The Jim Brown Jersey

[mvandor]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

Posters,

I emailed Doug Allen at Mastro over the weekend and asked him to send me his photo match of the Jim Brown jersey that he mentions during his interview of the Jim Brown auction video which can be seen on their website. Actually, Doug responded within an hour of my email and stated he would send the photo to me today. Doug emailed me with the photo at around 11 am est.

Doug did make it clear that this is a "style match" and not an actual photo match of the jersey up for auction. Just want to make sure that everyone is clear on this matter.

Sincerely,

Mark

[FONT='Calibri','sans-serif'] [/font]

In my mind that pic would lend credence to the probability that the jersey was a promo/photo shoot shirt as opposed to a game used one. As big a star as he was, as much photographed as he was, is it really unlikely even the 60's Browns might have preserved a jersey for photo shoots?

Certainly would explain the very light wear on the jersey. Unfortunately, it also affects it's worth.

[aeneas01]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

great post mark and a very interesting/educational/entertaining read!

Hi Robert,

First, thanks for placing this discussion into a separate thread. There are not a whole lot of discussions that are strictly about football jerseys, especially the pre-2000 era, so this is very refreshing from that standpoint. Hopefully, it will stay on the course of being educational.

unfortunately for me and those that are primarily interested in gae used football items, the guu forum can often resemble a baseball collector's watering hole! so it's always great to see threads dedicated to football interests as well!

To clarify about practice use, some teams were known to take their jerseys from previous seasons and use them in practice and training camp. To my knowledge, teams did not use the current season's jerseys in both practice and games, so if a player tossed his jersey into the stands after the season finale, the wear and repairs were most likely from that season (or previous seasons if the jersey had been recycled).

i was curious about this point as well - as i mentioned before, as a youngster i remember watching the new york giants practice in "property of" type gear over their pads. but while i was taking a closer look at the game used football helmets currently listed at mastro, i came across a ton of photos of teams apparently practicing in their game jerseys (i've included a few of these photos below). are these photos of camp/practice and are these guys wearing jerseys from the previous season? or are some of these photos from mid-season practices and could they practicing in their game shirts?

A few quick documentations of teams that reused durene jerseys in practice or camp at some point are the early 1970s Cowboys, the mid-1960s Jets, and the Detroit Lions. The Cowboys' use of old game jerseys in practice is well-documented in the 1973 book "The Gladiators". The Cowboys apparently stripped the plates off the back before reusing them in camp (assuming that there were plates on the back to begin with as NFC teams didn't begin using name-on-back until 1970). In Joe Namath's book "Namath" that was published in 2006, the Jets can be seen in two photos on page 155 in what appears to be training camp practice from the mid-1960s where they are wearing game jerseys. However, turn the page, and it looks like they are wearing solid color sweatshirts in a camp practice. When I made a bulk buy from the Lions in 1999, their equipment manager (who had been working for the team since the early 1970s) said that they didn't start using separate practice jerseys until sometime in the 1980s. I have always made the assumption that there aren't a whole lot of older jerseys to be found simply because teams reused them in practice until they wore out.

As for your question about telling the difference between "practice" repairs and "game" repairs, there should be no difference assuming that the same person made the repairs. That is the problem in my viewpoint. For example, I have a nice Dave Edwards Dallas Cowboys durene jersey from the early 1970s with a ton of repairs. The jersey was most likely game used as there are obvious signs that a nameplate was on the back. With the nameplate having been removed, I am convinced that the jersey was reused in practice based on the photos in "The Galdiators". So the question that always crosses my mind is whether most of the abuse came from practice wear or game wear. If the jersey was worn for one season but used everyday in camp for six weeks, I have to ask myself that question. Worse, the jersey may have never been put into game action (served as a spare or emergency jersey) and only saw practice action.

as i mentioned earlier, i don't see why it would matter to a collector if the wear was caused by practice or a game given that both reflect the history of the jersey. on the other hand i could see how a collector might be less excited about a jersey if it were discovered, for example, that the wear on a newly obtained alan page rookie jersey actually came from several guys that never made the roster prior to page's arrival. but how could anyone possibly, conclusively, make this determination?

