Random Card of the Day

Friday, June 3, 2016

Set: 2004 Upper Deck Legends (Rate)

Card: #17 Chad Johnson

“ I don't know if the NFL set was constructed like the NBA set, but it really missed the mark, in my opinion. I would rather they have given us a larger set instead of two sets with the same design with different numbers (and different card stock). I also don't like when they turn color photos into black and white, which is what they did for the legends portion of the set. On the other hand, I like getting a set specifically for legends, instead of having them mixed into the main sets like Panini does. ” -Billy Kingsley

“ Could have been a Hall of Famer had he not been so crazy. ” -carthage44

“ That left side font looks canned to me but over all it is a nice design. ” -koloth42

“ The whole changing your name to your number in Spanish struck me as weird! Lots of talent, but the ego got in the way in this case, I think!? Not sure I'd include him in the "Legends" category! ” -bkklaos

“ Parka in the front photo is pretty cool, but both the "ocho" and "cinco" are featured prominently on the back. The "scrambled pay TV" borders around said back photo are confusing and unnecessary. ” -dilemma19

“ I like this design my only problem with either side is the vertical writing. Chad Johnson before he started changing his name around. I think he eventually changed it back to Chad. ” -captkirk42

“ I really wish there was some sort of outline on how to define what a legend is... ” -SFC Temple

“ As a Browns fan, my favorite Chad Johnson memory is of him mailing bottles of Pepto Bismol to the Browns DBs before they were to play in 2004. The joke turned out to be on him as the Browns held him to 37 receiving yards, and won the game. I liked his sense of humor, and the way he interacted with fans on his social media accounts. ” -armac

“ Does a guy who at this point (according to the back stats) has 16 TDs really need to be identified as an NFL Legend? ” -rmpaq5

“ Oh yeah, got us a real legend there. Sure. ” -NJdevils

“ Child, please! ” -cckeith

“ Moron who changed his named to an incorrect translation of his uniform number. Not a fan. At all. And I may have missed his entire career during my collecting sabbatical. Not sure I own any cards of him. ” -switzr1

Continue the conversation...

Thursday, June 2, 2016

Set: 2001 Wizards Football Champions Premier League 2001-2002 (Rate)

Card: #187 Noel Whelan

“ He's so fast he's tearing the photo! Is that a phone number on the left side? I'd like to call Mr. Whelan sometime. Maybe he can teach me to be fast... ” -dilemma19

“ "Soccer.....that's like football without pads right?" - Robin Williams ” -RoyalChief

“ It's Futbol not Football. Get it right! ” -carthage44

“ OOH looks like another random CCG card similar to Topps Attax. Soccer this time. For this design it might have been fun for the corners to be rounded like the backs black border has. Fun Card. ” -captkirk42

“ "Wizards Football", huh? When does the Wizard change this card from junk to something decent? ” -NJdevils

“ I know it is a gaming card (I assume actually due to the back and the "stats" on the side...but man that is a very busy distracting front. ” -rmpaq5

Continue the conversation...

Wednesday, June 1, 2016

Set: 1991 Classic (Rate)

Card: #41 John Flannery

“ I really dislike the fact that Classic used the same design for their multi-sport set as well as their single sport releases that year. I can never tell them apart without having to stop and actually think about it. I try not to think about college cards much. At least this football release got a different back design; the basketball design is the same for the multi-sport set and the basketball only set. ” -Billy Kingsley

“ Man that big man was moving!!!! ” -RoyalChief

“ It's pretty much like he's busting through the banner running out of the tunnel. ” -rmpaq5

“ I don't follow football much, but a 300-pounder who runs a sub-5 40 grabbed my attention. Go Orange I guess... ” -dilemma19

“ I really liked the Classic sets. ” -carthage44

“ Not a fan of these Classics Game cards. I think it was originally for the multi-sport (4 sport) card game. If not I still don't like this series. ” -captkirk42

“ I loved this set. Back when the ' Cuse whooped butt! ” -SFC Temple

Continue the conversation...

Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Set: 1988 Score (Rate)

Card: #233 Tom Brookens

“ Ahhh, a classic (for Score), and a Tiger! Nice simple early design for a then newer company. Nice. ” -Kaline6

“ There is absolutely nothing special about the card design...but Tommy Brookens was one of my absolute favourites when I was a kid!!! ” -rmpaq5

“ The premier Score baseball set. I disliked the card numbers (I'm a set sorter) because they were too small (1989's were much better - someone must have told them about it). I liked the set more when it was released than I do now, but I still think it was a solid debut effort. ” -vrooomed

“ 88 Score is a winning design. 3 stars, per the rating in the bottom-left corner. They had colorful backs with a second photo, outstanding writing (though apparently not proofread), and full stats. The text is all small, but legible. Maybe I could gripe about the lack of team name/logo on the front (which was added in 1989), but overall it's well done. I miss Score, and their plastic bag packaging. ” -dilemma19

“ AMAZING STASH ALERT! ” -carthage44

“ Simply Score. Year One. Sounds more like a comic book title than a baseball card set. LOL. I like the simplicity of the front. Having the team name on the front would have been nice at least they put the team name and logo on the back. Back of the card is nice and tight. I has his career stats, a small bio and even a profile headshot. Nice. ” -captkirk42

“ Liked all the info on the back. Other than that, pretty dull. Killer mustache, though! ” -pistonfan

“ I will agree with anyone who has nothing nice to say about this card. ” -NJDevils

“ I really dislike most of the Score cards. This is no exception. Very plain design without much to keep interest. Why not put them team logo on front instead of the 3 stars? ” -Mitch

Continue the conversation...

Monday, May 30, 2016

Set: 2002-03 Parkhurst (Rate)

Card: #86 Scott Hartnell

“ this a Parkhurst card? ” -switzr1

“ Are these standard-sized cards? I know if I owned some, I'd probably be tempted to chop off the Parkhurst banner taking up so much space along the side, resulting in long skinny cards. ” -dilemma19

“ Not a big fan of the a player figure cropped and placed on a sterile background. In this case it makes Hartnell looked distorted and unnatural. ” -koloth42

“ Great player , shows up every night , wish I could say the same about this card. ” -uncaian

“ OK design I guess. What is that green background image? ” -captkirk42

“ I know Parkhurst's logo is green but it doesn't mean every design they make has to have that shade of green incorporated in their cards. ” -carthage44

“ Kinda stinks the Flyers traded him...he was a nice piece, and would've been useful in the playoffs. (Don't get me started about the Caps) ” -DarkSide830

“ There is something I don't like about the card company sticking their name and logo on about 25% of this card's real estate. The card itself looks pretty cool, but the team logo somewhere would have been a nice touch. Perhaps they should have flipped the company name and logo with the player name and team. ” -muskie027

Continue the conversation...

Sunday, May 29, 2016

Set: 1949 Bowman (Rate)

Card: #220 Johnny McCarthy

“ One day, I'll own a 1949 Bowman. Love the look, and love the vintage cards. ” -vrooomed

“ All vintage is cool! I wonder if any of the Bowman trinkets you could mail away for have survived? ” -Billy Kingsley

“ I didn't know cards originally included ghosts on them. Is that a bad scan or just the way it looks? ” -DarkSide830

“ Nice card , wish I had more in my collection - maybe someday. ” -uncaian

“ If life were only as simple as this wonderful card. Back in 1949, few people had TVs. This was probably the only way fans got to see the non-star players. ” -NJdevils

“ Very nice, crease and all. Love them vintage! ” -Kaline6

“ Very cool vintage. Love the statement on the back about the Baseball ring giveaway "Not valid where contrary to State laws" ” -captkirk42

“ Yucky crease! ” -suomibear8

Continue the conversation...

Saturday, May 28, 2016

Set: 1997-98 Fleer (Rate)

Card: #12 Vlade Divac

“ I hated this set when it was new...but now I love it. If I handle it too much the texture on the cards will start to affect my hands like fingernails on a chalkboard but I still love it now. ” -Billy Kingsley

“ Another multi-used design per year per manufacturer. That being said on this particular card the placement of the name and team (although wish a bit more pronounced) fits the photo perfectly. ” -rmpaq5

“ When I first looked at this card I thought his name was Wade Diva. ” -uncaian

“ Yes! Love the photo. Name and team could be a bit easier to read, but I forgive you, Fleer. ” -dilemma19

“ He was always fun to watch play. ” -carthage44

“ Back is OK. Front? Not for a base card. A special insert maybe but these over the head top of the basket shots are not good for base cards. ” -captkirk42

“ Always liked full of under basket action shots from above, definitely not a fan of horizontally oriented cards. This set was printed on rough both side uncoated paper – in basketball I know only two sets produced that way. ” -Thomas_Kava

“ I am not so irritating. ” -UKboogie

“ I am not really liking this card. I didn't collect this set, and after seeing this, I don't have a desire to. It is a better basketball picture than a card. The player and team name is tough to read, there is no logo, and overall, there is just nothing that really makes me like this card. ” -muskie027

Continue the conversation...

