Topps Living Set

[Fsegaud]

Originally Posted by Joliet Jake

That would be an absurd level of historical erasure.

I agree...but any other legit reason why Indians is not there?

Do you put it past Topps to do that?

They can't even write "Los Angeles" in front of Angels.

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by Fsegaud

I agree...but any other legit reason why Indians is not there?

Do you put it past Topps to do that?

They can't even write "Los Angeles" in front of Angels.

Sadly, I don't put it past them.

The amount of pandering to an audience that will never be your customer is sad.

Paige played for six Negro League teams and three American League teams, so what does Topps do, they feature him with the only team they're unwilling to use the full name for. I don't want to assume malicious intent when it could be a simple mistake, but that would also mean Topps did their homework and truly considered all team options after deciding to feature Paige in the set.

[eldavojohn]

Originally Posted by Fsegaud

They can't even write "Los Angeles" in front of Angels.

I thought that was their official name after the absurd Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim name change made everyone laugh?

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by eldavojohn

I thought that was their official name after the absurd Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim name change made everyone laugh?

Based on Baseball Reference, they've been officially known as the Los Angeles Angels since 2016.

However, with the Living Set beginning in 2018, the Angels have always been listed as such, omitting the city for whatever reason.

[Fsegaud]

Originally Posted by eldavojohn

Topps usually puts him in an STL browns uni and I'm guessing they are committed to not using that franchise name anymore:

Thanks for the example...that pretty much settles it. Sad times.

[Fsegaud]

Originally Posted by Joliet Jake

Based on Baseball Reference, they've been officially known as the Los Angeles Angels since 2016.

However, with the Living Set beginning in 2018, the Angels have always been listed as such, omitting the city for whatever reason.

Same for Topps Now I believe?

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by Fsegaud

Same for Topps Now I believe?

I would assume, but I can't find an example of a Topps Now card from 2022 or 2023 that should've mentioned the Indians and doesn't. Granted, I didn't dig that deep.

I took a look at 2022 Topps 206 on TCDb to see how the team name was displayed. You can see the difference between the Indians and Guardians.



While we agree this is ridiculous, if this is how Topps is going to approach Indians players, then choose a different team if you have the option to.

I feel bad for Cleveland fans if they ever get cards of Tris Speaker, Lou Boudreau, Kenny Lofton, or Bob Lemon. Three of those guys are Hall of Famers, and played most or all of their career with the Indians. The Guardians weren't a thing prior to 2022, and pretending like that's not the case is immature.

[kidfan9]

Can’t say “Indians”! Freedom of speech is heading out the door, sad.

[astroshane]

Both artists and Topps brought the heat this week. Just look at that Smoltz ! Now we have the big three, Maddox, Glavine, and Smoltz.

[jaredkelley]

Originally Posted by Chihuahuas

All, not sure if this is proper group for this question, but wondering if anyone else has experience on artist autograph verification failure at PSA. I had another Living Set Jared signed card psa/dna verified and slabbed previously with no issues, but just had 3 returned saying unable to determine of both Angel and Jared. All cards ordered directly from artists that had proof authenticity proof enclosed.

When I asked psa support during verification step and sent those verifications they said don’t honor 3rd party authentication. I can understand human opinion is part of the process & luck of the draw sometimes so I sent those certificates of authenticity to support & so grader could have 2 independent signatures to look at and help determine are authentic. I am thinking of resubmitting but don’t want PSA to think I am pulling a fast one, plus this isn’t cheap.

I treasure artist signed cards so not even considering selling. I just want to have PSA slabbed for safe keeping and match in my other Living Set PSA graded display.

Has anyone else had this happen?
Any advice?
Does anyone know what codes N0 and N9 means?

P.S. - I’m new to grading & never sent or even considered or valued enough to invest in so I am newbie on grading. Not complaining or slamming grader or grading service. Just curious since I’ve never had happened before and was heart broken.

Would appreciate your thoughts.

Long live the Living Set.

