General Forum

This may already have been discussed and if it was I missed it.    These cards have no number on them nor do their parallel sets.    Yet all have have the player's uniform number as the card number.   Is this right or wrong.  I always thought these were to be NNO.      If NNO can someone or admin fix all.   If not, could someone make a note in the comments section explaining why they use the uniform number as card number.

From everything I've heard or read in the forums, I would tend to agree with you; those cards certainly appear to need to be NNO. Unfortunately I don't have the permissions level to fix that, but I would imagine someone could take care of that.

The card numbers should be NNO, the checklist uploader must have gotten the checklist from Beckett.com. I also don't have the permissions to do this, but it should be a quick and easy fix.

Another question is on the paralllel sets.   There are three,  each with a different color tab,  Black, Blue and Gold.   Is this based on the front tab or back tab.      I have Kenny Jackson, back looks black, front looks brown, but I put it under black.    Someone else put another under the black tab parallels for Reggie White, front looks black, back looks blue.   I hope we have a McD expert out there.

All of the McDonald's sets should be NNO if the cards are "numbered" by listing only the players' uniform number (which, IIRC from the small amount I have, is the case with them).

Additionally, the "parallels" are based on the color of the foil covering the scratch-off area on the tab on the front. Seems most collectors feel the card is incomplete without the tab (although it coul be cut off and redeemed for prizes in certain cases). Some may even feel it's not in mint condition if the foil was scratched off.

Edit: I knew I forgot something - simply send in an inaccuracy report on any base sets that need to be NNO. Insert/parallels can be fixed by Level 7 & 8 members. (You can always drop me an e-mail and I'll take care of it.)

I still don't understand why we collectively decided that jersey numbers are not numbers? It makes no sense and is so counterproductive to what we are trying to do here. It's always "match the cards" unless they use jersey numbers, then it's "don't match the cards".

Cards have plenty of numbers on them; years, dates, weight, height, stats, serial numbers, zip codes, etc.  But none of them are Card Numbers, and neither are uniform numbers.  So, if an NNO card doesn't have a uniform number listed, do you pick another random number you see printed on the back?

No, it's perfectly fine...and accurate...for a set to have numbers and NNO in the same sets. It all depends on what's actually on the cards. If they choose to not be the same, it doesn't really matter. We just document them. 

By using your argument, every Topps baseball set that used #7 for Mickey Mantle are all NNO. When they lost the licence for him, there was no #7. That would make every other set since then NNO because they aren't consecutive. Obviously, That's insane, yet it's also exactly what we do with team sets. 

Billy,

Your argument on the Topps missing #7 is stretching it a wee bit :).  Using that argument the original 1953 Topps set would also be NNO as there are 6 or 7 card numbers that were never issued.  In the case of team sets, the jersey # is not meant to be a card number; it is exactly what it is, the player's jersey #.  Therefore the cards should be NNO.  

I was about to write something very similar to this to address Billy's point.

Thanks for stealing that thunder. LOL!

No one ever said that skip-numbered sets are to be NNO. However, Admin has stated that cards that only have uniform numbers on the cards are not to be numbered using them. I have been finding several in the smaller baseball sets that were "numbered" by using the uniform numbers, and have been switching them over to NNO.