rookie" of whatever is featured.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Let's not forget about the ridiculous concept of some Laughlin cards being considered RCs. Forget about later career or post-career! Some of these were issued post-mortem! Your "rookie" had already been six feet under for 30-40 years. One player, Bill Monroe, died in 1915! That's 59 years before the card was issued. Sorry, that's not a RC for my taste. "First card" fits the bill.

But back on topic, there certainly are a lot of gorgeous music and non-sports cards out there. I may not agree with the RC designation, but completely understand the appeal.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

This has never made any sense to me. Post-war vintage football is replete with "rookies" of long-time veterans. HOFer Frank Gatski's "rookie card" is a 1955 Bowman, his last year as a professional, as just one example (the 1946 Sears isn't a rookie because reasons). 1955 Topps All-American, 1952 Bowman, and 1948 Leaf cards that feature college players can be rookies, even posthumously, but the 1951 Topps Magic's are not. The inconsistent rules, the small set sizes, football rookies are more of a mess than baseball.

It seems to me some players just don't have a rookie card.

"First card" makes more sense to me to use for these things. The silliest is the fictional character rookies. I collect (i.e. hoard) the 1977 Topps Star Wars, or at least I used to do when I could buy bulk for a dime a pop. Ever since the 2020 increases, the younger crowd has been hyping "Luke Skywalker RC" and "Boba Fett RC" in the 1980 set in the Discord groups. Seems kind of silly to me. I suppose every single card in the 1977 set is a "first card/rookie" of whatever is featured.

Basketball too given the huge gaps in production prior to 1969. 1948, 1957, 1961 so lots of "RCs" of players 5, 6 years into their careers.

[frankbmd]

When one refers to a Rookie Card, is not the adjective rookie linked to the word card itself rather than the subject of the card. If you agree then all "first" cards are equivalent to "rookie" cards. Haven't we got enough to quibble about instead of this?

Frank "still waiting for my rookie card" Burkett

[Peter_Spaeth]

It seems in sports, all players must have a rookie card, so that would accord with what Frank is saying.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

When one refers to a Rookie Card, is not the adjective rookie linked to the word card itself rather than the subject of the card. If you agree then all "first" cards are equivalent to "rookie" cards. Haven't we got enough to quibble about instead of this?

Frank "still waiting for my rookie card" Burkett

People have really scraped the bottom of the barrel of possible things to complain about when they get triggered over the use of 'rookie card' with regards to non-sports personalities, and h2oya311 put it perfectly when he said (paraphrase alert) it was just a general way to say 'first' card.

Frank, if you send me a pic, I will gladly plug you in to a 1972 Topps 'In Action' card that you can then call your rookie (meaning FIRST) card. The only proviso is you actually have to be doing something active in the photograph (any activity under the sun counts)...which seems to be getting tougher for many of us these days.

[Snapolit1]

Mao’s rookie card?

https://goldin.co/item/mao-zedong-si...t-bookletjglht

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Mao’s rookie card?

https://goldin.co/item/mao-zedong-si...t-bookletjglht

He is in 1951 Bowman Red Menace lol.

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

He is in 1951 Bowman Red Menace lol.

Ha. Good one sir.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

People have really scraped the bottom of the barrel of possible things to complain about when they get triggered over the use of 'rookie card' with regards to non-sports personalities, and h2oya311 put it perfectly when he said (paraphrase alert) it was just a general way to say 'first' card.

Frank, if you send me a pic, I will gladly plug you in to a 1972 Topps 'In Action' card that you can then call your rookie (meaning FIRST) card. The only proviso is you actually have to be doing something active in the photograph (any activity under the sun counts)...which seems to be getting tougher for many of us these days.

Frank "still waiting for my rookie card" Burkett


Bowling in Chiang Rai, Thailand

Thai Bowling.jpg

[Fred]

How about Alfred E. Neuman, 8 years prior to the first release of Mad magazine. This post card has a cancellation date of 1944.

AEN-s.jpg

[h2oya311]

That Alfred E Newman is fantastic!!

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

Frank "still waiting for my rookie card" Burkett


Bowling in Chiang Rai, Thailand

Attachment 627713

Frank, did you make the split?

[KJA]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Basketball too given the huge gaps in production prior to 1969. 1948, 1957, 1961 so lots of "RCs" of players 5, 6 years into their careers.

And then the gap in production in the 80's so 1986 Fleer set had quite a few RC's of players who weren't really rookies like Jordan. Unless you count the STAR releases.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by KJA

And then the gap in production in the 80's so 1986 Fleer set had quite a few RC's of players who weren't really rookies like Jordan. Unless you count the STAR releases.

IMO people who don't count the Star releases are people who don't want to pay for a 101 Jordan.