Posted By | Message |
DaClyde
Posts: 1,314
Joined: Sep 2008
|
Wednesday, December 17, 2014 4:01 PM | |
Team sets vs oddball sets
I think it's time we settled on some criteria for the Team Set category. So far, it seems like only the team sets issued by Topps (or in earlier years, Upper Deck) get put there, while a large variety of sets issued by teams in tandem with sponsors (or not) are stuck in the Oddball category. My feeling is that all strictly MLB team-oriented sets should go in the Team Set category, leaving the oddball category for food issues and playing cards and stuff like that.
Increased global reach
On a similar topic, what is the current outlook as far as expanding globally and more directly supporting sets from around the world? I added enough Japanese sets that we got a "Japanese League" category, but the same would be increasingly useful for Korean, Venezuelan, Mexican and Taiwanese sets. That said, there would likely be a lot of need for German, Australian, Greek and Italian categories if we start getting more soccer/football, rugby, cricket and other non-US centric sports. I bring this up as I'm preparing to dramatically increase the number of Japanese sets posted to TCDB as I reduce my participation at a certain other site. That other site has also shown a complete lack of interest in expanding their scope to include more sports and countries.
More teams
Adding more countries and sports will increase the need for a somewhat more granular grouping of teams. I don't know that we'd necessarily want to get as narrow as specific leagues, or just as far as major league / minor league / amateur for each country. This is something COMC is likely struggling with as some sports have seen a lot of team name changes and variations in the past 20 years. We've already had similar discussions here about how to handle franchises and their naming history, but I'm not sure any conclusions were reached or decisions were made.
I would love to hear some thoughts on this, both from our wonderful Admin, as well as the other users and contributors that make this site so great. I see a bright future here and want to be sure everyone is included.
|
|
|
|
switzr1
Posts: 6,332
Joined: Dec 2013
|
Wednesday, December 17, 2014 7:36 PM | |
Perhaps there should be a minimum number of sets of a country within a sport heading to earn its own national grouping (like Canadian Football and Japanese Baseball have), and other countries could simply have an "International" grouping. I just acquired a Cyprian soccer card last week. I have no idea if I will ever identify it correctly, but if I had the checklist, I don't think I would expect a grouping for Cyprus under soccer. International might be good for it, as certain collectors might want to see these sorts of cards specifically. English soccer, on the other hand, has countless sets and would probably warrant its own grouping.
I've never had a full grasp on the team set vs oddball situation either. To me, a set like McDonald's Cardinals or Thorn Apple Valley Cubs would be a team set, even if they were a restaurant handout and a stadium handout, respectively. Oddball would be French's Mustard, which contained a variety of teams, or the Fleer box sets of the 1980s. Of course, minor league team sets already have their own place. This is my opinion, and I respect anyone else's.
Concerning additions of rugby, cricket, etc., I wouldn't object to specific sport groupings under the Misc. Sports heading. Don't necessarily have bowling cards as a category at the same level as baseball and football, but separate the bowling cards from the horse racing cards within the Misc. Sports. Just an idea. Nothing I'm adamant about.
-------------------------------
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.
|
|
|
|
vrooomed
Posts: 14,815
Joined: Dec 2012
|
Wednesday, December 17, 2014 7:47 PM | |
switzr1 may not have a clever signature, but the post is spot on. I agree 100% with his ideas. DaClyde, thanks for bringing this stuff up. TCDB is just getting better and better each and every day. Yes, we definitely need to get better with being so US-centric (or even North American-centric). This is the WORLD wide web, after all.
-------------------------------
-- 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).
|
|
|
|
thesemers
Posts: 71
Joined: Jan 2012
|
Thursday, December 18, 2014 3:36 AM | |
I also agree with
switzr1 on his
post. It is indeed
spot on. And
putting in
checklists from
other sports and
nations, I'm all
for it. I mean if
the Bratz can get
cards on the
database why not
rugby or cricket?
|
|
|
|
gb24
Posts: 252
Joined: Nov 2010
|
Thursday, December 18, 2014 9:09 AM | |
Can we make separate category called Broder in 1986,87,88,89,90 Baseball ? I have been filling in as much as I can in this area and I believe we would be the only place on the planet with this stuff categorized completely, once we are done.
|
|
|
|
Dave Sosidka
Posts: 304
Joined: Sep 2011
|
Thursday, December 18, 2014 11:38 AM | |
To me, Broder stuff should be under a category called Unlicensed Issues or (generously) Collectors' Issues. TCMA cards would also go there.
|
|
|
|
vrooomed
Posts: 14,815
Joined: Dec 2012
|
Thursday, December 18, 2014 4:08 PM | |
Giving Broder stuff a listing is being generous (in my opinion). Basically, they ripped off the premise of what we were doing at the company I worked for and didn't pay the same fees we were. Basically, they were illegal to make and sell. Sorry, I'll hop off the soap box before I REALLY get into it. :)
-------------------------------
-- 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).
|
|
|
|
DaClyde
Posts: 1,314
Joined: Sep 2008
|
Friday, December 19, 2014 6:46 AM | |
Yeah, I don't see giving 80s-90s unlicensed cards their own category, though I have no objection to their being listed. And TCMA would not fall into that category anyway. There really wasn't a licensing body for the minor leagues back then, and MLB/MLBPA didn't seem to care about historical sets containing players that were no longer members of the MLBPA. They fit perfectly into the Team Sets and Oddball categories.
|
|
|
|
DaClyde
Posts: 1,314
Joined: Sep 2008
|
Monday, March 2, 2015 10:08 AM | |
With the addition of the "Food Issues" category, I wanted to resurrect this thread and see if we could nail down some guidelines for the use of some of the categories. These are my suggestions, but I would definitely like others to chime in to see if we can get some sort of consensus.
Oddball
Oddball sets would be anything that is issued independent of any major set. This is something of a catch-all for sets that don't really fit in the other categories. I think there are a lot of sets currently listed as oddball that should be shifted to the new Food Issues or Team Sets categories. If a set does fit into another category, it should not be listed in the Oddball section.
Food Issues
In my view, food issue sets are any sets that were actually distributed with some type of food, be it discs issued with fountain drinks (Roy Rogers, 7-Eleven, Hardees, etc.), snacks (King-B beef jerky, Meadow Gold, Cracker Jack, Bazooka, Hostess, Jello, Jiffy Pop, M&M's, Mootown Snackers, etc.), breakfast cereal (Kellogg's, Post, Ralston Purina, Wheaties, etc.) or other foods (Jimmy Dean, Tombstone, Shakey's, etc.). Food Issues should not include team sets from food companies as sponsors for Baseball Card Night giveaways at ballparks. Those sets belong under...
Team Sets
Team sets should be any sets issued for a single team that do not fit in the Food Issues category. This would include all of stadium giveaways from Mother's Cookies, Keebler, Kahn's, Pepsi, Coke, Dr. Pepper, DAV, etc. This would also include any team sets issued by the major manufacturers and sold individually as has been done by Topps, Upper Deck (Collector's Choice), Score and others. The main exception here being team sets that belong under the Minor League, College or Japanese categories.
Bearing all this in mind, there are also the occasional sets that seem to be a food issue, but clearly aren't, like those Bazooka sets Topps did in the early 2000s.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Billy Kingsley
Posts: 7,510
Joined: Aug 2011
|
Monday, March 2, 2015 12:22 PM | |
I agree with you.
There are also
instances of promos
being listed with
the major releases
(at least one of
which is my fault,
for forgetting to
fix the drop down
box) and also mixed
in with the
Oddballs.
What are your
thoughts on Tobacco
issues? They were
the major issues of
the day but are
technically promo
issues. I think
they should be left
as is, personally,
but it bears the
thoughts of others
in my opinion.
-------------------------------
VERY slow trading due to health problems. Not transferrable so safe to trade with, just moving is painful and can't always access the cards. Cardboard History My COMC New Collection Website: Cardboard History Gallery (Still under construction) Tips on how to make your scans look like the card does in hand (No more washed out, fuzzy scans!):
|
|
|
|