The ROOKIE CARD LOGO thread

[sportscardtheory]

I personally HATE what MLB has done with their rules and regulations pertaining to the rookie card. We now have "first year MLB non-rookie cards", then MORE MLB "non-rookie" cards in between, before we get to the TRUE RCs. It's confusing and ridiculous and it ruins the value of true RC cards (and ALL the cards). ONE ROOKIE CARD YEAR IS THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION. Something needs to be done. Mickey Mantle has ONE true RC card, the 1951 Bowman... imagine if he had MLB cards from 1949 and 1950, but MLB for some STUPID reason says that they can't be RC cards... it would decrease the value of the 1951 card for sure, because people would have so many more options, thus affecting the value of ALL his "first year", in between and RC cards... ONE ROOKIE CARD YEAR PLEASE!!!

 

[studioclint]

I think it needs to go back to the way it was or not allow companies to have inserts before the make an mlb roster. So that way there could be a true rookie. I don't mind the old way it just sucks when players bowman card doesn't match the team they made there mlb debut with.

 

[sportscardtheory]

I think it needs to go back to the way it was or not allow companies to have inserts before the make an mlb roster. So that way there could be a true rookie. I don't mind the old way it just sucks when players bowman card doesn't match the team they made there mlb debut with.

I agree. For the life of me, I don't understand why they fixed something that was not even close to being broken by implementing a system that is ten times worse and ten times more confusing.

 

[i43770]

I think it needs to go back to the way it was or not allow companies to have inserts before the make an mlb roster. So that way there could be a true rookie. I don't mind the old way it just sucks when players bowman card doesn't match the team they made there mlb debut with.

I agree. For the life of me, I don't understand why they fixed something that was not even close to being broken by implementing a system that is ten times worse and ten times more confusing.

The flaw they made with the new process was allowing Bowman to keep making cards with their MLB license of players who weren't in the majors yet. They need to let the minor league companies make cards of minor leaguers and the major league companies make cards of major leaguers.

Think if LaPorta, Price, Smoker, Vitters, ect only had cards in Just, Tri-Star, team issued or the college sets. People always say that Just and Tri-Star aren't good cards, but when you are comparing them to a company who had cards in the 1940s, of course they aren't going to look or be as good.

 

[MOFNY]

Is it just me, or was there TRULY a problem the old way? What exactly spurred on the changes? What is it ever explained that well?

 

[200lbhockeyplayer]

Topps/Bowman was just able to work around the parameters and therefore making the "Rookie Card Rule" ineffective.

By releasing "inserts" that look and feel the same as regular card, they are obviously treated the same.

One thing for certain however it that it has given a lot of added life for 2nd and 3rd year "rookies" that are released.