Posted By | Message |
vrooomed
Posts: 14,779
Joined: Dec 2012
|
Thursday, October 12, 2017 6:27 AM | |
Two points:
1 - When the Canadian version of Donruss was first released in 1985, we were calling it Donruss/Leaf. When that changed, I don't know. But in my boxes of commons (sorted numerically by set, then in alpha order by set name by year, 1985 saw Donruss, Donruss/Leaf, Fleer, OPC, Topps - in that order). Within the past 3 years, I integrated a 5,000-count box into the commons, so I had to shuffle most of them around, and re-did them to match off with the site: D, F, L, O, T. Since we don't call OPC "OPC/Topps", we probably should drop the Donruss portion as they were simply called Leaf sets.
2 - We don't follow the checklist order for NNO sets because we may not always have access to the actual checklist card (and many sets don't even have CL cards) and Admin decided that for the site they created, they wanted it this particular way. Additionally, I have seen (probably have some) sets (mostly minor league baseball), where the spot used for the player's uniform number is then filled with non-useful info for non-uniformed personnel (trainers, SCOs, EMs, mascots, GMs, etc.). What to do in those cases? Use whatever was in that spot for those? What if it's all the same for all those mentioned? Or if there is no info at all? (Set w/examples) So in the example set, should we have 3 cards numbered "2017"? I wish companies would just number their sets. There's no excuse for a set these days (since 1990) to not be numbered.
-------------------------------
-- Dan -- Note: Please see my profile for more info regarding trading (section updated 3/4/2024). I have added a large portion of my inventory to the site, and currently have trading turned on (details are in my profile).
|
|
|
|
switzr1
Posts: 6,332
Joined: Dec 2013
|
Thursday, October 12, 2017 10:36 AM | |
I should add that's it's not important to me either way. I may never even think about this topic again. I don't build sets. I don't sort in numerical order. Card numbers don't matter to me, unless I'm trying to identify a card in the database with a player's filter. At that point, if I have a card with the number 14 displayed prominently on the back, I would be inclined to think that was the card number and search for the card that way. In no way am I trying to say that anyone else's opinion is "wrong". As Dan said, the wrong ones are the manufacturers for not numbering their cards.
-------------------------------
I'm going to reevaluate how I collect after the new year. It's just getting way too expensive for the new stuff. Sometimes I just want to buy a pack, not a whole box or even blaster.
|
|
|
|
Billy Kingsley
Posts: 7,510
Joined: Aug 2011
|
|
|
|
NJDevils
Posts: 6,342
Joined: Sep 2010
|
Thursday, October 12, 2017 10:50 AM | |
And for the umpteenth time, I hate everything about the Bowman "numbering" system. Seems they have more letters than numbers. Should call it the Bowman "lettering system".
|
|
|
|
C2Cigars
Posts: 11,319
Joined: Oct 2014
|
Thursday, October 12, 2017 1:14 PM | |
Card numbers are card numbers, a numbering system to sequentially organize a set. A uniform number is a uniform number, a system used to identify and distinguish players on a team.
And a card with both might send some into a panic.
-------------------------------
Someday my cards may double in value and then be worth half of what I paid for them.
|
|
|
|
Billy Kingsley
Posts: 7,510
Joined: Aug 2011
|
|
|
|
vrooomed
Posts: 14,779
Joined: Dec 2012
|
Thursday, October 12, 2017 2:57 PM | |
Billy, which Topps sets are you speaking of? I know there were several sets that skipped #7, but I don't know of any that were all #7.
-------------------------------
-- Dan -- Note: Please see my profile for more info regarding trading (section updated 3/4/2024). I have added a large portion of my inventory to the site, and currently have trading turned on (details are in my profile).
|
|
|
|
switzr1
Posts: 6,332
Joined: Dec 2013
|
Thursday, October 12, 2017 4:39 PM | |
Joe makes the most valid of all points right here
-------------------------------
I'm going to reevaluate how I collect after the new year. It's just getting way too expensive for the new stuff. Sometimes I just want to buy a pack, not a whole box or even blaster.
|
|
|
|
Billy Kingsley
Posts: 7,510
Joined: Aug 2011
|
|
|
|
vrooomed
Posts: 14,779
Joined: Dec 2012
|
Thursday, October 12, 2017 8:46 PM | |
Billy, I have a ton of respect for you. However, I think you're reaching here.
Having a set where intentionally (or unintentionally) a card here and there happen to match a players jersey number does not exclude it from being a numbered set. Since you're getting into hockey, let me introduce you to a set that, using your logic, would be NNO: http://www.tradingcarddb.com/ViewAllSet.cfm/sid/5411/1997-98-Pacific-Crown Many of the cards in the first 100 match the uniform number. Obviously, the last 250 cards cannot match. They are not using the uniform numbers AS the actual card numbers. Ray Bourque was never #1. Just because they decided to use #19 for Steve Yzerman doesn't mean that the whole set all of sudden goes to NNO.
Team sets that have no numbers on them except for uniform numbers have no card numbers. I can understand the desire to use the uniform numbers as the card numbers, but then you run into the exceptions, and you have to figure out how to handle them. Admin decided that for simplicity sake, they are all NNO.
-------------------------------
-- Dan -- Note: Please see my profile for more info regarding trading (section updated 3/4/2024). I have added a large portion of my inventory to the site, and currently have trading turned on (details are in my profile).
|
|
|
|