Tuesday, January 4, 2011

Death sentence


In yet another depressing proof of the theory that the "masses are asses," this card was selected as one of Topps' 60 best of all-time.

Shame, shame, collectors. We've been played again.

I know that Topps can be blamed for much of this. It deemed only 100 of its cards as the best of all-time, and a respectable chunk of those cards were dismissible junk.

But apparently many collectors did not read the rules of the voting.

These 60 cards that are determined the best of all-time by your votes are to be randomly inserted into this year's base set.

Aaarrrrghhhh! What have we done? We could have voted for all those '50s and '60s cards! Throw in some key '70s cards and there were close to 60 cards that anybody would be happy to pull out of a pack of 2011 cards.

Instead, collectors voted the 1989 Randy Johnson card as the 54th best card of all-time.

And for your excellence in voting, you will be rewarded. Topps will vomit thousands of Randy Johnson cards into its 2011 packs. How many 1989 Johnson cards do you think Topps owns? I think I know the answer. Infinite.

Nice going.

Collectors like me, who can't afford to buy box after box of 2011 product, will trudge to the store to grab a few packs, and end up with a few more Randy Johnsons to throw onto the pile of Randy Johnsons they picked up in 1989. And the second pile of Randy Johnsons they picked up in repacks over the last two decades. I'm certain that the Johnson card will appear at a ratio of 9,000 to every one 1956 Ted Williams card that shows up in 2011 packs.

And that's probably why Topps did a little party dance when Johnson appeared as one of the voted 60 best. I'm sure someone at the party uttered the word "suckers," and then immediately ducked into the printing press area and ordered up another 500,000 '89 Johnson cards.

Of course the thought of that makes me think that maybe the voting was rigged. Maybe collectors really aren't stupid enough not to realize that they're going to get buried by '89 Randy Johnsons if they vote for that card. I know I voted and I stayed clear of that card and just about everything from the 1980s. I couldn't have been the only one. Maybe no one voted for that card. After all, what's to stop Topps from saying, "Here's the top 60 that YOU voted on" if they don't show the voting tallies? It would certainly keep them from hunting down all those '50s cards.

I have no proof that this happened, but I do have a semi-active imagination.

All I know is we are resigned to pulling '89 Randy Johnson cards from packs this year, and I have already discussed what I would do if I pulled that card.

My scissors are sharpened and ready. I have several other sharp objects prepared, too. The results will be displayed here. I am 100 percent sure that I'm pulling one of those babies. And it will be time to exercise some population control.

But first, I'll allow one last chance for someone to plead for the life of the poor 1989 Randy Johnson card.

Any pleas? Anyone?

I'm waiting.

...

I didn't think so.

16 comments:

  1. I thought this was going to be about the Jeter/Mantle/G.W. Bush card. Another poor choice by the voters.

    If I was a cynic, I'd say that Topps had the 60 cards all picked out and the vote was a sham designed to give collectors the illusion of some say in the make-up of the product they purchase. A clever ruse, if you will. But I'm sure it was all above board.

    /sarcasm

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm with you. So far the list of 60 greatest is so unimpressive that it would HAVE to have been rigged.

    ReplyDelete
  3. does anyone actually believe that these cards are being voted on by the masses?
    Topps execs came up with the list months ago.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Now, will it be the actual card, or a 'new' version of it.

    I wouldn't do that to the current one.

    I wouldn't do that to any of them.

    Maybe mail it back to Topps instead?

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Of course the thought of that makes me think that maybe the voting was rigged."
    My thoughts exactly.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Alright, I picked up the gauntlet and did a contrarian post about why this card belongs. Look for it to go live Wednesday afternoon...

    (and it wasn't necessarily difficult to pin down why it does belong either)

    ReplyDelete
  7. I guess I'm partially to blame since I voted for the Randy. In my defense my vote was meant in more of a sarcastic way.

    moe.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I didn't vote so I have to keep my mouth shut.

    ReplyDelete
  9. For what it's worth...seeing stuff like this doesn't make me want to buy more Topps product this year. Which wasn't much to begin with, since the 2011 base design didn't have a "Wow" factor for me.

    Not only that, I am still bitter that I couldn't find even a 1986 Buddy Biancalana card in their '91 40th anniversary "giveaway"...last year's MCG gave me a handful of 1970s and later cards I already had (and then ended up being offered ridiculous offers to trade them away).

    So this long-time Topps consumer is probably going to just go look for those vintage cards I need from third-party sellers, because I have absolutely ZERO confidence I can get something by buying any of their product.

    And I'll likely end up getting the better bargain in the meantime.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I don't think anyone is voting. In fact, I guarantee no one is voting.

    And to answer the question as to how many of those they have...well, if me, a lowely, run-of-the-mill, average Joe collector has over 200 of these...the law of exponential redonktification means that they would in turn possess slightly more than 4...million.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I started to vote, and got so bored with the whole process I gave up. I think I will stick to old sets this year.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Okay before I get lynched by some of you... let me just say that I didn't vote for this card... and it would never make my top 60 list.

    But... on the flip side. I love this card. Not because it's a rookie card of a surefire HOFer... but because it pictures him in the Expos... bleu, blanc, et rouge. A few years ago, I hated this design... but much like the 86 Topps design, it's slowly has grown on me.

    If I ever do pick up this product... I'd be stoked to pull one of these bad boys... even if I can pick one of these up off of COMC for less than $.50.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Send me your address Fuji, and I'll send you five of them for $.00.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The whole thing was whack from the get-go. I didn't even bother voting because the "top 100" was such a joke. All that Mantle. All that junk wax. I think it would have been interesting if they just turned us loose to vote for our personal top 100 and see what came out on top. (Or even if we voted for our top 50, or 20, or whatever). It would have been interesting for me to see what cards are universally felt to be iconic.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I don't think Randy is to blame here. The problem is 1989 Topps. I literally cannot even step outside my door in the morning without walking into a wall of 1989 Topps packs. The roving cats that creep around the building deposit lifeless 1989 Topps cards at our doorsteps and in stairwells, foolishly hoping to gain some sort of approval. Homeless people approach me on the streets and beg of me to please take their 1989 Topps for some "good karma". Hell, you can't even burn these things without releasing some sort of cancer-causing noxious gas fumes that simultaneously destroy the ozone layer and coat gulf coast creatures in oil and soot.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I LOVE THIS POST! I did not vote for this card. I like how it looks, but I would have never voted for a 1989 Topps card. I purposely stayed away from all the Mantle's that they had on there, save for the '52 because, come on, it IS the iconic baseball card not named Wagner. I also didn't vote for the Jeter/Mantle/Bush because of the lame hype surrounding the card (even though the gold version got me $265 on ebay). If, in fact, the fans are the ones who voted, then it further fuels my theory that he fans have no business voting on the All Star game and as some have speculated, should never be considered for having a vote on the Hall of Fame.

    ReplyDelete