What is the worst follow up set design to a great set?

I was looking at some different Topps sets and it struck me by how different the designs were year to year in the 60's thru 90's versus the early to mid 2000's Topps.

This led to some horrific follow up designs to some iconic sets.

1. 1994 Topps Finest Baseball- 1993 Topps Finest is a milestone for modern collectors (Refractors baby) however in 1994 Topps ran the presses and killed the design all in one fell swoop. There are some hard core fans of the refractors but I can't give away full sets of this stuff at 10 bucks a set at shows.

2. 1961 Topps Baseball- After 2 years of colorful but pretty similar designs in 58 and 59 Topps decided to go radical and make the 1960 set a horizontal set with 2, that's right 2 pictures on the front of the card. They also kept the colorful design. Enter 1961 Topps and they decided to remove all color, horizontal design and went back to one picture per card. It is by far the blandest design of the 60's outside of maybe 67. The rookie class is weak in 61 and outside of some hard SP's and a tough high series 1961 Topps is one of the easiest and cheapest sets to build in the 60's.

3. 1990 Upper Deck- 1989 Upperdeck really started the premium card trend and pricing ($1 a pack? that's crazy). Having Griffey be card #1 never hurt either. 1990 UD was just a rehash of 1989 with less style and design. It was just really bland and with no big RC (they seriously left out Frank Thomas?) to chase the set quickly lost it's luster and value.

4. 1992 Topps Stadium Club- 1991 Stadium Club was the next kick in the pants for premium cards. Full bleed glossy cards with gold foil? Wow! Well Topps followed Upper Deck's 1990 path in making just small changes to the design and made a very bland, very forgettable design with again no real cards to chase even in 1992.

5. 1976 Topps Baseball- How do you follow 1975 anyway right? Having 4 HOF RC's in the set (Brett, Yount, Carter and Rice), one of the best designs since 1971 and a first time ever mini version, anything Topps did in 1976 would be seen as a let down. Maybe it's due to the lack of RC's (Eckersley) pizzazz or the endless printing problems with the set, 1976 is just bland and lifeless compared to 1975. Now the 1976 Brett is incredibly tough, much more than his RC, to find in high grade and the Young, Ryan, Rose and Bench cards are still very nice but were talking about comparing a Volksagon to a BMW here.

Honorable Mentions- 1954 Bowman Baseball, 1973 Topps Baseball

91 Leaf was thugly!

The 61 design is not that bad, IMO. It was the lack of good rookies that hurt the set long term (but you nailed that point). Spot on with the others though!

allstars said:

91 Leaf was thugly!

Click to expand...

I agree but we did get Gold Leaf Rookies out of it!!

I understand you're talking about aesthetics contrasted from one year to another, but the 1961 Topps set is one of the most popular of that era. 1967 is also one of them. The simplicity of the designs is part of the appeal. All others you list I rather like, in some cases more than their predecessors. 1960 Topps, for instance, is just ugly. I never liked the alternating color name fonts, and shoehorning a tiny B&W photo next to the larger color shot rarely worked.

FWIW, I thought the 2002 Heritage set was a huge letdown. I understand they tried to mimic the 1953 paintings, but they failed. Bleah.

We all have opinions but in terms of rankings both by collectors and in terms of value 1961 topps consistently ranks at the bottom for both.

You might be the first person on earth that i met that likes 1994 finest over 1993

2002 Heritage I don't have a lot of experience with as I didn't collect it as much but 2001 Heritage is very iconic.

As mentioned earlier, 1991 Leaf should be ranked very high on this list. Atrocious looking cards. I'd also put 1973 Topps on the list, perhaps the company's dullest effort after the very fun 1972 set. 1992 Topps is also bad, a much inferior version of many of the design elements in the underrated 1991 set.

James52411 said:

As mentioned earlier, 1991 Leaf should be ranked very high on this list. Atrocious looking cards. I'd also put 1973 Topps on the list, perhaps the company's dullest effort after the very fun 1972 set. 1992 Topps is also bad, a much inferior version of many of the design elements in the underrated 1991 set.

Click to expand...

I really thought hard about the 1992 Topps set as well. At the time it was a huge let down in terms of design but 1991 Topps wasn't as Iconic I felt as some other such as Stadium Club but that can surely be debated.

73 is in my honorable mention. Very dull and weird pictures as well. Some cards are nice but in a binder it is a white out.

Nice topic. I disagree with you on 1990 Upper Deck. Very nice, clean design with some excellent photography. It's not a home run, but it's a perfectly good set.

Going on pure aethetics and design, I think the 1968 Topps set, with its burlap bag borders, is horrendous, following the gorgeous 1967 Topps set.
Such a downgrade in looks.

It's like going from dating a frisky Victoria Secret model to a husky gal with a burlap sack on her head, and then you take off the sack and it's Rosie O'Donnell.

Austin said:

Going on pure aethetics and design, I think the 1968 Topps set, with its burlap bag borders, is horrendous, following the gorgeous 1967 Topps set.
Such a downgrade in looks.

It's like going from dating a frisky Victoria Secret model to a husky gal with a burlap sack on her head, and then you take off the sack and it's Rosie O'Donnell.

Click to expand...

Believe it or not, this happened to me.

1994 Fleer was simple, attractive and well-designed. 1995 Fleer was one of the worst designs in the history of the hobby.

1987 Topps is a modern day classic.
1988 is not.

If 1990 fleer wasn't so dull & boring, that would be listed compared to 1991 fleer.

James52411 said:

Nice topic. I disagree with you on 1990 Upper Deck. Very nice, clean design with some excellent photography. It's not a home run, but it's a perfectly good set.

Click to expand...

+1

It's still a great looking set. Not to mention all the fun of the Ben McDonald error chase...

2002 Donruss Rookies Crusade #45 - Cliff Lee/1500 - COMC

can anyone explain to me wtf that is???

An insert out of 2002 Donruss "The Rookies" if memory serves. The base set was all rookies, almost none of which were any good and few of which were actually rookies. There was also a decent number of inserts in the product. Needless to say, those Crusade inserts are far inferior to the late 90's versions.

James52411 said:

An insert out of 2002 Donruss "The Rookies" if memory serves. The base set was all rookies, almost none of which were any good and few of which were actually rookies. There was also a decent number of inserts in the product. Needless to say, those Crusade inserts are far inferior to the late 90's versions.

Click to expand...

Exactly, biggest drop-off Ive ever seen, although we are talking about insert sets and not base sets. I try to forget the terrible 02 "crusade" design yet every time you type crusade into ebay you have to see 50 of them. ::facepalm::

BBCgalaxee said:

1987 Topps is a modern day classic.
1988 is not.

If 1990 fleer wasn't so dull & boring, that would be listed compared to 1991 fleer.

Click to expand...

Agree, 1988 topps is the Linda Tripp of baseball cards

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Freedom Card Board mobile app

I'm also going to dissent on 1988 Topps. This is a nice, clean card.

Waxov said:

2002 Donruss Rookies Crusade #45 - Cliff Lee/1500 - COMC

can anyone explain to me wtf that is???

Click to expand...

Looks like cliff lee in front of a griffin, about to go medieval in the crusade for sabermetrics

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Freedom Card Board mobile app