Game issued turning into game worn

[Takuleechch]

So I've been reading a few posts here that say they have bought jerseys or known of jerseys that have been purchased as game issued but have shown "use" and therefore they believe it is game worn.

Is it just me or is it a case of "seeing what you want to see".

I mean a few have come with paperwork from very reputable sources who say the jerseys are only issued. If the jersey has marks etc that could be confused with game use and they clearly state and sell it only as issued then doesnt that mean its definitely only issued? I mean Obviously if they had a jersey that was worn they would sell it as worn. Maybe the loose threads etc came naturally or was manufactured to have that snag or flaw? Maybe the jersey was thrown around since it was never worn?

I feel like I taking crazy pills.
Anyone else thought the same thing?

[emann]

I'd tend to agree with you, until I bought a "game issued" jersey from a collector and subsequently photomatched it. It happens...

That said, there are some obvious scammers out there who will buy issued jerseys and then magically find use.

BTW: The majority of jerseys I buy from teams are sold as issued but the majority clearly show use.

[BamaHater]

These days especially in MLB some jerseys are collected to be authenticated after the fact. In this case, the authenticator has no way of knowing if the jersey was worn or not and the game it was worn in. Better to authenticate it as Team Issued and have it be used then the other way around. You'd be pissed if you bought a star player jersey authenticated as used and pay accordingly then find out it was never worn.

[Takuleechch]

Yes that's true. I have no experience with MLB jerseys but if you can photo match it then obviously that is different - jackpot!

I just feel that people are buying issued jerseys and seeing what they want to see and then claiming use when snags, pulls and loose threads don't have to come from being used in a game.

[Takuleechch]

I'd tend to agree with you, until I bought a "game issued" jersey from a collector and subsequently photomatched it. It happens...

That said, there are some obvious scammers out there who will buy issued jerseys and then magically find use.

BTW: The majority of jerseys I buy from teams are sold as issued but the majority clearly show use.

What does "clearly show use" mean though. Cause I'm thinking that the jerseys that go unused may get something that can be confused with use simply by the way they may be handled (thrown around etc) and may even be mistakenly washed by a worker. If you can photo match it then perfect but if the loa says issued then isn't it a little dishonest to claim it was used (unless photo matched of course)

[scottishcowboy41]

I have a white 2010 Dallas Cowboys #40 Danny McCray jersey that was worn in every game of the 2010 season. It is hammered and has over 10 team repairs. I have photomatched it to numerous games using game wear, team repairs and thread patterns.

The jersey came from Steiner with a card stating it is game issued, yet with a full season's use it could not be more game used. A huge mistake on Steiner's part, but mistakes do happen. Also, sometimes authenticators just say issued if they didn't witness the jersey coming off the player's back.

Having the correct paperwork is obviously ideal, but if you can 100% photomatch the jersey and save a few hundred dollars, I have no problem. This is only football jerseys I am talking about. NBA or to a lesser degree MLB jerseys are very different due to the lack of game use evident because of the nature of the sports. That would worry me if I collected those.

[PAC]

I have a white 2010 Dallas Cowboys #40 Danny McCray jersey that was worn in every game of the 2010 season.

I found a picture which proves he did not wear a white jersey in every game of the 2010 season:

http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/columbiabasinherald.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/e/dd/edd0e4b2-f901-11df-873a-001cc4c002e0/4cef1664ebb5b.preview-300.jpg

Your jersey must be a fake.

[cliffjmp33]

I believe scottishcowboy41 was referring to the jersey being used in every game that the Cowboys wore white. I'll let him clarify things, but I wouldn't throw the term fake out there without seeing the jersey first.

As for my 2¢ on the issue or issued/worn, I just worry with the amount of items MLB posts as Issued that there are people in the hobby who take advantage of that terminology to pass something off incorrectly. Most notably the "Mike Trout" helmet discussed on the Auction Items forum here.

http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=55182

[Takuleechch]

Yea as I said earlier if it has obvious wear and marks and can be photmatched then great BUT if you are really wanting to see some use you'll see some use if that makes sense. Justifying a few loose threads to try and say an issued jersey must be worn I think is wrong. Unless you can photo match.

