PDA

View Full Version : Namath's Game Worn Super Bowl Helmet? Nope.



aeneas01
03-14-2008, 06:10 AM
namath's "game worn super bowl lll helmet" will highlight heritage's upcoming auction - the starting bid is set at $50,000.

from sports collector's daily:

“This is arguably the most significant football artifact ever to reach the auction block,” said Chris Ivy, Director of Heritage Auction Galleries’ Sports Collectibles division. “It’s a key piece from one of professional football’s most celebrated and inspirational games, worn by one of America’s most beloved sports figures.” Aside from being one of the hobby’s most important game used pieces, Heritage believes it is also one of the most strongly documented.

from gavel chat:

Now, for the first time, Namath's helmet from that very game will be offered at auction. Heritage Auction Galleries (http://gavelchat.sportscollectorsdigest.com/ct.ashx?id=0b63d121-40b3-4cad-986a-829812313616&url=http%3a%2f%2fha.com) will be selling that monumental piece at its signature sale in May of this year. I think it can bring six figures. That would definitely be a record for the sale of a game-worn helmet. The provenance on this bad boy is rock solid and that is why I really think it can fetch so much at auction.

from aeneas01, game used forum:

not so fast - especially considering a starting price of $50,000. i've seen impressive documentation before, impressive provenance as well - only to see the high profile helmet it was supposed to have supported proven to be nothing more than just a nice helmet. so, all window dressing aside, let's get to the bottom line - is this joe namath's game worn sb3 helmet? the answer is no.

when i first spotted this helmet i immediately had my doubts - as such, i contacted heritage and requested additional photos which were sent promptly. while i was 90% certain that this was not namath's sb3 game worn helmet, the additional photos confirmed my suspicions. as i told chris at heritage, the problems with this helmet are numerous - there are significant inconsistencies that encompass both the interior and exterior of the lid. but two inconsistencies are so major that they make discussing the others in detail moot - in fact, they're so major that they simply rule out the possibility of this helmet being namath's sb3 game worn lid. as a matter of fact, in my opinion this helmet was never worn by namath.

before i go on i want to add that i believe that the events that led to this helmet being listed by heritage were not sinister - i do not believe that anyone was trying to mislead anyone nor do i believe that anyone was trying to intentionally misrepresent the item - in short, i think it was an honest mistake made by people that honestly believed in the helmet's authenticity. and for good reason given the letters.

1. namath's 1968/69 game worn helmet had two drill holes present below each ear hole - these drill holes were remnants from namath's previous two-bar facemask. what's interesting about these two drill holes is that they seem to indicate a botched job, hence the need for drilling twice on each side of the helmet. the helmet up for auction shows only one drill hole below each ear hole - a clean, single drill hole indicative of the job being done correctly the first time.

these drill holes are compared in the first photo below - this photo includes three images: the top two images are from sb3, the photo at the bottom is from the helmet at auction (which heritage emailed me) - i think the difference is rather clear. further, namath wore the same helmet throughout the 1968 season, the same helmet with the twin drill holes - from game 1 through sb3. as a matter of fact, given the cheapness of the jets at the time, i wouldn't be surprised if the helmet namath wore in sb3 wasn't the same one he had worn during previous seasons.

2. namath's 1968/69 helmet was not only reconditioned but it was also re-painted white. this is evident when looking at the exterior rivets of the jaw pads covered in white paint as can be seen in all of the photos. the helmet at auction is the original factory shell and has not been re-painted.


drill hole comparison (below the ear hole) - top two images are from sb3, bottom image from the helmet at heritage. from these photos you can also easily see that namath's 1968/69 helmet was painted while the one at auction isn't.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/001.jpg


additional auction photo sent to me by heritage (01): http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/01-2.jpg


another additional auction photo sent to me by heritage (02):

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/002.jpg


photo from sb3 (01):

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/SB01.jpg

photo from sb3 (02):

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/SB03.jpg

photo from sb3 (03):

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/SB04.jpg

photo from sb3 (04):

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/SB05.jpg

photo from sb3 (05):

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/SB06.jpg

photo from sb3 (06):

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/SB02.jpg


photo from game 01 - 1968/69 season:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/G01.jpg

photo from game 08 - 1968/69 season:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/G08.jpg

photo from game 11 - 1968/69 season:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/G11.jpg

-------------------------------------------------

as i mentioned earlier, there are many, many other problems with the helmet up for auction when it comes to trying to reconcile it with namath's game worn sb3 lid. but, based only on the photos above, how could the helmet at heritage possibly be the helmet namath wore during the 1968/69 season let alone sb3? for it to be namath's sb3 helmet one of the following would have to be true:

1. he wore two helmets during the 1968/69 season - the problem with this scenario is that there is not a close-up photo or close-up film frame available (that i have seen) from the 1968/69 season that shows namath wearing a helmet consistent with the helmet at auction.

2. the paint was stripped from namath's sb3 helmet and the second drill hole was professionally filled in. hmmm....

3. namath wore two different helmets during the super bowl - see number 1.

the unfortunate bottom line is that the helmet up for auction at heritage is simply not namath's game worn sb3 helmet - there is just no way around it. as such, it will be interesting to see how the folks at heritage will handle it. they have this information as of yesterday....

jwasserman
03-14-2008, 06:27 AM
You should be working for an auction house with your amazing knowledge of NFL items.

This should be a fun one to watch play out.

Jags Fan Dan
03-14-2008, 06:45 AM
You should be working for an auction house with your amazing knowledge of NFL items.

This should be a fun one to watch play out.
I agree. aeneas01, you should be making BIG money to authenticate helmets!!!

Vintagedeputy
03-14-2008, 08:29 AM
One of my pet peeves is people who just dont bother to do their job correctly.

With that said, it amazes me that a "professional" auction house has so many problems authenticating something (which is THEIR JOB) while a collector such as Aeneas who obviously holds down a full time job of his own can spot a fake with 5 minutes work of looking at images on getty....

sad, sad, sad........


again, excellent work as usual Aeneas....you are a credit to the hobby.

Jim

skipcareyisfat
03-14-2008, 08:32 AM
as a matter of fact, in my opinion this helmet was never worn by namath.

aeneas01, fascinating breakdown as usual. I'm interested in hearing more about why you don't think Namath ever wore it. If Heritage decides to back off the SB3 connection, I think they'll likely still try and pass it off as a SB3-era Namath helmet. So what exactly prevents this from being a Namath gamer?


You should be working for an auction house with your amazing knowledge of NFL items.

I agree. But with profit being top priority for pretty much every auction house, I think some would rather not have aeneas01 waiting around to pounce on every bad vintage helmet that comes through, and that a lot of other "authenticators" might pass.

nyjetsfan14
03-14-2008, 08:36 AM
All one can do is say wow. I am not only continually impressed but even more appreciative of the incredibly informative posts you provide aeneas! As mentioned by Jim, you are a true credit to the hobby and an invaluable resourse as it pertains to NFL helmets. And best of all you share you information/research with the common collector here rather than sell out to auction houses. You have my vote for whatever it is you run for!

GO JETS!

byergo
03-14-2008, 08:57 AM
It's pretty sad that they could call this one of the most significant pieces of football memorabilia of all-time, and yet is is obviously 100% fake.

What is that giant sucking sound? It's the sound of the reputation and credibility of this auction house and authenticator going down the toilet!

:eek:

toddhead
03-14-2008, 09:13 AM
This is exactly why I love this site. Before coming here I believed that everything the auction houses offered was 100% legit. Now, I question everything!

I find it amazing what auction houses/authenticators will "not see" when big money is involved. Not saying Heritage did anything wrong with this, but it's obvious that other auction houses let stuff slide in hopes that nobody will point it out.

Can't wait to see how this plays out.

I wonder if Joe still has his helmet...:cool:

Jags Fan Dan
03-14-2008, 12:59 PM
You know, this really is amazing because when I read about this helmet about a week ago, I remember thinking that this may be the most high profile item with the most rock solid prevenance that I had ever seen. And it really is a very cool back story to boot. And then it turns out to be wrong??? Really makes you think.....

nick1980
03-14-2008, 01:23 PM
All I can say is amazing, I can't believe they didn't try to photo match it before they put their name on the line like that, AMAZING

both-teams-played-hard
03-14-2008, 01:36 PM
The auction house must alter the description. In fact, they should end the auction and start over from scratch. Maybe, Namath wore this helmet at some time, but the included letter from an impeccable source clouds the water. It has nothing to do with this helmet. Anxious to see Heritage's next step. I agree, it doesn't seem anyone was trying to deceive a potential buyer.
Aeneas actually DOES research and proves items as bad. Therefore, it is doubtful that most auction houses would hire him.

suave1477
03-14-2008, 01:38 PM
Here is what I don't understand esepcially for auction houses when obtaining an item doing the most simple homework by searching gettys or other sources of pictures just to even see if the item is a style match or possible photomatch.
I NEVER PURCHASE AN ITEM UNLESS I CAN SEE THE PLAYER HAS WORN OR USED ONE JUST LIKE IT.

AM IM NOT BUYING MONUMENTAL SIGNIFICANT ITEMS IM BUYING AVERAGE JOE TYPE OF STUFF.

WHY CANT AUCTION HOUSES DO THIS????? IT TAKES ME FIVE MINUTES WHY CANT THEY TAKE OUT 5 MINUTES????

aeneas01
03-14-2008, 02:48 PM
it appears that heritage has removed the helmet from their site - as recently as this morning the helmet was prominently featured on their home page - now it is nowhere to be found. further, a search with the terms "helmet" or "namath" using their search engine turns up nothing.

however google seems to still have the listing cached - if you type "namath helmet $50,000" into google a link to heritage's listing still appears.

fwiw, i'm not getting a kick out out of this - i actually feel rather bad given that chris ivy at heritage is a very nice guy. as a matter of fact, everyone i have ever spoken to at heritage has always been nothing but extremely nice, courteous and very helpful. it's just an unfortunate incident that heritage, much to their credit, appears to have corrected promptly once it was brought to their attention.

Eric
03-14-2008, 03:02 PM
It's still listed as "coming soon" if you search namath on their site. This page comes up
http://sports.ha.com/common/view_item.php?SaleNo=709&LotIdNo=155001&txtSearch=namath&hdnSearch=true

WOODFERN
03-14-2008, 03:18 PM
It Just Goes To Show You That Even These Reputable Auction Houses Make Mistakes. They Don`t Do Their Homework On These Pieces. Why They Don`t Take The Time To At Least Find A Photo Match Is Amazing, Especially With A Piece Like This.

camarokids
03-14-2008, 03:25 PM
[quote=aeneas01;76384 i actually feel rather bad given that chris ivy at heritage is a very nice guy. as a matter of fact, everyone i have ever spoken to at heritage has always been nothing but extremely nice, courteous and very helpful. it's just an unfortunate incident that heritage, much to their credit, appears to have corrected promptly once it was brought to their attention.[/quote]


Why should you feel bad for the auction house ??????

The only emotions you should feel is one of disbelief and relief .

Disbelief that these auction houses can be this stupid ....

Relief that you helped save someone over $50K....

Once again someone on this forum DID their homework for them !!!!!!

I cannot believe the auction house was irresponsible enough to promote such a supposedly great item , with out doing the necessary research .

So they deserve the embarrassment brought upon themselves due to their lack of attention to ALL the details......

Others have said the same thing , blinded by the might dollar !

otismalibu
03-14-2008, 03:27 PM
fwiw, i'm not getting a kick out out of this - i actually feel rather bad given that chris ivy at heritage is a very nice guy. as a matter of fact, everyone i have ever spoken to at heritage has always been nothing but extremely nice, courteous and very helpful. it's just an unfortunate incident that heritage, much to their credit, appears to have corrected promptly once it was brought to their attention.

But really, if an item is supposed to be from a specific game, what should be the first step for the auction house to take?

Maybe glance at a game tape or some still photos? Nah.

I guess we have to commend them for not drilling a second hole.

aeneas01
03-14-2008, 03:45 PM
It's still listed as "coming soon" if you search namath on their site. This page comes up
http://sports.ha.com/common/view_item.php?SaleNo=709&LotIdNo=155001&txtSearch=namath&hdnSearch=true

that's interesting eric - how did you get to that page? check out the new lot description appearing a the top of the listing. the original listing read: 1969 joe namath super bowl lll game worn helmet. the new listing reads: namath helmet copy....

if and when heritage does relist the helmet i hope they do do in fact list it as a namath "copy" or a namath "reproduction" instead of a namath game worn helmet from the "mid '60s" or some other obscure description that tries to imply that namath once wore this helmet - because, again, imo he never did....


new ad:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/ad02.jpg


original ad:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/ad01.jpg

skipcareyisfat
03-14-2008, 04:01 PM
Ivy and the Heritage gang may be nice but they embarrassed themselves by ignoring evidence that's accessible to anyone with or without a reference library. (They say Lampson's quite a pleasant fellow too, btw.) Like too many houses, they expect us to take their catalogs as fact. I guess they haven't caught on to Google and the whole public collector forum thing either.

mvandor
03-14-2008, 04:41 PM
With your eye for detail aeneas I can only wonder what you do for a living. Split genes? Design space shuttles? :D

Your thoroughness is a credit to the hobby and an invaluable service to us here at GUU. Thank you again!

aeneas01
03-14-2008, 05:17 PM
Why should you feel bad for the auction house ??????

The only emotions you should feel is one of disbelief and relief .

Disbelief that these auction houses can be this stupid ....

Relief that you helped save someone over $50K....

Once again someone on this forum DID their homework for them !!!!!!

I cannot believe the auction house was irresponsible enough to promote such a supposedly great item , with out doing the necessary research .

So they deserve the embarrassment brought upon themselves due to their lack of attention to ALL the details......

Others have said the same thing , blinded by the might dollar !

i believe that honest mistakes can and do happen - in all walks of life. imho heritage did not simply and blindly list a rare helmet without so much as lifting a finger or taking a close look at it - they were furnished with what appeared to be sound written and verbal documentation, a sworn deposition and an autograph from namath that clearly implied that the helmet in question was his sb3 lid - they also reviewed scores of photos that showed namath wearing an almost identical helmet during the super bowl. given this, their mistake is more than understandable imho.

further, imho heritage is not alone in this thing. this helmet has been in the public domain for close to a month now and has received much attention from other auction related organizations - yet no one challenged it. quite to the contrary, everyone seemed to be quite dazzled by it. the helmet was even discussed here at the forum and taken at face value.

looking at the photos i posted it now seems more than obvious that the helmet wasn't namath's sb3 lid - now that we all know what to look for. but before these photos were posted, especially the additional photos heritage promptly furnished upon my request, was it so obvious? i would say apparently not given that at no time had anyone challenged the helmet's authenticity.

as i mentioned previously, i furnished chris ivy (director of sports collectibles - heritage auctions) with my findings late last night via email and reported to the forum that it would be interesting to see how he and heritage would respond. well now we know - chris immediately removed the item from heritage's website (although one can apparently locate evidence of the original listing) - it is no longer prominently featured on heritage's home page nor do searches link to it. no double-talk, no brush offs, no dragging feet - heritage was informed of a problem and acted immediately.

and, finally, heritage has a wonderful feature which is twofold - it allows heritage to quickly add items to their auction as they become available, for the mutual benefit of auction house and buyer, with the understanding that information can change and be updated. the feature also allows prospective buyers to voice concerns about an item, report errors and offer suggestions. in my case i utilized this feature by contacting heritage about problems with the helmet. heritage responded by promptly removing the item.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/policy.jpg

in a perfect world every auction house would have indisputable evidence that every item it they put up for auction was exactly as described - no excuses, no errors. but we don't live in a perfect world. fortunately for collectors there is at least one high profile memorabilia auction house, heritage, which tries to do the next best thing. i wish the same could be said for the other usual suspects.

beantown
03-14-2008, 05:30 PM
Great Job Robert! I would love to see some of the helmets in your collection! Please post for all to enjoy!!!

camarokids
03-14-2008, 05:33 PM
A job well done by YOU ! Apparently you have access to pictures or an internet that auction houses do not have access to :rolleyes:.......

Honest mistakes are fine as long their mistakes don't cost someone big money or hurt someone !

Apparently no one at Heritage thought to double check what appeared to 100% provenance ......once again ... it is all about doing your homework....

gingi79
03-14-2008, 06:33 PM
On the one hand, I think it is very good that Heritage took the evidence from aeneas and pulled this obvious mistake of a helmet from the auction. On the other, there is a Buyers Premium of 19.5% which is used to cover fees from authenticators..... I was told by Lelands once "The premium covers all fees associated with marketing, authenticating, storage etc." It should give me "piece of mind."

Therefore, since aeneas did the actual grunt work research and saved the Auction house tremendous bad press, a possible lawsuit and some collector a minimum of $50k, shouldn't he be offer the Buyers Premium......Just a suggestion for the guys at Heritage......

aeneas01
03-15-2008, 03:45 AM
aeneas01, fascinating breakdown as usual. I'm interested in hearing more about why you don't think Namath ever wore it. If Heritage decides to back off the SB3 connection, I think they'll likely still try and pass it off as a SB3-era Namath helmet. So what exactly prevents this from being a Namath gamer?

there are several problems relating to the interior of the helmet that, imo, rather easily disqualifies it as a helmet ever worn by namath. but i would rather not be specific about these issues at this time given that this info might furnish some of our unscrupulous ebay buddies with material to work with - if you know what i mean.


Great Job Robert! I would love to see some of the helmets in your collection! Please post for all to enjoy!!!

my collection would bore the forum to death - two huge piles of lids disrespectfully piled on top of each other, about 150-200 lids per pile. my lids really deserve much better given that they are almost exclusively rare, vintage gems - i've been promising myself for years that i will finally organize them but the years seem to keep passing by and the piles seem to keep growing! but, really, i'm kind of weird when it comes to helmets in that i love them all - just as long as they are classic, unique, not-often-seen pieces of football history no longer manufactured. in short, i don't place a great deal of emphasis on whether a lid is nfl or college nor do i place a great deal of emphasis on whether or not the lid can be tied to a specific player. it's the rarity, uniqueness, age and beauty of a lid that turns my crank.

you, gridman80, rkgibson, cohibasmoker, drj, jake51, barry-debi (just to name a few) are the ones that have collections worth sharing - and i'm very appreciative that you have!

gridman80
03-15-2008, 07:09 PM
Aeneas.
You are a real credit to this hobby. A true breath of fresh air...You have proved the adage I learned many years ago that no matter what the piece or the provenance you must do your homework.....Helmets are by far the toughest to authenticate but in my opinion the most desirable collectible in football.. I have been a jets fan for 40 years, a season ticket holder for 30, and a collector for 18...My guess is that one of two things occurred. either equipment mgr. Bill Hampton switched the helmet out on Joe, a trick Hampton's sons still do to this day to the players who want their stuff, or Joe told Bill that he made the kid a promise, please make me up a helmet for the kid. If I had to bet I'd go for option 1 as I think Joe is a man of integrity....Hampton's kids used to trade jets game used gear for boom boxes, cases of beer and god knows what else...In the later years of his tenure as Jets equipment mgr, Bill had to lock Joe willie's stuff in a safe to keep it from his kids and his wife as they were selling the stuff off for peanuts...right down to Joe's knee braces...

aeneas01
03-16-2008, 06:02 AM
today i received an email with a link to the following article found at "sports collectors daily" who i had quoted in my original post. i'm posting a copy of the article because a) it's a nice plug for the best sports memorabilia site on the planet (which i underlined in red!) and b) because it reiterates my previous mention of heritage's prompt and professional handling of a difficult situation.

http://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com/sports-collectors-blog/namath-helmet-in-question.html


gridman80 - great story about the hampton clan! a little unsettling to collectors i'm sure, but great nonetheless! these sort of stories, and i'm sure college and nfl locker rooms are replete with them, confirm that the passion we all share for collecting these gems equates to nothing less than a bonafide treasure hunt! also, thank you and thanks to the rest of you guys for your kind words about my post - we're all in this thing together!



http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y238/aeneas1/sub/xxx.jpg

camarokids
03-17-2008, 07:52 PM
Let me just say this aeneas01 , I think the job you did was great . I just disagree that you are thinking so highly of the auction house .

Had you not found the pictures , posted them on GUU and not emailed Heritage , the helmet would still be up on their website .

Heritage pulled the item because they were forced to do so (bad publicity would have gotten worse) .

After all the helmet looked good to them after their research :rolleyes:......

CollectGU
03-17-2008, 08:27 PM
I could be wrong but I think that Heritage ran with the item in their preview without having anyone physically inspect it just based based on the provenance and story received from the family. They should have taken their time on a historic piece like that....

Regards,
Dave

aeneas01
03-18-2008, 05:17 PM
Had you not found the pictures , posted them on GUU and not emailed Heritage , the helmet would still be up on their website. Heritage pulled the item because they were forced to do so (bad publicity would have gotten worse) . After all the helmet looked good to them after their research :rolleyes:......

couldn't the same be said for guu auctions? if i understand it correctly, guu reviews items and if they pass preliminary mustard, guu goes ahead and lists them for further buyer preview/review. and should a buyer discover a problem that disqualifies the item as described, then guu removes the item - if no problems are reported, then the item rides. isn't this what heritage did?

i guess one could argue that guu does a better job than heritage at screening their items before listing them for buyer preview/review - but i didn't follow the inaugural guu auction so i don't know if any listed items were removed because of a buyer's discovery during the preview/review stage. whatever the case, imo both guu and heritage would most likely let an item ride if a) it passed preliminary mustard and b) no one questioned the item before the auction ended, no?

which brings me to another issue that i've been wanting to discuss - is it possible to bring helpful information to forum members without compromising the reputation and integrity of a seller that freely and promptly removes an item that is found to be not as described? further, is it unethical to share the details of the problem with the forum even though the seller has done everything in his power to right the situation?

