1st Bowman Chrome Card... or Not?

[ru4scuba]

I'm sure there are other examples of this, but this is the first one I've noticed this year. Sure, technically it is Bard's 1st Bowman Chrome card, but since he has already had a Bowman Sterling card released in a previous year do you think the designation confuses an already confusing RC market?

Heh... just noticed it is the same photo.

 

[Juanfatj]

Sure it can say 1st card. If I was collecting I would go after the Sterlings.

 

[jcmint]

I'm sure there are other examples of this, but this is the first one I've noticed this year. Sure, technically it is Bard's 1st Bowman Chrome card, but since he has already had a Bowman Sterling card released in a previous year do you think the designation confuses an already confusing RC market?

Heh... just noticed it is the same photo.

Sterling all day

 

[Bill Bray Collector]

The real question is should Daryl Thompsons Auto cards from 2007 say "first bowman chrome card" when he had one in 2005 :?

Honestly does Topps ever look before they put the "1st Chrome card' logo thing on there?

 

[Craig - 21hawk]

I voted yes for one reason: Topps is using a technicality (parallels don't count) to be able to continue to put draft picks and minor leaguers in a set with major leaguers. Because they are using that technicality they need to be consistent, and putting the "1st Bowman Chrome Card" symbol is being consistent.

Craig

 

[thefasterblade]

Wheres Lars' FBC card logo?

 

[ru4scuba]

I voted yes for one reason: Topps is using a technicality (parallels don't count) to be able to continue to put draft picks and minor leaguers in a set with major leaguers. Because they are using that technicality they need to be consistent, and putting the "1st Bowman Chrome Card" symbol is being consistent.

Craig

Technically, yes. But aren't they making an already confusing issue to novice collectors even more so by using the logo on a second year card and potentially diminishing the secondary market value of the Sterling?

2007 Bowman Sterling
2008 Bowman Chrome (With First Card Logo)
20XX Topps (With RC Logo)

 

[thefasterblade]

The real question is should Daryl Thompsons Auto cards from 2007 say "first bowman chrome card" when he had one in 2005 :?

Honestly does Topps ever look before they put the "1st Chrome card' logo thing on there?

McCallister has the logo in 06 BCDP and on his 2007 auto also.

Makes no sense.

 

[Craig - 21hawk]

I voted yes for one reason: Topps is using a technicality (parallels don't count) to be able to continue to put draft picks and minor leaguers in a set with major leaguers. Because they are using that technicality they need to be consistent, and putting the "1st Bowman Chrome Card" symbol is being consistent.

Craig

Technically, yes. But aren't they making an already confusing issue to novice collectors even more so by using the logo on a second year card and potentially diminishing the secondary market value of the Sterling?

2007 Bowman Sterling
2008 Bowman Chrome (With First Card Logo)
20XX Topps (With RC Logo)

Certainly, but no more so than the MLBPA RC logo on what could be a fourth or fifth year card already does.

When you're already bending the rules (in spirit if not otherwise) it is best to bend them in a consistent manner so as to lessen any backlash that might occur from the rule maker.

Craig

 

[All The Hype]

Technically I think it's correct since like you pointed out, it says 1st Bowman CHROME, but yes it definitely just adds to the confusion.

Now here's one that doesn't make sense...Jon Jay had a chrome in 2006 with the 1st Bowman Chrome logo on the card. Now he has another chrome in 08 BC, which also has the same designation. Figure that one out.

(generic pics from ebay)
2006-

2008-

 

[bballcardkid]

Boo stickers, and boo Topps for fudging things up.

 

[ru4scuba]

When you're already bending the rules (in spirit if not otherwise) it is best to bend them in a consistent manner so as to lessen any backlash that might occur from the rule maker.

Craig

What I'm getting at is that maybe Topps should change their use of the "1st Bowman Chrome" logo and perhaps just use a "1st Bowman Logo" or something to that effect. That way there won't be cards released in three different years that could be considered a RC.

 

[ru4scuba]

Technically I think it's correct since like you pointed out, it says 1st Bowman CHROME, but yes it definitely just adds to the confusion.

Now here's one that doesn't make sense...Jon Jay had a chrome in 2006 with the 1st Bowman Chrome logo on the card. Now he has another chrome in 08 BC, which also has the same designation. Figure that one out.

(generic pics from ebay)
2006-

2008-

In cases like these, I think Topps just screwed up and didn't realize the player had already had a BC card.

 

[Philip J. Fry]

Technically I think it's correct since like you pointed out, it says 1st Bowman CHROME, but yes it definitely just adds to the confusion.

Now here's one that doesn't make sense...Jon Jay had a chrome in 2006 with the 1st Bowman Chrome logo on the card. Now he has another chrome in 08 BC, which also has the same designation. Figure that one out.

(generic pics from ebay)
2006-

2008-

In cases like these, I think Topps just screwed up and didn't realize the player had already had a BC card.

Does Topps not have access to their own product checklists?

 

[Jaypers]

When you're already bending the rules (in spirit if not otherwise) it is best to bend them in a consistent manner so as to lessen any backlash that might occur from the rule maker.

Craig

What I'm getting at is that maybe Topps should change their use of the "1st Bowman Chrome" logo and perhaps just use a "1st Bowman Logo" or something to that effect. That way there won't be cards released in three different years that could be considered a RC.

I would change it from "1st Bowman Chrome Card" to "1st Year Card".

Maybe that might make them more cautious in the future. Or not.

 

[P_Manning 18]

Just a thought.

But maybe since its 2 different products ( Bowman Chrome and Bowman Chrome Draft) they figure they can use it on both.

Jon Jay Bowman Chrome Draft in 2006
Jon Jay Bowman Chrome in 2008

2 different products.... 2 different designs.

 

[JustinG08]

[quote="ALL_THE_HYPE":28umpnxx]Technically I think it's correct since like you pointed out, it says 1st Bowman CHROME, but yes it definitely just adds to the confusion.

Now here's one that doesn't make sense...Jon Jay had a chrome in 2006 with the 1st Bowman Chrome logo on the card. Now he has another chrome in 08 BC, which also has the same designation. Figure that one out.

(generic pics from ebay)
2006-

2008-

In cases like these, I think Topps just screwed up and didn't realize the player had already had a BC card.

Does Topps not have access to their own product checklists?[/quote:28umpnxx]

I agree it's pretty sad they dont catch things like this especially when someone like myself who barely spends anytime following prospects can pick out guys like Jon Jay and Helder Velazquez who both had cards in '06 draft.

 

[DRav87]

As with Jon Jay it also happened with these guys too:

Brandon Rice:

2006

2007

Brandon Roberts

2006

2007

 

[nborton]

Just a thought.

But maybe since its 2 different products ( Bowman Chrome and Bowman Chrome Draft) they figure they can use it on both.

Jon Jay Bowman Chrome Draft in 2006
Jon Jay Bowman Chrome in 2008

2 different products.... 2 different designs.

I bet you're right on that. This has been happening long before this year though. Every year there are guys that have had previous Bowman chrome cards. I bet this is the reason. They may not consider Draft as part of Chrome. Still dumb anyway. It does nothing but confuse people.

I would go with Jaypers with the 1st year thing instead. Much more reasonable.