[emann]

Yea as I said earlier if it has obvious wear and marks and can be photmatched then great BUT if you are really wanting to see some use you'll see some use if that makes sense. Justifying a few loose threads to try and say an issued jersey must be worn I think is wrong. Unless you can photo match.

There are some little tells that you can sometimes find if you've handled alot of gamers (i only collect MLB, so that's what I'm referring to). I personally don't feel they should be posted to the forum as I'd hate to be the one who clues forgers in on things to start adding to their forged use jerseys.

That said, happy to share if you contact me directly.

But here is a question: would you still consider it wrong if the above poster who bought the pounded Cowboys jersey couldn't photomatch it, but it came from the team in obvious used condition? I think there are many variables with collecting, so I think it's tough to generalize.

[Takuleechch]

There are some little tells that you can sometimes find if you've handled alot of gamers (i only collect MLB, so that's what I'm referring to). I personally don't feel they should be posted to the forum as I'd hate to be the one who clues forgers in on things to start adding to their forged use jerseys.

That said, happy to share if you contact me directly.

But here is a question: would you still consider it wrong if the above poster who bought the pounded Cowboys jersey couldn't photomatch it, but it came from the team in obvious used condition? I think there are many variables with collecting, so I think it's tough to generalize.

Yea I would find it wrong if he wasn't able to Photomatch it. I mean I think people assume all marks must have come from game use when maybe the equipment manager or someone may have just been careless with it. so unless photomatched our stated in the loa we shouldn't jump to conclusions.

[scottishcowboy41]

I have read about and seen a lot of needless and disappointing negativity on this forum but this is the first time I have had any of it directed at myself.

PAC, as experienced forum member cliffjmp33 correctly pointed out, I meant all the games the Cowboys wore white in 2010. This I thought was fairly obvious as the Cowboys always wear their Throwback uniforms at least once a season. Not really sure that this needed pointed out.

I am pretty shocked that you decided to spend time searching for a photo in an attempt to make some sort of statement to prove me wrong and then brand a cherished part of my collection as fake. Why not ask me in a normal civilized manner that I didn't mention the Throwback game?

PAC, what did you join the forum for? To discuss and learn about game used memorabila with like minded individuals and admire their collections and gain valuable knowledge? With that kind of remark as your 13th ever post on this forum I very much doubt it.

The forum after all is just a gathering of people... with every thousand good, there will always be a handfull of bad.

[emann]

Yea I would find it wrong if he wasn't able to Photomatch it. I mean I think people assume all marks must have come from game use when maybe the equipment manager or someone may have just been careless with it. so unless photomatched our stated in the loa we shouldn't jump to conclusions.

Not to continue this (since nobody else is really weighing in), but what about any items that predate authentication without photomatches? Can none of those be sold as "game worn"? That probably constitutes 95% of the jerseys in circulation...

See, that's where I think this attitude falls short in the game used hobby. You need to be able to evaluate on a per item basis and have an ability to do so. Then it comes down to an individual feeling of trust in both that ability and in the items you're looking to purchase for your collection.

Anyway, just my take...

[allstarsplus]

If the authenticator didn't see the player take the jersey off of their back then it's supposed to be hologram'd as Game Issued.

I have dozens of Nats jerseys that are like that and some have so much use they are no doubters. I've also been able to photomatch several.

[Takuleechch]

As I said if you can photmatched it that's different.
I'm not too familiar with how MLB does it with issued vs worn but if they label everything they don't see come off the players back as issued then don't you think there will be people who buy "issued" jerseys that are actually just issued jerseys then start to see use that doesn't actually exist?
Does that make sense?

[emann]

I'm not too familiar with how MLB does it with issued vs worn but if they label everything they don't see come off the players back as issued then don't you think there will be people who buy "issued" jerseys that are actually just issued jerseys then start to see use that doesn't actually exist?
Does that make sense?

Absolutely—but that is sort of the risk with anything in this hobby. It takes a pretty decent level of faith... Unless you only buy "authenticated as game worn from the team" and I believe there have even been instances of those being incorrect. It's been said on the forum before, but unless you get a player to hand you his jersey during the game, you can't ever really be 100% sure. I think there have even been instances of photomatched use being faked at this point...

I agree that sometimes you see what you want to see. From the buyer's POV in the aftermarket, you just need to make as much of a judgement call based off due diligence...