To take this a little further and make all durene collectors a little more uncomfortable , let's use two Washington Redskins who went on to the Hall of Fame as an example. In 1964, the 'Skins draft included both Charley Taylor and Paul Krausse. The 'Skins used the same style of burgundy jerseys for most of the 1960s. For this discussion, let's assume that the 'Skins resued previous seasons' jerseys in practice and training camp. The often unanswerable questions are these:

1. Did the wear and repairs on the #42 and #22 jerseys come from Taylor and Krausse in game action?
2. Did the wear and repairs come only from practice and camp after the jerseys - used in previous seasons - had been relegated to practice use?
3. How do we really know that Krausse and Taylor ever wore these jerseys?

1. again, why would it matter if these jerseys belonged to these guys?
2. since it would be impossible to determine, why would it matter?
3. if this could not be determined i imagine the jerseys would be valued accordingly, no?

The last question is the most intriguing when collecting older durene jerseys, especially regarding NFL teams prior to the nameplate era. If a team used the same jersey style (including number font) and manufacturer over the course of several seasons, it can be near impossible to pinpoint the exact season. This can be problematic if you run across a #22 or #42 'Skins jersey as these jerseys may not have been worn by Krausse and Taylor, but rather by LeRoy Jackson and Bill Anderson who wore #22 and #42 respectively in both 1962 and 1963. Trying to find proof-positive photo evidence from that era can be difficult at best.

either a jersey can be conclusively traced to a player or it can't i would think - if it couldn't, if you could easily argue that the jersey could have just as easily belonged to another a player, then i would think that would determine the value of the jersey, no?

I won't even get into the discussion of college and high school teams that wore the same style as NFL teams. Was that red jersey with white numbers worn by the Chicago/St. Louis Cardinals, University of Alabama, or Annandale High School? I once saw an old University of Iowa durene jersey that I would have bet the farm was a Steelers jersey. Glad I didn't place that bet!

absolutely and i've wondered about this often. the same goes for football helmets - heck, there are a lot of pop warner teams around the country that mimic what the pros wear - and i've seen some of these pop warner helmets on ebay listed as pro gamers. just recently one of the big auction houses yanked a "michigan" gamer after i informed them that it was clearly not an authentic michigan helmet and was most likely a high school lid. high schools around the country use the same helmet schemes as major college programs.

When looking at any older football jersey style that seems atypical (such as the Jim Brown jersey in question), finding a photo of the paticular player in that style can be near impossible. For me to feel somewhat comfortable in that regard, I need to find at least one Browns player wearing that particular style of durene in a game action photo from that era. That might not answer the question about the paticular player being researched, but at least it would answer the question as to whether the team actually wore that style in game action.

In almost every team bulk buy I have made from a team or league, there are inevitably items that are different than the rest. I have refused to list items for sale simply because I cannot match them or explain them. But just because I can't positively match them doesn't mean that they aren't just as real as the rest (which they are).

i agree 100%

I hope this information is helpful.

Mark Hayne
Gridiron Exchange
gixc@verizon.net

Always looking for Atlanta Falcons and WFL jerseys

[Jake51]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

In response to Mark's post, the Broncos were also in the group that would use the previous season's game jerseys as practice jerseys. I have Rich 'Tombstone' Jackson's game jersey from 1968 - photomatched and evidence of a nameplate - and it has 49 repairs on it. While some of those repairs were ther result of game action, the majority are from practice sessions. Personally, the fact that there is practice use on the jersey does not diminish its value to me at all.

Thanks,

Tom

[lund6771]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

In response to Mark's post, the Broncos were also in the group that would use the previous season's game jerseys as practice jerseys. I have Rich 'Tombstone' Jackson's game jersey from 1968 - photomatched and evidence of a nameplate - and it has 49 repairs on it. While some of those repairs were ther result of game action, the majority are from practice sessions. Personally, the fact that there is practice use on the jersey does not diminish its value to me at all.

