Hello & Welcome to our community. Is this your first visit? Register
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 59
  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    3,533

    Re: Namath's Game Worn Super Bowl Helmet? Nope.

    Quote Originally Posted by kingjammy24 View Post


    rudy.

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

    This is my email address here!
    dzscope at gmail dot com

    Email is best for personal messages...


  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    291

    Re: Namath's Game Worn Super Bowl Helmet? Nope.

    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.

  3. #43
    Senior Member commando's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    965

    Re: Namath's Game Worn Super Bowl Helmet? Nope.

    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?

  4. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,974

    Re: Namath's Game Worn Super Bowl Helmet? Nope.

    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.

  5. #45

    Re: Namath's Game Worn Super Bowl Helmet? Nope.

    Quote Originally Posted by rose14 View Post
    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

  6. #46
    Senior Member kingjammy24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    3,116

    Re: Namath's Game Worn Super Bowl Helmet? Nope.

    "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.

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,128

    Re: Namath's Game Worn Super Bowl Helmet? Nope.

    Quote Originally Posted by kingjammy24 View Post
    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...

  8. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,128

    Re: Namath's Game Worn Super Bowl Helmet? Nope.

    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.sportscollectorsdig...4f378280d.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...

  9. #49

    Re: Namath's Game Worn Super Bowl Helmet? Nope.

    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
    Thank you,
    Chris Nerat

  10. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    1,128

    Re: Namath's Game Worn Super Bowl Helmet? Nope.

    Quote Originally Posted by kneerat
    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, 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?

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:22 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5
Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Skin By: PurevB.com