[G1X]

Not to continue this (since nobody else is really weighing in), but what about any items that predate authentication without photomatches? Can none of those be sold as "game worn"? That probably constitutes 95% of the jerseys in circulation...

See, that's where I think this attitude falls short in the game used hobby. You need to be able to evaluate on a per item basis and have an ability to do so. Then it comes down to an individual feeling of trust in both that ability and in the items you're looking to purchase for your collection.

Anyway, just my take...

emann - I agree with you 1000%. Furthermore, those who collect older items need to have the ability to tell the difference between game-used and team-issued items (not to mention the difference between team pieces and replicas or fakes) as actual photo matches are nearly impossible to find because of the lack of available photos, and team/league COAs and other types of certification were non-existence. In addition, these collectors have to know the various tagging and other nuances of the teams/players they collect as unlike current-era jerseys that use the same manufacturers (Nike in the NFL and Reebok before that, and Majestic for baseball and Russell before that), there were a number of manufacturers involved. Some NFL teams, for example, would typically use a manufacturer for a few years and then switch to another.

Takuleechch - I agree with you in that on rare occasions, a collector might be a bit optimistic and see wear where perhaps others might not see it (and it probably doesn't exist). However, experience is a great teacher in this hobby and seeing a number of jerseys eventually gives many collectors the "eyes" to accurately differentiate a game-used jersey from a team-issued jersey. Having made a few bulk buys directly from pro football teams over the years, I can attest that it is usually easy to quickly see the difference between the jerseys that show game use and those that appear to have never been worn.

For those of you who are new to the hobby, if you live near a team that sells their game-used jerseys or a uniform dealer such as MeiGray, spend some time going through their racks of jerseys as it is good way to gain valuable information about game jerseys and make side-by-side comparisons of jerseys that show wear to those that are mint. It will quickly become apparent which jerseys show wear and which do not. As the old saying goes, a jersey will speak for itself.

Team/league COAs and photo matches are great if you can get them, but that won't always be the case, and it will almost never be the case if collecting older items (basically, anything from the 20th century).

Mark Hayne
Gridiron Exchange
gixc@verizon.net

[mbrieve]

I recently purchased a jersey from a well-known dealer who did a bulk buy with a team. This dealer listed all the jerseys as team-issued because they could not guarantee use. Some of the jerseys had crisp tags and looked to be lightly used if at all.

Going by the photos posted, I selected a jersey that displayed signs of multiple washings, numbering and lettering showed plenty of loose threads, etc. Again, unless I can photomatch it, there is no guarantee the jersey was worn on the field. All the evidence apparent in the photos posted in the auction listing pointed to it being used (and used a lot).

Because of the team issued distinction, I was able to purchase the jersey for less than a new retail authentic jersey from the team. I'll take that deal!

[scottishcowboy41]

mbrieve, that was the same senario as my purchase of my McCray Cowboys gamer. Brad from Shafrancollectibles, who is a forum member here, bought hundreds of Cowboys game issued jerseys in a massive Steiner clearout. Brad advertised the jersey as issued because it came with an issued Steiner card, but the photo's of the pounded jersey showed me it was in reality very much game used. I got it at a great price because Steiner had designated it as issued. All the Cowboys game issued jerseys he had were well priced and a few showed game use. I think he shifted all of them in under a month!

I was lucky enough to photomatch my jersey extensively, but even if I hadn't been able to, the game-wear, numerous team repairs and blueing of the jersey show clear game use. Not just some loose threads on this occassion. I'm happy.

[short84]

The reason Steiner sold the large lot of jerseys they received from the Cowboys as issued was because they did not receive any specific information from the Cowboys indicating which game or games the jerseys were worn in. Since their contract with the Cowboys was terminated, they simply printed up game issued COAs for each jersey and then sold them for $25 each to dump their inventory. I too, have several jerseys with the issued COAs that show game use with repairs, turf burns etc. I have one jersey in my collection that has over 30 repairs that was sold with an issued COA but for $25 I am more than happy with it.

[scottishcowboy41]

$25!!! Wow! I guess that's one of those right place at the right time kind of dealsl. I definitely need to relocate to the U.S! Lucky you! I was very pleased with what I paid for mine, even though it wasn't quite as good as $25, lol!