Friday, May 27, 2016

Set: 2007 Upper Deck Goudey - Red Backs (Rate)

Card: #183 Kevin Kouzmanoff

“ Red? More like brown back. I like the throwback cards so this is cool in my book. ” -Billy Kingsley

“ A great tribute to some of the classic 30s issues. Is Kouzmanoff really so pale/transluscent/ghostlike in person? ” -dilemma19

“ Not a bad set, but I don't like the smaller size for the base set. I prefer the 2008 Goudey over this set. ” -CluelessJoe

“ Nice modern retro card based on a very vintage design. I sort of wish they hadn't used the modern "rookie card" logo on these. It is sad that now days retro cards are too mainstream. These are the last of the few sets that did things right. ” -captkirk42

“ ugh! Old design rehash. These aren't a tribute to vintage; they're an insult. ” -C2Cigars

“ Nice tree in the background. ” -carthage44

“ No thank you, Mr U. Deck. ” -NJdevils

“ The "Red Backs" parallel IMMEDIATELY lost me. I hate sets distinguished only by a color of script or foil. At least I can tell when a border that is white in the base set is dark on a parallel (even if I can't tell what color it is). But lettering and foil are much harder for my eyes to recognize aren't all the same. Decent looking card otherwise. ” -switzr1

“ I'm starting to really like the Goudey sets, I like the look of the design and look of the card. I'm slowly working on the sets, the parallels will be the challenge! ” -Joshua825

Continue the conversation...

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Set: 2003 Upper Deck (Rate)

Card: #8 Earl Snyder

“ 19 MLB games. 12 hits, 1 of which was a HR. 6 organizations. At least he made it to the bigs! Good for him. ” -vrooomed

“ Wow, 36th round draft pick. Not much of a star rookie I would say. ” -carthage44

“ I'm not sure what to think about this set. I have some of these and it is an OK design. hard to read the "Star Rookie" tag on front. For vets it is their name and jersey number there in the hard to read foil. Man I wish the card companies had never used the foil lettering for base sets. ” -captkirk42

“ He looks like someone who heard something funny while sitting on the bench and he's not part of it and his eyes are saying: Oh well... ” -JimStaub

“ Nice front design. Simple and uncomplicated. One tweak I'd make is move the red name/team banner farther down. I'd like to see some stats on the back. So, apparently all it takes is to play 18 games and bat .200 to be called a Star. ” -C2Cigars

Continue the conversation...

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Set: 1999 Pacific Paramount (Rate)

Card: #180 Hugh Douglas

“ Meh. Not really sure what Pacific was going for here...I can't tell if it's supposed to be a whiteout theme (like SP Authentic) or if it's just a washed out scan. I don't know enough about football to know if the shadow border around his name is team colors or just randomly different. If it's the former, that's not too bad, but if it's the latter, then I would not like that at all. ” -Billy Kingsley

“ This may be the worst card ever. I'm hard-pressed to find anything redeeming about it! ” -dilemma19

“ Nothing paramount about this design. ” -carthage44

“ Looks like he's playing freeze tag. ” -NJdevils

“ Subtract some points for foil lettering, at least this you can sort of read. Can't tell is that the team name under the player name? Needs clear team name and team logo would be nice. Moving on to the back mostly somewhat OK except obvious only one year of stats, minus several million since the stats are vertical not horizontal. Ugly looking card did I say it was ugly? NO? Well it is Ugly. ” -captkirk42

“ I love the Pacific sets from this era, but the color foil parallels in some of the sets are enough to drive a person mad. ” -switzr1

“ Do the Hustle! Do do do do do do do..... ( I got nothin') ” -Kaline6

Continue the conversation...



Copyright © 2017
Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners.