We all know 1990 Donruss, and 1991 Donruss, and 1965 Topps Embossed; almost the icons of ugly sets. But a lot of disasters have slipped through the cracks, so I'm thinking about doing a little series to highlight those lesser-known wonders. Hope no one has done this before.
In the early 2000s, there were a lot of sets like UD Vintage and Fleer Tradition, which were basically devoted to tweaking old Topps designs a tiny bit to avoid a lawsuit, and then passing it off as their own. So you can't really call any of those sets good, when they were glorified rip-offs. It makes you feel that Topps deserves to be the only MLB-licensed baseball card company if that's what the other companies did.
But the worst of those sets was 2001 Fleer Tradition. The problem, in my eyes, with a lot of retro sets is that they use a photo filter to make the pictures look older. I get why they do it, but I think it always looks terrible. But the worst use of it comes in 2001 Fleer Tradition, hands down. The action shots have the filter, and it's the worst I've ever seen. Here's an example:
I mean, look at that. Mo's face is a blur, you can barely read "New York," and everything else looks weird. And it's not the scan (from TCDB), as I have this card and it's just as bad in hand.
Some more atrocities:
What could they have been thinking?
The set could be worse. The layout is okay, and it really might be a nice front if it weren't for the stupendously bad action shots.
The backs are fairly innocuous. One thing I don't like about them is the cartoons. They're boring, and not even player specific.
The statistics are meager, for 2001, and there really isn't anything to make up for that. Look at all that space at the top!
And after awhile they wimp out, and don't even include the pitiful cartoons, so there's an ocean of blankness. All that space could be used for stats.
The Upper Deck Vintage sets were at least kind of brazen in that they changed the designs as little as they could get away with. This one, I can't even tell whether it's supposed to be 1955 or 1956, and the banners suggest a little 1979 for some reason. And you're right that the effects on the action photo are just stupid.
ReplyDeleteTopps Embossed really are the ugliest thing ever. I think some of the (relatively) recent Triple Play sets have a reputation for being ugly. And, of course, 1995 Fleer--to me those Donruss sets are works of art compared to that!
For me the white line with URLs on 1998 Pacific Online really ruins that set for me. That would be my vote for the little-talked-about ugly set.
I couldn't agree more on this one. I don't care for any of these sets, especially those from Upper Deck. And for what it's worth, I don't recall anybody doing a series like this before.
ReplyDeleteHey, wait a minute - I kinda like these. Fleer Tradition as a whole seems to get tossed aside these days, and I kinda think that's unfair. There's some great cards and designs hiding inside that brand.
ReplyDeleteI'm with Dime Box Nick. I like these. Was Fleer trying to rip off Topps? Sure. But imitation is the sincerest form of flattery (or something like that). That's why bloggers are always using each other's awesome ideas for posts.
DeleteWhat's your problem with 1991 Donruss? I think that the cards look cool.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with you about 2000 Fleer Tradition, however. I ordered a few online without seeing them, and when I got them, I was unimpressed.
Almost every set from any brand from the mid-to-late 1990's is pretty ugly, in my opinion. 1998 Topps is especially terrible.