take my case for example - it would seem that the forum's goal would have been fully served (an item accidentally misrepresented was removed from circulation) had i contacted heritage prior to bringing my concerns to the forum's attention and, upon heritage's prompt response including the removal of the item (which i believe would have been the case), simply left matters at that. but would the forum's goals really have been fully served had that scenario transpired? what about the sharing of useful information, the sharing of interesting discoveries, the ongoing learning process as it pertains to vintage items? would any of these important aspects that make this such a great forum have been served had i or any other member facing the same situation failed to report back, share photos, explanations and opinions about why an item is not as described? further, wouldn't forum members be deprived of knowing when certain sellers made a habit of listing items that weren't thoroughly reviewed?

frankly, it seems to me that sellers are damned if they do and damned if they don't when it comes to accidentally misrepresenting an item - that dirty laundry must and will be aired (mistakes detailed) in order for the forum to exist as the tremendous resource that it is. sure, mention can and should always be made when a seller is apologetic, thankful and appreciative that problems were brought to his attention but, at the end of the day, the seller's integrity and motives will always be contemplated.

in the "auction item discussion" section of the forum chris cavalier created a sticky entitled "template for questioning sellers prior to posting on the forum" in which he did a great job outlining the spirit of the board as it pertains to questioning items - i think this part of chris's post especially applies to this discussion:

"So why is this rule is place? As discussed many times before, we have implemented this rule because we believe publicly questioning items on this forum, especially with accusations concerning the seller's possible motivations, has the potential to adversely affect someone's livelihood in a very real and material way. This is especially true now that this site has grown to the point it has and is playing an integral role in the hobby. Therefore, we believe the appropriate and responsible thing to do is allow the seller the opportunity to reply to any potential concerns before any questions are aired publicly. This is particularly applicable if the questions are raised in a manner that appears to question the seller's intentions."

even when a seller's intentions are not questioned or accusations made, publicly airing out one's findings on this board will always be a slippery slope.

kingjammy24
03-18-2008, 05:58 PM
robert, i think you did a fantastic job on this.

"imho heritage did not simply and blindly list a rare helmet without so much as lifting a finger or taking a close look at it - they were furnished with what appeared to be sound written and verbal documentation, a sworn deposition and an autograph from namath that clearly implied that the helmet in question was his sb3 lid - they also reviewed scores of photos that showed namath wearing an almost identical helmet during the super bowl. given this, their mistake is more than understandable imho."

the documentation was impressive. ultimately though, everyone knows an item must stand on its own and not simply coast on "iron-clad" provenance. we've all seen items with great provenance crash and burn. the real issue is the extent of heritage's effort. while they obviously did more than blindly list it without lifting a finger, did they go to the full extent that they should've for the profit they stood to reap? obviously noone had the expectation that they'd blindly list it and not do any work so the fact that they did more than that is a given. this was, in heritage's words, "arguably the most significant football artifact ever to reach the auction block". if chris nerat's estimate was correct, then it was possible for this helmet to have sold for $100k. at $100k, the buyer's premium alone would've been almost $20k. what are the expectations for a $20k payment? while it's difficult to quantify, i don't think it'd be unrealistic to expect 140 man-hours of work for $20k. how much time did heritage spend reviewing photos? they reviewed scores of them and noone at all noticed the holes? i know less than nothing about football helmets but i know the difference between 2 holes and 1 hole and if i spent even 20 hours looking at photos then i'd have to be completely inept not to eventually notice the holes. imagine staring at a single helmet and photos for 20 solid hours. the holes would eventually pop out like a sore thumb. if, after 20 hrs, i still didn't notice them, then do i honestly deserve to charge thousands of dollars for my services?

point blank, whatever heritage did, it wasn't good enough in light of the profit they stood to reap. some lone collector, who wasn't being paid at all, came along and pointed it out. they're the ones who ought to have serious resources at their disposal. this is their profession. i certainly can't pay thousands for magnified getty images nor can i afford to devote an entire week to staring at photos but they can and they should've. when you walk into a place that charges $100 for an entree, then you expect a $100 entree. when the chef comes out with a $6 burger, then it's hardly an excuse if he says "hey it's not like i didn't do anything. a $100 entree is hard!". that's really my beef against many of these shops; they're not good enough for what they charge. you'll find expertise on this forum that's as good if not better and costs nothing. you alone outperformed an entire crew whose job it was to suss this helmet out! they charged $20k and failed. you charged $0 and got it right. the auction houses are filled with self-annointed experts who are more skilled at writing press releases and collecting premiums than running clean auctions. the 20-30% buyers&sellers consignment rates are laughable for the lack of quality work they seem to churn out.

if they only want to look at photos for 20 min before crowing "hey we tried! noone's perfect!", then they should chop their buyers premiums down to 2% and people wouldn't expect a great job. whatever heritage did on this helmet wasn't worth a 19.5% buyers premium. for $20k, i'd expect them to see the holes.

"before these photos were posted..was it so obvious? i would say apparently not given that at no time had anyone challenged the helmet's authenticity."

the holes weren't hard to miss. the fact that noone challenged it isn't, in my opinion, evidence that it was easy to miss. i assume most didn't care to even bother looking that closely. i usually only look closely at items i'm considering purchasing or items that i find really interesting. how many serious buyers were there for a $100k helmet? plus, the auction hadn't even really begun. perhaps some people did notice but simply didn't speak up for various reasons. if you spend 40 hours examining photos and every single inch of the helmet, how blind would someone have to be to miss the 2 holes vs 1 hole? $20k worth of blindness. you don't even have to know a thing about football helmets for petes sake to notice the difference. all you have to do is know the difference between 1 and 2.

anyway, here's the most interesting issue; heritage stated "This exceptional offering has remained in the possession of Andrew Vanore, Jr. from the days just following Super Bowl III until Tuesday, February 19, 2008, when it was delivered to Heritage consignment directors."

straight from broadway joe to his friend to andrew vanore to heritage. now look at these photos:

http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/4092/helmetod4.jpg

notice the "namath", "12", and "jwm" inscriptions written in the helmet. now juxtapose those with your comment that "this helmet was never worn by namath...there are several problems relating to the interior of the helmet that, imo, rather easily disqualifies it as a helmet ever worn by namath". the helmet was never worn by namath yet the inside is marked up with his name and number. i don't doubt your evaluation but it certainly makes the inscriptions very puzzling. any thoughts on how or why those inscriptions are there?

anyway, heritage seems to have made the best of a bad situation by reacting promptly and properly. i can name a few auction houses that would've told you to take a flying leap and would continue to run the helmet because "lou says he likes it".

rudy.

camarokids
03-18-2008, 06:35 PM
In the photos just posted , I see a faint number 5 between the 1 and 2 ....

There is also another number after the 5 , but I cannot tell what it is .

