Laziness Hits a New Low

08.07.2009

In the past several months around the sports card blogosphere, a lot of a time has been spent writing and reading about the companies’ lackluster design attempts and the recycling of those poor design styles. This topic has recently been touched on a lot with the announcement that Upper Deck has now lost its NBA and MLB licenses in just a few months span. I often hear people complain that year after year, certain product lines continually reuse the same awful card designs, despite critical reviews and slumping sales.

I try not to get too worked up about brands being similar two or more years in a row. After all, this has been happening for a long time. In the 1960s and 70s, card companies often reused photographs from one year to the next, let alone had similar card designs. I do, however, have an issue with several products in the same year that look almost identical, and I’m not talking about Upper Deck’s flagship being the same for each major sport in a given year. This year, in the span of just over a month, Panini will release four separate football products. Not only do 2009 Score and 2009 (Leaf) Rookies & Stars have spin off products that are essentially glorified parallel sets (Score Inscriptions and Rookies & Stars Longevity, respectively), they also look like rip-offs of each other. Take the images below for an exhibit. The top row features scans of 2009 Score inserts while the bottom row shows 2009 Rookies & Stars inserts:


 

Each tiny thumbnail leads to a larger image

Notice any similarities? Let’s see…photo cut-out of player on very loud background…check. Random “paint splashes” and other crazy shapes…check. Needless diagonal lines poorly incorporated into the design…check. Mostly white background with either odd pastel or maybe team colors on aforementioned splashes and shapes…check. Some cards incorporating a design that only shows a cut-out of the player from the waist up…check. Text moving in multiple directions on the same card…check. Set logo appearing in an area of the card where it could easily be swaped out for the logo of another set produced by the same company…check.

To me, what we have here is just poor decision making. When I first saw images from 2009 Score, I admit I liked it. There is a huge movement towards guaranteed “hits” and high-end products while kids and budget collectors (especially in today’s economy) are left with very few collecting options. 2009 Score had a low-end feel to it, and a price point to match. Cool. Then 2009 Leaf Rookies and Stars came out and I noticed a troubling thing. They are essentially the exact same product. The only difference? Leaf Rookies and Stars promises a bunch more hits and each box will yield you less than half as many cards as a box of Score, but will cost you more than twice as much. So really, Panini has acquired two fairly old name brands that were very different, completely destroyed both of them, and then passed them off as Crap and Crap Deluxe, because R&S is really just Score with more inserts and hits. I can understand going through a dry spell. I’m sure we’ve all experienced writer’s block or creative constipation. But it appears as though Panini has one guy in charge of creating designs for all non-Donruss brands and he was only able to come up with one concept…so he just made some subtle differences and passed it off as two separate product lines. Poor form, Panini. Poor form.

Remember when Score and Leaf Rookies & Stars were two separate entities and appealed to different markets while looking completely different…because they really were two separate products? I do:

2001 Score2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars
Click each image to view a full sized and original scan


Live Today: 2009 Score

07.15.2009

Despite being bought out several times, Score is back for its 20th anniversary in football cards, with its latest edition coming from Panini America, a.k.a. Donruss. This classic set is available in boxes of 36 packs of 7 cards each. The 400-card base set consists of 300 stars and rising performers and 100 rookies.

As is the case with all Donini products, you can expect a bunch of inserts and a whole host of parallels. 2009 Score inserts include Hot Rookies (30), The Franchise (20), Future Franchise (20), Young Stars (20), and 1989 Rookie Reprints (10). The base set and each insert set (except the 1989 Rookie Reprints) has at least 6 parallels, which include Glossy, Scorecard (# to 499), Gold Zone (# to 299), Red Zone (# to 100), Artist’s Proof (# to 32), and End Zone (# to 6). The base set and 1989 Rookie Reprint insert set also have an Inscriptions parallel featuring autographs (# to 20 or less for the Reprint inserts).



Each tiny thumbnail leads to a larger image

Quick note: Each thumbnail leads to a very large image, except for the base card of Ben Roethlisberger. I couldn’t find a higher resolution image for the base card. Sorry for the inconvenience and possible eye strain.

Per box breakdown: 36 packs, 7 cards (252 total) including: 36 rookies (1 per pack), 36 glossy parallels (1 per pack), 1 Scorecard parallel, 1 Gold Zone parallel, 6 Hot Rookies inserts, 3 The Franchise inserts, 3 Future Franchise inserts, 3 Young Stars inserts, 1 1989 Rookie Reprint insert, and 6 other random inserts/parallels.

From the images I have seen, Score seems to be delivering on its budget reputation. The cards are ridiculously cheap (a box of 252 cards will only set you back around $20-$30), but the design shows it. There is certainly no pizazz when it comes to the base set or even inserts (glossy cards are a parallel), so you definitely get what you pay for. For me, I think the base card’s border is a tad over done and there is way too much going on in the background of the other inserts, leaving them with a rather tacky appearance. The one idea I love is the 1989 Rookie Reprints. Donini pays tribute to Score’s early days when they ruled the rookie world in football cards, without feeling the need to create an entire retro set a la Topps and Upper Deck. A set of 10 rookies is a little too small in my opinion, but doing the entire 100-card rookie subset in this design could have been overkill as well. So I guess I’ll take what I can get. Too bad I’m not stoked about any of this year’s top rookies (I still claim Derrick Williams and Deon Butler are severely underrated).

What is your first take? Do you love the chance to build a set or collect cards of your favorite team/player(s) without breaking the bank, or is this low-budget release not worth the cardboard it’s printed on?


It Wasn’t All Good

06.30.2009

If you have been reading my blog since its inception about a month ago, you may think that I am in love with football cards that are now a decade old. This certainly is true, to an extent. I think that cards from the mid-to-late 90s were some of the best cards I have ever seen. I have been known to enjoy a new product from time to time (2007 Topps Co-Signers, 2008 Upper Deck, etc.), but generally I do admit that I am a bigger fan of older wax.

That being said, I will also be the first to admit that not every set from my favorite era was gold. Take the card below for example. While the design is not horrible (I rather like the football border on the left side and the player’s name is much easier to read in person than in this scan), the photography leaves a lot to be desired. I usually do not like when two big time athletes are on the same card without it being a team card or other multi-player specific card. Here, instead of showing Emmitt blasting through the defensive line or dashing into the end zone, we see him embracing teammate Troy Aikman. Yes, this is most likely a celebration after Emmitt did score a touchdown, but should we really praise the photographer for being late and not capturing the actual moment? Even with all of this, the main photo is not my issue with this card. What I would like to know is what in the world is up with the profile picture?!? Here is a man who played most of his career in Texas and often showcased a prime time smile (though not as glorious as Neon Deion Sanders’), and they picked this shot? Was this his one trip to Green Bay and the photographer took a quick break from admiring Brett Favre’s aura? I mean, you can’t even see most of his face, and he’s not wearing a helmet!


Click image for full sized scan

Is this the worst card ever produced? Certainly not. We have seen far worse cards in just the last year or releases. Could it be improved? Absolutely. If you combine this card’s relatively simple and crisp design with some modern Upper Deck photography, you could have an amazing base card. Am I still in love with older cards, despite some of their shortcomings? Always.

Am I done complaining? For now…