The Deliberate Omission of Pete Rose's Name In 2013 Topps

[Jaypers]

Sorry if this was posted already.

http://chicagosidesports.com/pete-rose-stripped-of-all-time-hits-record-by-topps-baseball-cards/

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

Really can't fault Topps for that, its not really a big deal as long as the number is properly represented.

I'm more concerned about their apparent inability to properly add or subtract on that line!

 

[bongo870]

That is a joke. #1 he bet as a manager. What does his hits have to do anything? Rose accomplished ALOT as a player. Respect that he didnt bet untill years later as a manager. Strip his manager record.

 

[MansGame]

This doesn't really give me heartburn... so what... I mean Rose is the all-time hits leader whether Topps wants to not place his name next to it or not... I mean anyone can just go look and see his name next to that number. It would be a bigger deal if Topps just ignored his hits total all together and said that Cobb is the all-time leader with 4,191 hits

 

[Jaypers]

I was just informed on BO's boards that it's because of Topps's MLB licensing that actually prevents them from mentioning his name, and therefore this is a non-story. Oops.

 

[A_Pharis]

Could it also have to do with Topps' spite toward Leaf and the fact that Leaf has put out some big Rose product?

 

[A_Pharis]

I was just informed on BO's boards that it's because of Topps's MLB licensing that actually prevents them from mentioning his name, and therefore this is a non-story. Oops.

Interesting. Disregard my post, but you'd also think Topps would be able to simply contact him. Can the MLB dictate that?

 

[sportscardtheory]

I highly doubt that they can not legally mention Pete Rose's name on a baseball card. It's not as though they used his image or any kind of copyrighted material. His printed name isn't banned from baseball.

 

[Pine Tar]

I was just informed on BO's boards that it's because of Topps's MLB licensing that actually prevents them from mentioning his name, and therefore this is a non-story. Oops.

I was thinking this, when you posted it. This makes sense . And like Mansgame has said, we all know who they are talking about when that is on there.

Thanks Jay for sharing the blog anyway. It was an interesting read

 

[KLARNOLD]

I could see Topps making Career Chase variations with Rose's initials P.E.R. or nickname Charlie Hustle.

 

[bcubs]

So Topps can't print his name on a card yet on MLB.com here he is listed plain as day, his name right next to his stats as the all time hit leader. From there you can do a drill down into all things Pete Rose statistically speaking. There must be some strange clause in the contract or this was just some idiot interpretation at Topps done with minimal research.

http://mlb.mlb.com/stats/sortable.jsp?c_id=mlb&tcid=mm_mlb_stats#elem=[object+Object]&tab_level=child&click_text=Sortable+Player+hitting&sectionType=sp&statType=hitting&page=1&ts=1360780993387&split=&season=&game_type=%27R%27&playerType=ALL&timeframe=&season_type=ALL&sortColumn=h&sortOrder=%27desc%27&extended=0

 

[JoshHamilton]

I highly doubt that they can not legally mention Pete Rose's name on a baseball card. It's not as though they used his image or any kind of copyrighted material. His printed name isn't banned from baseball.

Would you want to piss off the league that gives you an exclusive license and is responsible for at least half the income of your multimillion dollar company?

Disallowed or not, I can see why Topps wouldn't want to ruffle any feathers at MLBP

 

[VandyDan]

Do it this way:

"Longoria, continuing to get hits for the love of Pete, Rose along the all time hits leaders, now only 3000 (or whatever) behind the all time leader."

Problem solved.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

Not surprising at all. If he's banned from MLB, he shouldn't appear anywhere in an MLB product.

I don't agree, but it's not surprising.

 

[Ghumbs]

Beckett News » Pete Rose?s exclusion in MLB products is nothing new ? and it?s MLB?s call

 

[sportscardtheory]

Beckett News » Pete Rose?s exclusion in MLB products is nothing new ? and it?s MLB?s call

This makes no sense. His name is all over MLB's site, so why can't his name be on a baseball card. It's not a Pete Rose baseball card, it's simply an attachment to his stats and records that MLB clearly recognizes. It's pretty damn hypocritical for MLB to use Rose's name, but to not allow companies with MLB licenses to.

 

[robert67]

.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

This makes no sense. His name is all over MLB's site, so why can't his name be on a baseball card. It's not a Pete Rose baseball card, it's simply an attachment to his stats and records that MLB clearly recognizes. It's pretty damn hypocritical for MLB to use Rose's name, but to not allow companies with MLB licenses to.

It's their license.

Further, the website is not a product. If anything, it's an advertising tool. Baseball cards are products.

 

[bcubs]

It's their license.

Further, the website is not a product. If anything, it's an advertising tool. Baseball cards are products.

Good point about the website, had not thought of it that way. I will say in my opinion he did less to harm the game than everyone who still has their names and images on products such as Bonds, McGwire, Palmeiro, Clemens, Canseco, etc.

 

[uniquebaseballcards]

Good point about the website, had not thought of it that way. I will say in my opinion he did less to harm the game than everyone who still has their names and images on products such as Bonds, McGwire, Palmeiro, Clemens, Canseco, etc.

As bad as that is, one's gotta understand baseball's history and its number one rule before making a judgment here.