General Forum

For baseball, Topps 1970, 1990, 1995, and 1996, 1990 Donruss, and any Bowman.

For all sports, the 1992 Topps design is so blah.

I only collect baseball but by company:

Topps: 1990 - way too much color (I was never a fan of the 1975 set though I know many of you rate it your favourite)

Donruss: 1990 followed a close second by 1991 and third 1989 - really ugly red borders? Who picked their border colors those years? The local kindergarten classes?

Fleer: 1991 - see donruss comments on the border colours; 1995 gets the honorable mention not so much for the design but for the card layout and the card number on some being very difficult to make out.

Score: 1991 - way too large of a set, subsets created to justify more cards, too many border colours (the only cards of this set I like a bit are the white borders), even the factory set box was ugly.

Upper Deck: 1992 - this was the fourth year of almost the same design, 1989 was a wonderful new concept in cards,1990 was still quite nice, by 1991 it was ok, but 1992, give me something new.  1993was a bit better but still not great, the cards and pictures were better than 1992 though the set grew into being too large.

O Pee Chee: 1994 only because some ofthe card # are impossible to make out.  You need a checklist beside you when sorting these.

Common theme here - they are all from the same era where the companies were just putting stuff out there because many had joined the hobby thinking they were going to get rich. The only ones who made money werethe companies themselves but for some of those, their riches did not last because they failed to change with the hobby.

Baseball only:

Topps - 1960 - sorry, I like a vertical front format.

Donruss - 1981 - that first effort was terrible. I never liked it and glad I moved my extra set of them a while back.

Score - 1988 - only because I really can't read the card numbers

UD - I agree with Bruno - 1992 because really, who needs the same basic design 4 years in a row?

Fleer - 1990 - The design is lame, the quality was worse than the design (ever take a stack of these and see how uneven the sizes are?), and they even spelled Ripken's name wrong - how in the world do you misspell one of the top 5 players in the game at the time??? And the card stock is poor quality. I actually thought 1991 was an IMPROVEMENT over 1990. (And let's face it, if 1990 Fleer didn't exist, there would have been a blurb in this post about 1991 Fleer. And 1995 gets a dishonorable mention for those hideous designs/layout/colors/garishness.)

Yes, I saved my least favorite of my least favorites for last.

Bruno, it appears that you don't like colorful borders!

Your comment reminded me, 1995 Fleer, in all four sports, is terrible beyond words.

David, the cards are supposed to be about the players, not the colorful designs. When I look at the cards through the years, those I like best are those that the player photo first attracted my eye, the older cards do that for the most part.  Some of these sets make me close my eyes tight and then slowly open them to avoid shock.

Thanks for all the replies, I am really enjoying reading these and then looking them up.  There definitely was some bad looking sets from the time I was away.  Those 94 Stadium Clubs and 95 Fleers are pretty bad.  I need to look up a lot of the others mentioned that I am unfamiliar with.  I have to laugh at the mentions of the sets I know, brings back memories!!

My least favorite vintage was  1972 Topps. Front was to busy and cut back on photo.  Then I have to say  1981 Donruss  so thin  and crazy cuts  some card were cut at an angle.  Then the mid 1990's  '95 to '99. Some for design  and some for just the number of cards in a set.  As leagues expanded  the card sets got smaller.  But at lease they fit in a 1 1/2" binder.

While a number of 1990s sets have questionable designs, I don't hate them as much because at least they are different and sometimes interesting, even if poorly executed at times.

The sets I don't like from a design standpoint are ones I consider boring. Of cards I own, my least favorite set is 2002 UD Victory. I find it really boring.

My least favorite set from an execution standpoint is 2008 UD Documentary. The player on the front of those cards don't match up with the write ups on the back. It just seems like a half-baked set that they decided to roll out anyway.

One of my least favorite sets has to be 1993 Upper Deck baseball. First year it was issued in two series, and the cards themselves had a weird gloss on them that made them stick together. The scripty font for the player name, and lack of team or UD logo on the front were horrible. The photography was pretty good, but the coloring of the photos often seemed off, like it was Photoshopped unnecessarily. (Example: http://www.tradingcarddb.com/ViewCard.cfm/sid/305/cid/109836/1993-Upper-Deck-436-Butch-Huskey )

There are some nice subsets as well as the Derek Jeter RC, but overall a "swing and miss" for me.