Tag Archives: poor design

Donruss Really Liked This Picture, Huh…

I am a collector.  And I happen to collect baseball cards.  But once I add new cards to my collection, I don’t just throw them into a plastic sleeve or top-loader and put them away.  While I keep them extremely neat and organized, I like to go through the cards and enjoy them.

With my Andre Dawson collection, I tend to go back to the vintage stuff quite a bit as  they bring back a ton of memories of my childhood collecting days(imagine if I still had all of those cards – WoW).

But lately I have been spending time checking out the new stuff as well.  And although it was never a collecting goal of mine to get all of Dawson’s modern-era cards, it has become a great extension to my collection and I look forward to adding more and more in the future.

As I look as these newer issues, I really enjoy the creativity that the card companies display with their releases.  And with all the subsets being pushed out each and every year, I find it amazing that so many cards still are appealing.  These companies have some very talented artists on board and they should be thankful that more releases are not hybrids of old stuff which would certainly turn off the collecting world.

With all of that being said, I cannot understand why card companies would spend so much time and effort on designing new and interesting product while recycling old photos time and time again.  Heck, there have to be thousands of pictures of Andre Dawson playing baseball for the Expos, Cubs, Red Sox, and Marlins – he played 21 years!!

My example:

This is a smattering of modern-day cards that I own of ‘The Hawk’.  I enjoy all of them, and I admire their uniqueness from one to the next.  But you know what would make them stand out even more???  Unique photos!!!

I have no doubt that there are more cards out there with this exact photo of Andre being used.  And as I work to build up my Andre Dawson collection if I find them, I will certainly want to add them to my collection.  I just find it very odd that these companies would continue to re-hash the same pictures year after year…

Are you feeling me???

Dave Winfield 1989 Upper Deck

Dave Winfield 1989 Upper Deck

Here is another one of the cards I bought from www.checkoutmycards.com.

With their inaugural set in 1989, Upper Deck blew the baseball card collectors out of the water with their beautiful photos and unique designs.

I guess that is why I am so disappointed with the Dave Winfield card from that set.  This picture is nothing short of terrible.  I am not sure how card companies obtain images for use on their products, but for UD to use this image of Winfield doesn’t say a lot for whoever makes their selections…

dw89ud

1982 Topps, Fleer, and Donruss Andre Dawson

1982 Topps, Fleer, and Donruss Andre Dawson

Also inside this 60 card lot were the 3 base cards from the 1982 sets.  All I have to obtain now is the 1982 Topps All-Star card of Andre and then the 1982 portion of my collection will be complete.

The Topps and Donruss cards from this year look great.  And the Fleer really stands out with it’s terrible design, lack of bold colors, and pathetic photography…

Here they are:

Results: Ugliest Card from the 1970’s

In what was a very tight race, the 1973 Topps set has been voted the ‘Ugliest Card from the 1970’s’ by the readers of ’30-Year Old Cardboard’.

A closer look at this card and what makes it stand out:

The color is really faded on these cards.  From the player’s uniforms, to the background, and the graphics.  Everything and everyone looks washed out.

The backgrounds chosen for these pictures are terrible.  It’s very hard to tell if any of these pictures were taken in major league stadiums, as the background looks more like an elementary school park.

Topps’ use of a small artistic silhouette in the lower right corner of the card completely bombed.  Baseball has so many classic poses as well as specific poses that can be used for the major positions.  These look silly and appear to have been chosen at random.  I know it’s from 1973 and the graphics systems back then were nothing like they are today, but I don’t see Topps’ effort at 100% on these either.

So there you have it.  The worst card design from the 1970’s goes to the 1973 Topps set.  Stay tuned as I bring the ‘Best Card Design from the 1970’s’ to you next.

1982 Fleer Has No Equals…

In one of my more recent blogs, I wanted the readers to vote on the ‘Ugliest Cards From the 80’s’.  You can read that blog here.  The 1983 Fleer card was the biggest loser, and it was for good reason.

But the more I began to think about this, one of my readers(Gerad) mentioned the 1982 Fleer set because it lacked the Fleer logo.  Initially it didn’t effect me, but his comment makes complete sense to me now.

Check out a sample:

OK.  I work for a direct-to-consumer company.  I have worked there for 8 years and prior to that I was in retail management for another 7 years.  I think I have a pretty good understanding of customer expectations due to my personal experience.

Branding is everything!!!  It really is just that simple.  This card illustrates the exact opposite.  Nowhere on the front of the card do you see the Fleer logo.  Nowhere on the front of the card do you see the team’s logo.  The front of the card is as important as the window of a department store.  It’s a tool that should be used to draw in the customer and Fleer did not do this.  Signs, banners, logos, and color all get attention.  It’s clear that Fleer(wow that rhymes) had a license to produce items with MLB logos otherwise Ripken’s logo on his jersey and hat would have been removed.  But to not include them in the design of the card is just plain dumb.

The logo means everything.  Picture Nike without the Swoosh.  Picture Coca-Cola cans without their famous script signature.  Hell, picture Coors beer without the Rocky Mountains in the background.  All of these companies use specific logos and placement with their products.  Even if it is not the thing that draws you in, you subconsciously see the logo and are comforted that you are dealing with a quality product.

The problem is that these companies are and have been well established.  Fleer on the other hand was in it’s infancy stage in the early 80’s and should not have abandoned the logo they used in 1981, or at least used a new one with the 1982 issue.  This card reminds me of a plain business card with black type.  No frills, nothing fancy… There is nothing to draw you in.  There is no connection to a team.  How did they expect to captivate an audience and pull people towards their product and away from the competition?

What I am saying here is not news.  This is common practice in the Advertising and Marketing world.  Brand recognition is the most important thing to offer any consumer and Fleer failed miserably…

Thanks again Gerad for shining a light on the ‘Ultimate Dud’, 1982 Fleer.