Well - it's been a tedious back-and-forth with PSA trying to convince them that my foil signed Living Set cards are actually authentic. My biggest fear is that this will continue to be an issue with them over the years. I absolutely feel horrible for any of you who spent money with PSA to slab these artist-signed cards only to have them returned by PSA as-is. PSA refused to give me any reasons why they passed on authenticating the foil signed cards, which were the best quality foil-autos I provide to collectors. Apparently, PSA thinks I can do better. Here is their reply to me (I'm not sure who Craig is):

"Hello Craig,

Thank you for contacting PSA Customer Care.

Unfortunately, providing images, a proof, or pictures will not make a difference. As previously stated, Our authenticators can only render an opinion based on the evidence that they have in front of them; the most important evidence being the characteristics of the autograph itself. The signature has to stand on its own merit, which means that if the pen that was used didn’t flow evenly, their hand shook and made a loop too big, there were hesitations, etc... it can be deemed questionable.

While we understand the effort you are putting forth for the customer, this will not change our authenticators professional opinion.

I know it can be hard to "just trust us!" but I do want to assure you that we have earned this trust from the community for being the best and most trusted third-party authentication service on the market for over 30 years.

If you have any other questions that I can help with, please do not hesitate to reach out.

Sincerely,
Michael A.

PSA Associate Customer Care Representative"

[Bunny Hop]

I love how clean the Paige art is.

[Bunny Hop]

I do not love the PSA reps response, despite not having any intent to grade my signed Jared cards.

[Natsfan32]

Originally Posted by kidfan9

Can’t say “Indians”! Freedom of speech is heading out the door, sad.

IF Topps is forbidden to use "Indians" it is the result of corporate decisions rather than the law or government.

[eldavojohn]

Originally Posted by kidfan9

Can’t say “Indians”! Freedom of speech is heading out the door, sad.

I don't fault companies from not wanting to exile a subset of potential customers ... that said I think this is stupid and wouldn't have exiled anyone. And that said, this has nothing to do with free speech ... I can think of a lot of words companies don't want to use and that self-censorship has had zero bearing on what I legally can and legally cannot say aloud in public.

The one thing that leaves me scratching my head is their parent company seems fine with making money off it so ...

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by astroshane

Both artists and Topps brought the heat this week. Just look at that Smoltz ! Now we have the big three, Maddox, Glavine, and Smoltz.

The inclusion of Smoltz also completes the 2015 Hall of Fame class.

• Craig Biggio - 2019 - 208 - Houston Astros
• Randy Johnson - 2019 - 160 - Arizona Diamondbacks
• Pedro Martinez - 2022 - 555 - Boston Red Sox
• John Smoltz - 2024 - 699 - Atlanta Braves

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by Bunny Hop

I love how clean the Paige art is.

Angel's Paige would easily fit in the original 1953 set. It's like he's taken that original style, and improved upon it. It's truly immaculate.

Originally Posted by Bunny Hop

I do not love the PSA reps response, despite not having any intent to grade my signed Jared cards.

I don't plan on grading mine either, but I agree, the rep's response is embarrassing. How do you mess up someone's name in an email?

[MtnAg08]

Love the artwork on both cards and so glad to see both of these players represented. It is disappointing that they didn't do Paige with the Monarchs as I was really hoping to get that franchise included in the set. I also wonder if that means we still won't be getting any more Negro League players since Paige is being represented in his MLB uniform. Am really hoping to see Cool Papa Bell sometime in the future.

Also, I agree with everybody else that if you are going to do Paige with Cleveland why not include Indians in the name? So glad that Feller, Lofton & Thome got in the set before Topps supposedly switched to this new rule. It definitely makes me less excited for any other future, former Indians that may be added.

[eldavojohn]

Originally Posted by MtnAg08

I also wonder if that means we still won't be getting any more Negro League players since Paige is being represented in his MLB uniform. Am really hoping to see Cool Papa Bell sometime in the future.