Has anyone pointed this out ?

kingjammy24
03-18-2008, 06:41 PM
"couldn't the same be said for guu auctions?..."

robert, you're correct. while i think there are some inherant flaws in GUU's Auction system, i suppose the big difference in your example is that GUU explicitly requests and depends on the community to examine their items as part of their authentication process whereas most auction houses, like HA, charge far more substantial premiums to "get it right" with their own crew. with HA there's the expectation that they got it right in-house whereas with GUU i suppose there's the expectation that the community got it right. If this helmet had come up in a GUU auction and sold, i guess we could all blame ourselves :p

"is it possible to bring helpful information to forum members without compromising the reputation and integrity of a seller that freely and promptly removes an item that is found to be not as described? further, is it unethical to share the details of the problem with the forum even though the seller has done everything in his power to right the situation?"

obviously, everyone's made mistakes. the issue is the number and nature of errors. some people make very few mistakes and even fewer are stupid mistakes. others seem to make stupid mistakes every 5 minutes. i don't think people simply see the error without regarding the context. i've made errors and many people i respect have made errors but noone holds anything against them because the errors have been so few and far between and they weren't stupid errors. there's also the increased expectations when someone's paid to be an "expert" and they go around beating your chest proclaiming themselves to be the greatest ever, like many auction houses do.

i don't think there's anything unethical about sharing info. you're assuming their reps will necessarily suffer and i don't think that's the case. kim stigall's made some errors and his rep is stellar. people can barely remember the mistakes he's made because they were so few and far between and they weren't stupid errors.

with this namath helmet, i was simply floored that for $20k they couldn't spot 2 holes vs 1. $20k! if i pay someone $30, then i don't expect them to spend 2 solid days working on something. however, if i pay $20 grand, i want chris ivy's head buried in SB3 books for at least 2 solid weeks, day and night. it's all about expectations. for me, heritage failed to live up to them. errors aren't just errors. there's the context that determines how they'll be regarded.

"at the end of the day, the seller's integrity and motives will always be contemplated."

i don't really agree that they'll always be contemplated. again, it depends on the context of the error.

rudy.

kingjammy24
03-18-2008, 06:52 PM
In the photos just posted , I see a faint number 5 between the 1 and 2 ....

There is also another number after the 5 , but I cannot tell what it is .

Has anyone pointed this out ?

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/9833/helmetxb8.jpg

rudy.

kingjammy24
03-19-2008, 12:00 AM
chris nerat posted this on the scd site on 03/18:

"Today Lou determined that it is not a game-worn Namath helmet, but is a Jets gamer from an unknown player."

well this is odd. it went straight from namath to his friend/courier to the consigner. it has "namath", "12", and "jwn" written inside it. why was an unknown player running around the field with joe's name, number and initials written in his helmet??

rudy.

aeneas01
03-19-2008, 12:49 AM
anyway, heritage seems to have made the best of a bad situation by reacting promptly and properly. i can name a few auction houses that would've told you to take a flying leap and would continue to run the helmet because "lou says he likes it".rudy.

and that's all i've been trying to point out, especially given my experiences with other auctions houses. as i mentioned months ago, i once came across a "game used" butkus helmet at auction that didn't look right - so i contacted butkus, pointed him to the auction and he replied to my email the following day that the interior of the helmet "bothered" him, that he didn't recall his number ever being applied to the inside of the helmet in the same manner. the auction houses response? in a nutshell - butkus didn't know what he was talking about, the lid rides. beautiful.


notice the "namath", "12", and "jwm" inscriptions written in the helmet. now juxtapose those with your comment that "this helmet was never worn by namath...there are several problems relating to the interior of the helmet that, imo, rather easily disqualifies it as a helmet ever worn by namath". the helmet was never worn by namath yet the inside is marked up with his name and number. i don't doubt your evaluation but it certainly makes the inscriptions very puzzling.

imo no more puzzling than the sig on the exterior of the helmet that reads "hope you have as much luck with this as i have...", no more puzzling than a 1975 vintage cowboys' tk helmet that will soon hit auction houses with a letter from staubach stating that it was his game used lid even though staubach stopped wearing tk lids after the '72 season, no more puzzling than a 1973 vintage tk packers' lid inscribed by bart "1971 my final season".


any thoughts on how or why those inscriptions are there?

sure - just as i have thoughts as to why the size "7" appearing on the crown webbing has been carefully darkened. but, again, the helmet is clearly not namath's sb3 lid as advertised so getting into that or the several other problems with the lid seems to be beating a dead horse - or an attempt to further embarrass heritage by piling it on.


i don't think there's anything unethical about sharing info. you're assuming their reps will necessarily suffer and i don't think that's the case. kim stigall's made some errors and his rep is stellar. people can barely remember the mistakes he's made because they were so few and far between and they weren't stupid errors.

i think we'll have to agree to disagree - imo auction houses suffer when they drop the ball and their mistakes are rehashed in the public domain.


point blank, whatever heritage did, it wasn't good enough in light of the profit they stood to reap.... if they only want to look at photos for 20 min before crowing "hey we tried! noone's perfect!", then they should chop their buyers premiums down to 2% and people wouldn't expect a great job. whatever heritage did on this helmet wasn't worth a 19.5% buyers premium. for $20k, i'd expect them to see the holes.

and therein lies the rub - further, it's a point that's impossible to argue and imho you are 100% correct. collectors pay a steep premium to auction houses because they are supposed to offer what ebay doesn't - a safe haven where one can be confident and secure that what they are purchasing is indeed the authentic item that has been described. but, then again, just do a forum search on coas and it's pretty clear that auction houses are what they are.


chris nerat posted this on the scd site on 03/18:

"Today Lou determined that it is not a game-worn Namath helmet, but is a Jets gamer from an unknown player."

well lou and i agree - as i mentioned in my first post, not only did i believe that the lid wasn't namath's game used sb3 helmet, but i didn't believe that it ever belonged to namath. who says lou is a bad guy? better yet, i wonder if heritage paid lou for his input! :) ;)

btw rudy, thanks for your posts on the topic - they were a great read and i'm sure 99.9% of the forum feels exactly as you, as well they should!

aeneas01
03-19-2008, 01:14 AM
chris nerat posted this on the scd site on 03/18:

"Today Lou determined that it is not a game-worn Namath helmet, but is a Jets gamer from an unknown player."

well this is odd. it went straight from namath to his friend/courier to the consigner. it has "namath", "12", and "jwn" written inside it. why was an unknown player running around the field with joe's name, number and initials written in his helmet??

rudy.

i just went over to scd and read chris's blog - i found his following comment interesting:

"Many board members crucified Heritage for promoting the piece as something it was not, but what they didn’t realize is that Lou never authenticated it and caught all the things wrong with it and many more things that the message board member didn’t even catch."

hmmm....

i thought i was careful to state throughout my posts that i found many other problems with the helmet but considering the two major issues i pointed to, i felt that discussing the other issues was pointless - so i didn't. as a matter of fact i stated the following:

"...as i told chris at heritage, the problems with this helmet are numerous - there are significant inconsistencies that encompass both the interior and exterior of the lid. but two inconsistencies are so major that they make discussing the others in detail moot - in fact, they're so major that they simply rule out the possibility of this helmet being namath's sb3 game worn lid. as a matter of fact, in my opinion this helmet was never worn by namath."

so i'm a little confused - why would chris nerat feel compelled to state that lou discovered problems with the helmet that i "didn't even catch" given that i clearly didn't share my other findings with the forum? chris?

otismalibu
03-19-2008, 09:05 AM
i thought i was careful to state throughout my posts that i found many other problems with the helmet but considering the two major issues i pointed to, i felt that discussing the other issues was pointless - so i didn't.

Yep.

It's sad, really. After the fact, it's "look, look...Lou found something that the board members did not!!!" Hats off to you Lou - you're a credit to the hobby.

Lou Lampson couldn't hold aeneas01's jock, when it comes to helmet knowledge. And if he did ever get his hands on it, he'd surely attribute it to Joe Montana.

rose14
03-19-2008, 09:52 AM
It seems that fellow board member and Sports Collectors Digest columnist Chris Nerat is a little disgusted with some of the fellow posters on this site. You can read it on his blog here: www.sportscollectorsdigest.com (http://www.sportscollectorsdigest.com)

Well, I decided to email a response to his blog and here is what I emailed him.

Chris, I just finished reading your blog about some of the cowardly talk on the gamusedforum.com website. I'm not going to trash Heritage for jumping the gun and advertising an item that appeared to have rock solid provenance but Heritage probably should have done a little fact checking themselves before promoting an item like this before the collecting community. By taking a little amount of time and cross checking the helmet it would have saved them from this embarrassing situation. Mistakes happen, but with an item such as the Namath helmet they should have realized that it would have been scrutinized.

My problem with your column is that you state that some posters on the forum are way out of line, some are cowards and some are instigators and are bad for the hobby. Yes, there are some overzealous posters on there but with the many fake items that have been sold at auction through supposedly reputable auction houses after being authenticated by supposedly reputable authenticators I believe the collecting public has grown tired of seeing collectors being ripped off for the sake of pure profit for certain auction houses and authenticators.

How can someone such as yourself actually call someone out as a coward and bad for the hobby when the company you work for continues to business with Coach's Corner Sports Auctions? I'm sure you have heard all the complaints about authenticity with Coach's Corners items. It seems Coach's Corner has a never ending supply of Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Ty Cobb, Honus Wagner, Cy Young and even Josh Gibson signed items. Some of the most knowledgeable and experienced autograph and memorabilia collectors in the collecting community have never even seen a genuine Josh Gibson signed item but Coach's Corner seems to find one to auction every other month. When Coach's Corner does sell these items why do they always sell at just a fraction of what the same item would sell for in say a Robert Edwards auction?

I know you frequent the message boards such as as the one for the basis of your column as well as the Net 54 Vintage Baseball Card Forum where posters have continued to ask for a response to this but no one from SCD has ever been man enough to step up and respond. In fact there was an outstanding thread that has received over 700 post that questions SCD and their relationship with Coach's Corner. I'm sure you have seen it but in case you haven't here is a link to it. http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/thread/1201896466/last-1205088768/Open+letter+to+STAT+and+Christopher+Morales (http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/thread/1201896466/last-1205088768/Open+letter+to+STAT+and+Christopher+Morales) This is just one of the many threads where posters have questions SCD's motives.

Why hasn't there been a response from someone associated with Sports Collectors Digest? It is the "voice of the hobby" isn't it? I can tell you, it's money. If it wasn't for the monthly 20-25 pages of advertising that SCD gets from Coach's Corner I highly doubt that publication would continue to be in business. I am a current subscriber for now but I find it embarrassing that you can call someone out for being a coward and being bad for the hobby when the publication that you write for has done so much damage and continues to further damage the hobby each and every month.

I look forward to your response.

We will see if Chris Nerat isn't the coward that he claims some on here to be and responds to this very important question.

aeneas01
03-19-2008, 01:00 PM
Yep. It's sad, really. After the fact, it's "look, look...Lou found something that the board members did not!!!"

i have to say greg, nerat's comments left me with the same impression - with a little pouting and sour grapes thrown in as well. frankly, and not to put too fine of a point on it, imo nerat was pretty much saying that the "pros" are now on the job, they now have it covered, and that the armchair authenticators and hobbyists can get back to comparing bottle caps.

also, given that nerat felt compelled to pursue this topic in his blog, i'm equally curious about his following comment as well:

"Keep in mind, Lou Lampson (http://gavelchat.sportscollectorsdigest.com/ct.ashx?id=a31ae9d5-b283-46de-ba36-2294f378280d&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.americanmemorabilia.com%2faut hentication.asp), its (Heritage's) game-used equipment authenticator wasn’t scheduled to come in to their Dallas offices until this week, when he will look at all lots for the May Signature sale.... Was it bad judgment to run with the ads before Lou looked at the helmet? Maybe so, but they did and that was a business decision, but given the strong provenance, I believe it was a calculated risk and the majority of other auction houses probably would have done the same thing."

so let let's see if i've got this straight - lampson is actually heritage's game-used equipment authenticator (which i didn't know), the guy does work for them? yet heritage doesn't run the namath helmet by him before his scheduled trip to dallas, before they publicize the lid as ""arguably the most significant football artifact ever to reach the auction block"? lampson is in the dark as far as this item is concerned? is this what i'm hearing from nerat?

seriously, how does this work? seriously, how does one square this? obviously lampson had access to the same photos heritage included in their publicity ad - obviously lampson could have received more photos from heritage if needed. and obviously getting on a plane to dallas was not needed to determine that this "monumental piece" was not namath's authentic sb3 helmet.

but apparently, according to nerat, that's not how things work in the world of top-tier auction houses, in the world of well-known authenticators. apparently an auction house can't pick up the phone and call it's authenticator to say "hey, we know you will be here in two weeks to do your work on the lots, but how about taking a quick look at some photos of this namath helmet we got our hands on - we think it could be the biggest find of the last twenty years, could bring a boat load at auction and we want to get the word out as soon as possible."

no, apparently things just don't work like that - after all, what could be determined by just looking at some pics....

camarokids
03-19-2008, 01:17 PM
http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/9833/helmetxb8.jpg

rudy.


with the better close up picture , it looks more like a six not a five . thanks for the blow up....

rose14
03-19-2008, 02:37 PM
I just got off the phone with Chris Nerat and I have to say it was a joy talking to him. Let's just say Chris is in a very tough position concerning what I brought up about Coach's Corner.

As for Heritage and the Namath he even acknowledged that Heritage made a mistake in promoting the helmet but in now way were they trying to get one by the public. I tend to believe that as it appeared the helmet had rock solid provenance but Heritage failed to take a litte time to compare it and make sure before they started promoting it and it turned out to bite them right in the ass.

commando
03-19-2008, 02:58 PM
Let's consider the game used hobby today versus fifteen years ago, and the how the internet has affected everyone involved -- from the biggest auction houses down to the casual collector.

First of all, the most obvious result of how the internet affects our hobby is the availability of product. These days, even the most advanced niche collector has a reasonable chance of finding what he's looking for, whereas fifteen years ago, he'd have to place random calls to dealers, check the weekly issues of SCD, or get catalogs from the sports auctions that were around at the time.

So what does this have to do with the "Namath" helmet? Well, plenty... Quite simply, the internet has spread word of the helmet to countless collectors who may have not even realized that it was up for auction if this were the "good old days." The internet has allowed the chance for countless collectors to see -- and question -- the helmet.

Secondly, the internet has allowed the creation of collecting communities such as this one. Think about it. Fifteen years ago, how could you ask a specific collecting question, with photos, and have a knowing person somewhere respond within five to ten minutes? If you were a Patriots collector living in Boston who stumbled upon a Chargers jersey, where would you even begin to research such an item?

Relating to the "Namath" helmet, a fellow member of this community is a true expert in the area of vintage football helmets. Can he tell you much about game used hockey sticks or basketball shorts? Probably not. But when it comes to vintage football helmets, he really knows his stuff. What if he had seen this Jets helmet in an auction catalog fifteen years ago? What could he have done, other than call the auction house? If word didn't get to the right person, and the auction continued, how would anyone else have known about the concerns with the helmet fifteen years ago?

Accountability in our hobby is finally here. Good collectors are often the owners of bad merchandise -- and that's a fact. Many of them paid good money for items that were also sold to them in good faith by good people. The problem isn't always that the seller knows he's misrepresenting an item. The problem whether an item was used by the specific athlete or not. Period.

I'm convinced that there is no expert in our hobby who knows everything about all the equipment from every team in every league. I'm convinced that there is no expert in our hobby who even knows a lot about all the equipment from every team in every league. To be a true expert on any subject, you need to know more than a few basic things about brands and tagging. You need to know how that 1985 Patrick Ewing Knicks jersey looks and feels compared to that 1985 Rory Sparrow Knicks jersey. I have serious doubts about any "expert" who writes a letter of opinion on a 1986 George Brett Royals jersey at 9:30, a 1974 Anthony Davis USC jersey at 10:00, and a Theoren Fleury stick at 10:30.

I'm trying to stay on track here. My point on the Jets helmet is that auction houses may use "experts" who do have knowledge in specific areas, but I'm sure some items are simply examined and judged based on their overall "feel." A paid authenticator may be asked for an opinion on a circa 1972 Baltimore Colts jersey, for example. Well, he can be familiar with the tagging for the era, do research on the years the number was used and compare the item to known examples in his database. But right here on this forum may be a collector who has twenty or thirty 1970's-era Colts jerseys hanging in his closet! Who do you think is more qualified to look at that item?

cohibasmoker
03-19-2008, 03:14 PM
Robert, if the hobby masters don't like your opinions, no problem. The next time you see a problem with a helmet being offered by a major auction house, say NOTHING.

Let the auction house authenticate the helmet and put it out for public offering. Wait until the auction is about half-way completed and then post your comments on the forum while at the same time sending same to the auction house as well as SCD.

It will be interesting to see what their comments will be. But that's just my opinion.

Jim

PS: Some folks in the hobby may not appreciate your expertise but I certainly am glad you are around and accessible to us novice collectors.

Vintagedeputy
03-19-2008, 03:22 PM
I just got off the phone with Chris Nerat and I have to say it was a joy talking to him. Let's just say Chris is in a very tough position concerning what I brought up about Coach's Corner.

As for Heritage and the Namath he even acknowledged that Heritage made a mistake in promoting the helmet but in now way were they trying to get one by the public. I tend to believe that as it appeared the helmet had rock solid provenance but Heritage failed to take a litte time to compare it and make sure before they started promoting it and it turned out to bite them right in the ass.


I agree with the comments about Chris, super nice guy. He interviewed me for a recent edition of SCD about Giants memoribilia and he was a real treat to talk to. He even sent me a copy of the issue since my sub had expired.

Jim

kingjammy24
03-19-2008, 04:05 PM
"imo auction houses suffer when they drop the ball and their mistakes are rehashed in the public domain"

my point wasn't that their reps don't suffer per se but rather that, if all else is good, then their reps don't suffer long-term effects. i agree that any entity will suffer an immediate, short-term hit when they drop the ball. relatively speaking though, a short-term hit is negligible. people forgive and forget. for proof of that all you need to do is consider the fact that everyone has made errors yet many reps have remained stellar. clearly the errors they made didn't have long-term repercussions. the real, long-term
effects, i believe, only come when the mistakes are constant and egregious.

"why would chris nerat feel compelled to state that lou discovered problems with the helmet that i "didn't even catch" given that i clearly didn't share my other findings with the forum?"

robert, in your post you explicitly stated that you had found a myriad of other issues but given the profundity of the 2 main ones, it was pointless to discuss the others. when i read chris nerat's post that lou had found issues that you hadn't, i naturally assumed that you privately conveyed to him the totality of issues you had found and that's what enabled him to know that lou had found issues you hadn't. after all, if chris didn't know all of the issues you found, then how could he possibly know that lou had found ones you hadn't? are you saying you had no such conversation with chris nerat?

personally, i found nerat's calls of "walking the walk" and discussions of what's bad for the hobby to be the height of hypocrisy. how is it he has time to lambast members of this forum yet he apparently has no time to ever write about any of lampson's or coachs corner's massive errors? if someone wants to be a sycophant or is too gutless to bite the hand that feeds them, that's fine and understandable but don't then come out talking about "walking the walk" and pointing the finger at what's bad for the hobby as if you're unbiased or haven't made your name by turning a blind eye to the hobby's biggest ills. you'd have a hard time showing that anyone on this forum has singlehandedly caused more damage than lampson so i find nerat's choice of targets ludicrous.

"he's in a tough position". i can't imagine that column pays the bills so he's free to walk. doesn't seem so tough to me. either play the shill and live with it or walk away but don't intentionally fail to report about any of lampson's egregious errors and then turn around and lecture people about what's bad for the hobby. michael o'keeffe's column has bigger balls but maybe it's because o'keeffe doesn't waste his efforts trying misdirect blame away from friends and advertisers. SCD doesn't seem to have many fans and i can't help but think it's articles like that that are partially responsible. reading nerat's article was like listening to spitzer talk about how prostitution rings should be shut down. of lampson, he writes that the "knowledge that this guy has in his head, some of you would never be able to comprehend." lampson has been incomprehensible for some time now. personally, i couldn't be more tired of hearing the same old line that gets trotted out by lampson's sycophants: "but he's a football genius!"
then tell him to stick to football! unfortunately for the hobby, this football genius sticks his paws into everything from baseball to ladies undergarments (i'm sure it has nothing to do with trying to cash in as much as possible regardless of expertise) and every time he does, it results in a mess.

rudy.

aeneas01
03-19-2008, 04:53 PM
robert, in your post you explicitly stated that you had found a myriad of other issues but given the profundity of the 2 main ones, it was pointless to discuss the others. when i read chris nerat's post that lou had found issues that you hadn't, i naturally assumed that you privately conveyed to him the totality of issues you had found and that's what enabled him to know that lou had found issues you hadn't. after all, if chris didn't know all of the issues you found, then how could he possibly know that lou had found ones you hadn't? are you saying you had no such conversation with chris nerat?

i don't know nerat from adam and have never exchanged one word with the guy - chris ivy of heritage did call me about my findings and to let me know that heritage was going to pull the auction as a result - but i told ivy what i told the forum; that there were a lot of things wrong with the helmet, that imo the lid never belonged to namath and that there was no need to go into detail about these problems given what i had already brought to his attention. did ivy tell nerat about our phone call - did ivy give nerat some bad info - did he misquote me or offer nerat something that he thought i said? who knows.

and, fwiw, there was a very good reason that i didn't offer ivy more details about the lid - because, frankly, i didn't trust auction houses and didn't want to give heritage something to work with. but after hanging up with ivy, after seeing that he not only took what i had to say seriously but also promptly yanked the auction, i couldn't help but feel that i shouldn't group heritage in with some of the others i've dealt with...

aeneas01
03-19-2008, 05:22 PM
i forgot to add....

since nerat didn't respond to my forum question regarding why he would make such a presumptuous claim given that i have not shared my finding with anyone, i decided to post the same question to his blog earlier today - maybe i'll get an answer there:

http://gavelchat.sportscollectorsdigest.com/CommentView,guid,a31ae9d5-b283-46de-ba36-2294f378280d.aspx

regardless if nerat responds or not, i think it's clear that his comments were intended to diminish my opinions while at the same time elevating those of lampson's. poor form imo - especially considering that nerat never bothered to take the time to ask me what it was that i had found...

kneerat
03-20-2008, 12:34 AM
aeneas01,
In response to your question about why I stated that Lou caught things wrong with the helmet that you didn't even catch (he may or may not have)... I am sorry for the mistake and have amended my original blog entry to reflect what actually took place.

