Why Topps Archives Stopped At 1954???

[darkhorse9]

Could I be the only one that thinks the 1954 achive set was ugly? They just looked weird in glossy paper and new card stock. The "cards that never were" just looked bad.

The 1953 set doesn't suffer as bad (although those extended set cards were pretty ugly too.)

The 1956 set might have looked sharp, but after that....

[Bob Lemke]

I agree that the concept was a fish out of water.

Many of those of us who collected the originals found the down-sized glossy cards jarring. And the "extended" cards in 1953 were butt-ugly.

Younger collectors, by and large, couldn't have cared less about guys like Angel Scull and Bobby Young.

[Gary Dunaier]

Originally Posted by Bob Lemke

Younger collectors, by and large, couldn't have cared less about guys like Angel Scull and Bobby Young.

Which is one advantage of the Topps Heritage line - the older designs with current players that the younger fans can relate to. It's just a shame Topps couldn't have waited a year to begin the series, because then they'd be able to market them as today's players in card designs from 50 years ago (the 2012 Heritage set uses the design from the 1963 Topps).

[Rich Klein]

The other issue was the archive set also were created during the hobby boom. After 1994, sales of cards started to dry up and the archives set were not only as Bob said, a bit aggravating to get all the players involved but also were not going to sell enough copies to make the project worthwhile.

That is why Topps tried the Dodgers archives in 1995 and that ended the sets until the heritage sets began in 2001

Regards
Rich

[theseeker]

"fish out of water" ? I must be swimming upstream , again, because I really love the complete reprint sets. And Topp's were by far the best. As far a players from eras before ones time-- as a set builder, I've always found the commons to be as interesting and more fun than the star cards. For the younger collector, is there more interest in a common player from the fifties, if the card is an original?

[ALR-bishop]

John--Better a fish out of water than butt ugly

Al

[theseeker]

Al, you did manage to put it in perspective for me.

As for the legendary Bob Lemke, not seeeing how a younger generation collector could have interest in the Angel Scull card? Why I'm stunned. If that three panel cartoon on the card back, on how he was doing well on the field (destined to be a AAAA player,) but didn't understand any English until a Spanish speaking women introduced him to some college students to help teach him, isn't inspirational to the younger collector, I'm in the wrong hobby. *edited to insert smilie face and change the tone*