- Thread starter
- #1
Aside from cabinet cards, baseball and other collectible cards were small pretty much throughout the whole history of the hobby. Old Judge, Allen & Ginters, Mayo Cut Plug, T cards, W cards, and so on. Bowman changed slightly each year, but were still on the smaller side. Part of the reason Topps was able to crush them, I suspect, was that 1952 Topps were just bigger (2-5/8" x 3-3/4" vs. 2-1/8" x 3-1/8"). The Topps design was great, obviously, with a bigger checklist and all that, but I'd have to think that the kids in 1952 just preferred the bigger cards. Bowman apparently thought so, too, as they changed to match in 1953. In 1957, victorious Topps changed to the 2.5" x 3.5" size that's been pretty much the standard ever since, with certain exceptions like Tallboys or horizontally elongated cards (1951 Topps Teams, 1971 Greatest Moments, non-sports Widevisions), or purposely designed minis.
I've often wondered if and why a different size might be adopted and be popular enough to supplant the current standard. I think the current size is popular partially because it's easy to remember and calculate multiples, but it also just feels right. But could it ever change? Going back to the 52-56 size? Bigger? How about a 20% proportionally larger 3" x 4.2"? How about N43 size, like the A&G inserts. Or even bigger, Sportscaster size or like 1962 Topps Giants, replicated by Donruss later on. Or maybe smaller? With greenness on everyone's mind, would "saving trees" by going down to 2" x 3" be viable? It would save 2.75 square inches of cardboard per card.
The way the hobby is now, it would be a difficult change, either way. Everyone stores their cards in some sort of specialized holder, whether it's a cardboard box or multi-row box or top loader or lucite or sheets, and I'd guess at least 90% of everything sold is for standard size cards. When they do put out something in a larger size, it's generally viewed as an irritant more than a cool change. How many 1989 Bowmans have been dinged because they were larger? And I find things like 1992 Fleer tallboys a pain to store, always just going into the monster box sideways. Going smaller would be less of a problem, but going bigger probably would be.
I've often wondered if and why a different size might be adopted and be popular enough to supplant the current standard. I think the current size is popular partially because it's easy to remember and calculate multiples, but it also just feels right. But could it ever change? Going back to the 52-56 size? Bigger? How about a 20% proportionally larger 3" x 4.2"? How about N43 size, like the A&G inserts. Or even bigger, Sportscaster size or like 1962 Topps Giants, replicated by Donruss later on. Or maybe smaller? With greenness on everyone's mind, would "saving trees" by going down to 2" x 3" be viable? It would save 2.75 square inches of cardboard per card.
The way the hobby is now, it would be a difficult change, either way. Everyone stores their cards in some sort of specialized holder, whether it's a cardboard box or multi-row box or top loader or lucite or sheets, and I'd guess at least 90% of everything sold is for standard size cards. When they do put out something in a larger size, it's generally viewed as an irritant more than a cool change. How many 1989 Bowmans have been dinged because they were larger? And I find things like 1992 Fleer tallboys a pain to store, always just going into the monster box sideways. Going smaller would be less of a problem, but going bigger probably would be.