`
Connect With Us!
IOS Store
Share Thread:
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Sergio Romo
#1

Sergio Romo
Just asking if anyone thinks Romo's 2012 Topps card #379 should be designated as his Rookie Card? I don't want to get into an agrument as to what or the value of "rookie". If a system is to be followed, then why wasn't in this case. Again, just asking.
Reply
#2

RE: Sergio Romo
It should be his RC. Just not tagged ... yet.
Chris Olds
Editor, Beckett Media

colds@beckett.com
Twitter @chrisolds2009
beckett.com/news

>>>> IF YOU HAVE A SITE ISSUE, please do not DM me.Please email customerservice@beckett.com. (I don't actually handle any of that stuff.)
Reply
#3

RE: Sergio Romo
(10-30-2012, 11:37 AM)chrisolds Wrote: It should be his RC. Just not tagged ... yet.
Agreed

And they don't need Wilson anymore after this season. He was great in the playoffs and World Series for sure.
Reply
#4

RE: Sergio Romo
Seems a bit late in his career to be getting an RC in my opinion, but his 2012 Topps fits the definition to the letter.
[Image: k4VFlSs.png] [Image: xnRMc6d.png]

I collect Dirk Hayhurst.
Thank you jbel4331 for the banner!
Reply
#5

RE: Sergio Romo
How would it be designated as a rookie card? It's 3 years after his MLB debut in 2009. In 2010 Topps made (2) cards for him. One in the 2010 World Series Giants team set and one in the Topps emerald Giants team set. Topps should have made a rookie card for him for the 2010 set. I think to make the 2012 topps card a rookie card that's stretching the "rookie card definition." Sure it's his first non-prospect base card but just how many years can you delay rookie card? I blame Topps... I've also been waiting for a Hector Sanchez rookie card all year. How about it Topps? Do I have to wait until 2014?
Reply
#6

RE: Sergio Romo
(10-30-2012, 07:00 PM)JRMdawg311 Wrote: How would it be designated as a rookie card? It's 3 years after his MLB debut in 2009. In 2010 Topps made (2) cards for him. One in the 2010 World Series Giants team set and one in the Topps emerald Giants team set. Topps should have made a rookie card for him for the 2010 set. I think to make the 2012 topps card a rookie card that's stretching the "rookie card definition." Sure it's his first non-prospect base card but just how many years can you delay rookie card? I blame Topps... I've also been waiting for a Hector Sanchez rookie card all year. How about it Topps? Do I have to wait until 2014?
It is an RC because it is his first non-insert card in a pro uniform released in pack form. The two you mentioned fall under the two disclaimers I mentioned.
[Image: k4VFlSs.png] [Image: xnRMc6d.png]

I collect Dirk Hayhurst.
Thank you jbel4331 for the banner!
Reply
#7

RE: Sergio Romo
(10-30-2012, 07:04 PM)nyyankeesfan28 Wrote: It is an RC because it is his first non-insert card in a pro uniform released in pack form. The two you mentioned fall under the two disclaimers I mentioned.
Yeah, yeah... I think it would be better defined as a "first card" than a "rookie card." Much like Bowman likes to stamp their cards as "1st Bowman Card." I think if it's a rookie card the player must meet the Major League Baseball Definition of a Rookie:
A player shall be considered a rookie unless, during a previous season or seasons, he has (a) exceeded 130 at-bats or 50 innings pitched in the major leagues; or (b) accumulated more than 45 days on the active roster of a major league club or clubs during the period of a 25-player limit (excluding time in the military service). BUT I also understand the card definition is "the first fully licensed base card issued of a player for any given brand in a single year." I know this argument has gone on for a while.
My beef is more with Topps. If they claim to be "home of the rookie card" with their Bowman product then they should live up to it.
Bottom line I just think it's funny Romo has a "rookie card" 2 and a half years after his debut. I know this is an on going debate in the card world but that's my opinion.
Reply
#8

RE: Sergio Romo
(10-30-2012, 08:43 PM)JRMdawg311 Wrote: Bottom line I just think it's funny Romo has a "rookie card" 2 and a half years after his debut. I know this is an on going debate in the card world but that's my opinion.
I don't think its funny. I think its ridiculous if Romo gets a RC card for 2012! He already had a card in 2010, make that the RC suckers!
(10-30-2012, 11:37 AM)chrisolds Wrote: It should be his RC. Just not tagged ... yet.
why should it be the RC when he had a card in 2010?
[Image: angelsbanner.jpg]
Reply
#9

RE: Sergio Romo
(10-30-2012, 08:59 PM)elfeo013 Wrote: I don't think its funny. I think its ridiculous if Romo gets a RC card for 2012! He already had a card in 2010, make that the RC suckers!

why should it be the RC when he had a card in 2010?
It was in a team set, so it doesn't count. It should, but it doesn't.
[Image: k4VFlSs.png] [Image: xnRMc6d.png]

I collect Dirk Hayhurst.
Thank you jbel4331 for the banner!
Reply
#10

RE: Sergio Romo
I have his 2008 Bowman "rookie card" ... er, not, I guess, because it's a "prospect insert" card.

Still, I have it in a "Rookie Card" toploader! Take that, Topps! Ha ha!
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)