Thursday, February 2, 2012

the obligatory 2012 topps post

You didn't really think you'd get away with me not doing a 2012 post did you?

Well, if you remember a few days ago, I planned on busting two jumbo boxes to get my two sets and be done with series one for the most part right?

Well that changed.

Instead, I ended up picking up one jumbo box, four jumbo packs and three hobby packs. I also decided to buy the second set plus the 50 card 1987 Topps mini set off eBay. Allow me to explain.

I wanted two sets and the 1987 set. I figured instead of buying two jumbos and not finishing the 87 set, I'd go with one and buy the two sets on eBay so I spend less and so I'm also not stuck with cards I can't trade away. It seems that pretty much everyone is on the negative side of 2012 Topps as a whole. How will I trade cards if no one is actually collecting any of the insert sets aside from the 1987 minis? Thats also part of the reason I bought that set, due to the fact that it seems like that is the one insert set most are chasing (chalk it up to the age of a good chunk of the collectors around here), making it tougher to complete. I just saved myself the trouble and I now have some available for trade.

My feelings toward series one as a whole are both happy with it and underwhelmed. Here is why. The inserts do nothing for me. The more I looked at them in pack breaks by you guys, the more I saw stuff I didn't really care about. Golden this, greatest that. Whatever. Even the Classic Walk-Offs set, which initially I loved the idea of, came out disappointing to me. The cards are boring when they could have been fantastic. They didn't have to cater EVERY insert set to the relics and autos but they did. Walk-offs included. How very droll.

What I am happy with though is the base card photography. It is surely outstanding this year. A bunch of plays at the plate (including one of a pitcher Tom Gorzelanny!), double plays and fun around the park. So many great photos and I really think that this is one of the best years in recent memory for the pictures themselves. Tim Hudson's card is great too, which shows him watching a home run that he hit. Sweet! The design itself is not too bad and I'm sure will grow on me once series 2 hits in the summer. I'm also a huge fan of the gold parallels and am hugely a fan of them not being serial numbered. Speaking of numbers, I pulled two black bordered cards numbered to 61 and they use the foil stamping on the back as opposed to that awful cheap black stamping they've done for the past two years.

Now, on to what I got out of my packs/box. I won't show anything but the hits because I know you've seen your fair share of everything else.

My jumbo box included:
Decent but nothing outstanding. The rings card is gigantic thick. Fourteen base cards thick to be exact.

Out of the four jumbo packs:
Oh goody, a redemption. Well, better than nothing I suppose.

I'll grab some packs here and there but for the most part I too, believe I'm finished picking this set up.

You know, in a funny way, Topps DID create a game changer, they somehow got us all to buy less!


  1. I'd love to trade for the Bills redemption and Gordon. Well, maybe the Bills. I have a bid in on eBay for it that ends later tonight....

  2. i think you are spot on about topps 2012 - good post. i feel the same way about the inserts - it's pretty consistent with everyone in blogland, too...

    i have mild interest in the golden greats and gold standard - but perhaps they are just too similar, in a way? like they get mixed up in my mind, too!

  3. I haven't gotten to rip any 2012 yet, but your feeling are almost identical too mine. I'm curious about the ring card. Is the faux ring made of plastic or metal or something else? It looks neat and I've seen a bunch of them from blog and forum posts.

  4. Agreed. I'm only collecting Reds, Tigers and Cubs and, lightly, Golden Standards and Gold Futures.

  5. Buddha: the faux rings on the cards (they're not full rings, alas, though that would've made them even thicker) are made of metal, and they're pretty heavy! I got a Schmidt one in a jumbo yesterday.

    Ted: spare '87 minis? Hm. Interesting. You might totally have the right idea with that whole "buying the set outright" thing though. I'll sleep on it and make a decision over the weekend.

    How are you on base doubles?

  6. I don't think the rings are that heavy, I think its due to the thick cardboard they're encased in. The metal itself is probably cheap, as they did mass produce them. I got my full set, minus the two cards that were damaged. They weren't they only two damaged cards though. I ended up with about 16 or so that I wouldn't put into a set that I'm keeping, selling or otherwise. I just didn't get dupes of those two but did of the other 14. Doubles I'm decent on.

  7. I bought the 87 mini set too. Still thinking about building one as well.

  8. I am working on all the insert sets, if you are interested in trading drop me a line and I can shoot you my want list.


  9. Don't need the Bills anymore but I'm down to trade for the Gordon if you wouldn't mind setting it aside until I can dig something up for you.

  10. I'm with the majority about the Panini designed inserts. Wasn't going to do the '87s, but might now just to have more than one or two insert sets to go with the base.
    I got several cards - usually the last ones in the pack - that had a doinked or layered corner.

    Will expound on the incomplete insert designs and more this weekend over at