Bowman Hosmer Auto Live?

[glewis22]

You would think they could hire an intern/temp for a couple weeks at minimum wage and document some system (excel etc) of figuring out who and who hasnt had a 1st chrome/bowman card of the guys they are printing.

The fact that guys can have 2 or 3 cards with the 1st logo on it, and totally leave it off guys whose actual first chrome is beyond me...

People really should know enough about any card without having to rely on a silly logo to tell them.

The people who don't know anything about a card or always rely on logos to tell them about a card aren't really true collectors anyway, are they?

Dude, you are a moron. So its our fault huh, whats the point of having a bloody logo? To inform people. If its wrong, it misinforms people. Pretty simple, and pretty stupid post by you.

 

[beefycheddar]

You would think they could hire an intern/temp for a couple weeks at minimum wage and document some system (excel etc) of figuring out who and who hasnt had a 1st chrome/bowman card of the guys they are printing.

The fact that guys can have 2 or 3 cards with the 1st logo on it, and totally leave it off guys whose actual first chrome is beyond me...

People really should know enough about any card without having to rely on a silly logo to tell them.

The people who don't know anything about a card or always rely on logos to tell them about a card aren't really true collectors anyway, are they?

I believe it has to do more with the fact that Bowman is a very important set in the Hobby world; and continuous mediocrity, and ambiguity in this set is a matter relating to principle (keeping this set's high reputation), rather than the casual collector's confusion.

This is another reason why the logo simply doesn't need to exist to begin with - there'd be less mediocrity and ambiguity in Bowman.

The logo just isn't that important. People aren't buying or collecting logos...or rather they shouldn't be.

But you buy, collect, and sing the praises of the RC Logo. Funny.

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

You would think they could hire an intern/temp for a couple weeks at minimum wage and document some system (excel etc) of figuring out who and who hasnt had a 1st chrome/bowman card of the guys they are printing.

The fact that guys can have 2 or 3 cards with the 1st logo on it, and totally leave it off guys whose actual first chrome is beyond me...

People really should know enough about any card without having to rely on a silly logo to tell them.

The people who don't know anything about a card or always rely on logos to tell them about a card aren't really true collectors anyway, are they?

I believe it has to do more with the fact that Bowman is a very important set in the Hobby world; and continuous mediocrity, and ambiguity in this set is a matter relating to principle (keeping this set's high reputation), rather than the casual collector's confusion.

This is another reason why the logo simply doesn't need to exist to begin with - there'd be less mediocrity and ambiguity in Bowman.

The logo just isn't that important. People aren't buying or collecting logos...or rather they shouldn't be.

The consensus says otherwise- when the Matt Moore au., or the Ackley 2nd-Year blue prospect au. came out for example. I consider this an issue significant enough to find annoyance in (and so do others). It isn't a deciding factor when making a purchase - it isn't for me, but a valid issue to bring up. I agree the logo shouldn't be, or perhaps simply have a universal "Bowman Chrome" logo.

Yes I'm with you, I like the universal BC or Bowman nameplate (a different kind of logo? LOL) alone.

Any brand can have a "first *** (insert set name here) card" logo, it just doesn't mean that much by itself.

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

You would think they could hire an intern/temp for a couple weeks at minimum wage and document some system (excel etc) of figuring out who and who hasnt had a 1st chrome/bowman card of the guys they are printing.

The fact that guys can have 2 or 3 cards with the 1st logo on it, and totally leave it off guys whose actual first chrome is beyond me...

People really should know enough about any card without having to rely on a silly logo to tell them.

The people who don't know anything about a card or always rely on logos to tell them about a card aren't really true collectors anyway, are they?

I believe it has to do more with the fact that Bowman is a very important set in the Hobby world; and continuous mediocrity, and ambiguity in this set is a matter relating to principle (keeping this set's high reputation), rather than the casual collector's confusion.

This is another reason why the logo simply doesn't need to exist to begin with - there'd be less mediocrity and ambiguity in Bowman.

The logo just isn't that important. People aren't buying or collecting logos...or rather they shouldn't be.

But you buy, collect, and sing the praises of the RC Logo. Funny.

You truly have no clue, do you. Show me where I've said this...or is this an attempt at a troll?

 

[bikerider60]

Wow I love your Card Geek Posts.. Beat people down..have fun with this so called Hobby.

 

[Superfractor]

[quote="ArtVandelay":slxlxrml]You would think they could hire an intern/temp for a couple weeks at minimum wage and document some system (excel etc) of figuring out who and who hasnt had a 1st chrome/bowman card of the guys they are printing.

The fact that guys can have 2 or 3 cards with the 1st logo on it, and totally leave it off guys whose actual first chrome is beyond me...

People really should know enough about any card without having to rely on a silly logo to tell them.

The people who don't know anything about a card or always rely on logos to tell them about a card aren't really true collectors anyway, are they?

I believe it has to do more with the fact that Bowman is a very important set in the Hobby world; and continuous mediocrity, and ambiguity in this set is a matter relating to principle (keeping this set's high reputation), rather than the casual collector's confusion.

This is another reason why the logo simply doesn't need to exist to begin with - there'd be less mediocrity and ambiguity in Bowman.

The logo just isn't that important. People aren't buying or collecting logos...or rather they shouldn't be.

The consensus says otherwise- when the Matt Moore au., or the Ackley 2nd-Year blue prospect au. came out for example. I consider this an issue significant enough to find annoyance in (and so do others). It isn't a deciding factor when making a purchase - it isn't for me, but a valid issue to bring up. I agree the logo shouldn't be, or perhaps simply have a universal "Bowman Chrome" logo.

Yes I'm with you, I like the universal BC or Bowman nameplate (a different kind of logo? LOL) alone.

Any brand can have a "first *** (insert set name here) card" logo, it just doesn't mean that much by itself.[/quote:slxlxrml]


The only reason I'd like a static logo is because Topps can't get it right. I can say that with the Bowman set(s), the "1st card" logo actually means something to me- if it's actually the player's first; I'm assuming it means something to many collectors as well ("Chrome is king").

 

[mwashuc06]

Whocares if it says that its the 1st BC card or not, at least the auto has been released live quickly.

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

The only reason I'd like a static logo is because Topps can't get it right. I can say that with the Bowman set(s), the "1st card" logo actually means something to me- if it's actually the player's first; I'm assuming it means something to many collectors as well ("Chrome is king").

Yes I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying you hopefully already know whether its a player's first card/first year card without the logo - and that you're not buying a card because of a logo.