Rudy,
I will answer any of your questions you posted via a phone call, tomorrow. I would type them out right now, but it is past midnight and I have to get some sleep so I can be ready for my Badgers tomorrow night, Friday's games and March Madness round two weekend.

Look forward to talking with you.
chris

aeneas01
03-20-2008, 09:55 AM
Many board members crucified Heritage for promoting the piece as something it was not, but what they didn’t realize is that Lou never authenticated it and caught all the things wrong with it and many more things that the message board member didn’t even comment on in his original thread.

that's your amended and improved version chris? that sets the record straight? good grief - no offense, but you are a piece of work my friend. how about this for setting the record straight chris:

"i intentionally and falsely implied in my blog that i was privy to information that allowed me to confidently state that lampson discovered the same inconsistencies as the guu member and that lampson also discovered many more inconsistencies that the guu member didn't even catch. i intentionally and falsely implied this, even though i had no such knowledge, in an effort to lend more credence to my argument. one could even say that i'm guilty of the same thing heritage is guilty of - jumping the gun in an effort to better position that which i was selling - my argument and point of view. but unlike heritage i didn't act promptly and responsibly by correcting the problem once my errors were brought to my attention - instead i chose to continue to float my sale."

also chris, at the risk of sounding ungrateful, what up with your "apology"? out of one side of your mouth you apologize for your presumptuous comments yet, in the same breath, you quickly amend your apology by adding that lampson "may or may not have" found many things about the helmet that i didn't "even catch". speaking of presumptions, i presume that you won't take it personally if i just go ahead and pass on your "apology".

and about your blog today - more specifically, about your following comment in your blog today: "For the original man who photomatched the Namath helmet, I never meant to note that you didn't do a good job on what you discovered."

no, what you meant to note was that you were privy to all of my findings and were therefore able to recognize that lampson identified each and every one of them and many more to boot. that's what you meant to note chris. and it's perfectly clear why you meant to note this, isn't it?

speaking of lampson chris - when you made all of those phone calls in order to get to the bottom of this namath thing, did you happen to ask anyone why lampson, heritage's go-to equipment guy, couldn't form a preliminary opinion on the helmet based on the photos alone? why heritage had to wait for him to arrive in dallas before he weighed in on the topic? you wrote in your blog:

"Keep in mind, Lou Lampson (http://gavelchat.sportscollectorsdigest.com/ct.ashx?id=a31ae9d5-b283-46de-ba36-2294f378280d&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.americanmemorabilia.com%2faut hentication.asp), its game-used equipment authenticator wasn’t scheduled to come in to their Dallas offices until this week, when he will look at all lots for the May Signature sale."

given heritage's apparent relationship with lampson i find it incomprehensible that heritage wouldn't have contacted him weeks ago about the helmet. any thoughts on this?

mvandor
03-20-2008, 10:16 AM
Floating the idea that "Green Light" Lou would have kaboshed a $50,000+ sale by refusing authentication on his own on the Namath helmet - if aeneas hadn't documented the basic issues with this helmet so publicly beforehand - is preposterous on its face for anyone that's watched this hobby for more than a week.

Everything since is simply spin by those that benefit financially from their relationships with the auction house. Personally, I think aeneas put Heritage in a position they had no choice but to pull the item. It speaks volumes about them that they'd promote such a supposed major piece without having it first "authenticated" by Sweet Lou. Frankly, I think auction houses have gotten too cocky about their ability to move millions in bad merchandise and now operate with a "list first, support or pull if challenged later" policy.

ChrisCavalier
03-20-2008, 01:29 PM
Hello Robert,

I have been watching the threads related to the Namath helmet and I will post some more detailed thoughts a bit later today. In the meantime, I wanted to quickly post two thoughts right away:

1) I, like so many others on the forum, am consistently impressed by your knowledge of game used helmets as well as the value you add to the collecting community through your posts;

2) I sent that comment, as well as a few other thoughts, to you in an email last Friday. Could you please let me know if you received that email. I haven't heard back from you and I'm wondering if I have your most up-to-date email address.

Thanks in advance,
Chris

chakes89
03-20-2008, 03:53 PM
The main thing I saw from the pictures provided were the 2 little holes beneath the ear hole on each side in the pics from the Super Bowl

There was only one hole on each side in the pics of the helmet from the auctions

I doubt that helps anyone in anyway but I thought I would throw my cents into this

both-teams-played-hard
03-20-2008, 04:06 PM
The main thing I saw from the pictures provided were the 2 little holes beneath the ear hole on each side in the pics from the Super Bowl

There was only one hole on each side in the pics of the helmet from the auctions

I doubt that helps anyone in anyway but I thought I would throw my cents into this
Yes, chakes, that was the initial issue with the helmet. You spotted this by just viewing the pictures. Wouldn't you think a football historian would have noticed this also, without a trip to Dallas?
For the record: I am NOT an expert on anything, nor have I ever claimed to be. Folks who claim to be "experts" are flirting with disaster.

CollectGU
03-20-2008, 05:21 PM
Yes, chakes, that was the initial issue with the helmet. You spotted this by just viewing the pictures. Wouldn't you think a football historian would have noticed this also, without a trip to Dallas?
For the record: I am NOT an expert on anything, nor have I ever claimed to be. Folks who claim to be "experts" are flirting with disaster.


Why doesn't someone simply ask Chris Ivy if Lou looked at any pictures or did any premilinary work before they put it up in the previews instead of assuming that's what happened or must have happened...Someone should get the proper story from Chris on this and post it..

Dave

mvandor
03-20-2008, 05:28 PM
Why doesn't someone simply ask Chris Ivy if Lou looked at any pictures or did any premilinary work before they put it up in the previews instead of assuming that's what happened or must have happened...Someone should get the proper story from Chris on this and post it..

Dave

Always the auction houses' #1 advocate here, right Dave? At least you stick up for more than just your fav, AMI, I see.

The real question is why SCD chose to spin this story instead of focusing on the huge error by Heritage in so visibly promoting a bad piece - either prematurely before they had it authenticated, or after some preliminary flawed approval by Lou.

But then we know why don't we?

CollectGU
03-20-2008, 09:33 PM
Always the auction houses' #1 advocate here, right Dave? At least you stick up for more than just your fav, AMI, I see.

The real question is why SCD chose to spin this story instead of focusing on the huge error by Heritage in so visibly promoting a bad piece - either prematurely before they had it authenticated, or after some preliminary flawed approval by Lou.

But then we know why don't we?


Mike,

Your entire frame of reference for this hobby seems to be the forum, go broaden your horizons a bit.. All I said was somone should get the story of what happened from Chris Ivy...I'm not defending anyone, and personally see it as a big screw up on their part.

mvandor
03-20-2008, 10:25 PM
Mike,

Your entire frame of reference for this hobby seems to be the forum.

Not even close, amigo, not even close.

Eric
03-20-2008, 10:36 PM
http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/9833/helmetxb8.jpg

rudy.

another observation

the 6 faded behind the 12 looks to be the same style as the 6 on this roger finnie helmet from american memorabilia which sold in 04. that might support the idea that the "namath helmet" is another jets helmet from that era.
10838
http://www.americanmemorabilia.com/Auction_Item.asp?Auction_ID=5182