I would wager that if they played with an MLB team you'll see them in an MLB team uniform otherwise their team. For example, I imagine Buck Leonard will be in the living set eventually and will be Homestead Grays.

[eldavojohn]

Originally Posted by Joliet Jake

However, with the Living Set beginning in 2018, the Angels have always been listed as such, omitting the city for whatever reason.

Originally Posted by Fsegaud

Same for Topps Now I believe?

Um I feel like very nearly all Topps cards have been listing them as just "Angels" with the registered mark for some time now:

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by MtnAg08

Love the artwork on both cards and so glad to see both of these players represented. It is disappointing that they didn't do Paige with the Monarchs as I was really hoping to get that franchise included in the set. I also wonder if that means we still won't be getting any more Negro League players since Paige is being represented in his MLB uniform. Am really hoping to see Cool Papa Bell sometime in the future.

Also, I agree with everybody else that if you are going to do Paige with Cleveland why not include Indians in the name? So glad that Feller, Lofton & Thome got in the set before Topps supposedly switched to this new rule. It definitely makes me less excited for any other future, former Indians that may be added.

I forgot Lofton had already been featured.

Thank you for the reminder.

[Joliet Jake]

Originally Posted by eldavojohn

Um I feel like very nearly all Topps cards have been listing them as just "Angels" with the registered mark for some time now:

Sorry, I should have clarified.

You are correct, I believe Topps switched to simply using the Angels moniker as of 2016 when the team dropped the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim as their official club name.

It may simply be a situation where Baseball Reference and TCDb will not list a team without a city. Angels may very well be the official name of the club as far as MLB is concerned, which would be even more ridiculous. Then again, Arte Moreno is always game for some absurdity to bring attention to his club.

[jaredkelley]

Originally Posted by TUAlum96

I’m excited to see Satchel in the set! It still seems like a missed opportunity not to feature him as a Kansas City Monarch (or as a member of another Negro League team, lest you think I’m entirely KC-driven). Jared or Angel, any insight as to why we haven’t seen any more Negro Leaguers since Josh Gibson?

Angel's work is flawless, as usual. It's too bad for Angel that Topps didn't allow Satchel to be featured in a Monarchs uniform. I think that would have boosted the sales significantly on card 700.

I have been a consistent squeaky wheel with Topps regarding the Negro League. Topps doesn't relay updates with me regarding the licensing hold-ups, nor should they technically. I'm just an illustrator.

My personal research on this matter has led me to believe that every Negro League team and their emblems, with the exception of the Monarchs and the Indianapolis Clowns, are available for public use because their copyrights have expired. The NLBM was able to determine the identity and location of the owners for the Monarchs and Clowns and bought the rights to those teams specifically.

Additionally, in 1993 NLBM commissioned an artist to update logos for 20 of the best known Negro League teams, which the NLBM calls "Retro Logos" to differentiate from "authentic logos". NLMB therefore owns all rights to the updated Retro Logos for those 20 teams. But my understanding is that Topps can freely use any of the authentic logos of those 20 teams, with the exception of the Monarchs and the Clowns.

Did Topps consider working out an agreement with NLBM to use Satchel in a Monarchs' jersey? I don't know.

(I got this info from an article written by Tom Linafelt in 1997)

[gmarutiak]

Originally Posted by Fsegaud

I think they just will not use the name INDIANS ever again on a baseball card. Pathetic in my view.

Agreed. The absurdity is amplified by the inclusion of the Smoltz card in the same week. Indians=UNACCEPTABLE. Braves=ACCEPTABLE.

Now get off my lawn!

[SoCal Topps Now]

What happened to the Checklist for 601-700? Any ideas?

[jaredkelley]

Originally Posted by gmarutiak

Agreed. The absurdity is amplified by the inclusion of the Smoltz card in the same week. Indians=UNACCEPTABLE. Braves=ACCEPTABLE.

Now get off my lawn!

This is a brilliant observation.