Thanks,

Tom

and Vikings

[RKGIBSON]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

Jake51,
Tom, One of the things I like about the forum is learning how other collectors think. In your opinion, how does the name plate being removed from a vintage jersey effect it in your mind, as far as collectability and value difference, compared to one that would have the name left on it? Somethimes a jersey with the name removed may be the only opportunity you have to get that player. Do you think reproducing the name, accurately, and installing it would make the jersey better?

Anyone elses opinions are welcomed here too.
Roger

[kingjammy24]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

Jake51,
Tom, One of the things I like about the forum is learning how other collectors think. In your opinion, how does the name plate being removed from a vintage jersey effect it in your mind, as far as collectability and value difference, compared to one that would have the name left on it? Somethimes a jersey with the name removed may be the only opportunity you have to get that player. Do you think reproducing the name, accurately, and installing it would make the jersey better?

Anyone elses opinions are welcomed here too.
Roger

for me, it's all original/unrestored or nothing. a nameplate removal, whether by the team or not, would decrease the value and collectibility. that said, i think restoring it is even worse. at least when it's removed, the jersey is still "original" in the sense that nothing unoriginal has been added to it. putting a restored nob on it just taints the whole thing.
personally, while i wouldn't want a jersey missing the original nob, if i had to take it, i wouldn't want it restored. i'd just live with the aberration. and ultimately be unhappy with it. if a grail jersey came up for me, say a 1991 joe carter shirt, and it was the only one that would ever come up, and it was missing the name, i'd probably pass on it. i know i'd just constantly be disappointed in the missing name and it'd bother me too much to enjoy the jersey fully. i know i'm probably in the minority feeling this way. it would just forever be an imperfect piece and the imperfection would gnaw at me everytime i looked at it.

rudy.

[jdr3]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

The redskins recycled game jerseys also.

[aeneas01]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

Article: Troy Kinunen

Jim Brown Jersey: Personal Preference vs. MEARS Grading Standards

With the continued discussion regarding the Jim Brown jersey, I was asked several questions about our evaluation of the jersey. Since I chose to include photos with my response, I decided to create a short news item. The issue boils down to personal preferences vs. established MEARS grading standards.

Question: Why wasn't the Hall of Fame contacted regarding this jersey.

Answer Troy: Over a decade ago I conducted a research trip to the Football Hall of Fame. I purchased numerous Hall of Fame photos from their archive department. At that time, I photographed numerous jerseys, including the Jim Brown that was on display. At that time I took available tag shots, close-ups of font, and close-ups of team repairs. From my photo references, I could clearly see the Jim Brown jersey was made from durene. Since the questioned jersey was "tear away", I did not see any merit to questioning the Hall about this particular jersey.

In the past, I have worked with the Baseball Hall of Fame on numerous occasions, in addition to numerous professional sports team. MEARS does attempt to exhaust all avenues when examining a jersey, as we did on the Jim Brown jersey. I just didn't see a potential benefit of seeking their advice for this item. It was like comparing apples(durene) to oranges (tear away).

as a "research center" i would think mears might feel a special obligation to reference the largest collection of period jersey exemplars in the country, housed at the pro football hall of fame, given the magnitude of this item - not an exercise in comparing apples to oranges, but rather an exercise in due diligence. not only does the hall own an enormous inventory of like jerseys (vintage tagging comparisons, etc.), but it also owns a tremendous photo and film library which could have possibly shed more light on the jersey. if a "research center" is not prepared to take such steps in an effort to authenticate such an important piece, then one has to wonder what separates a research center from a group of knowledgeable hobbyists sharing their opinions. this is not stated out of spite, but out of genuine concern.

Question: Could this jersey be a practice or photo shoot jersey.

Answer Troy: Highly Unlikely. I have included several photographs of Jim Brown wearing a practice jersey. Judging by the numerous different styles, it illustrated the Browns employed the practice of wearing specific practice only jerseys throughout the course of several seasons. This is illustrated by the different designs found on the practice jerseys themselves, each dating the practice jersey to a different year. It was in my professional opinion the examined Jim Brown jersey was not a practice jersey, since the photo evidence clearly supported the fact that distinct and different jerseys were worn during practice.

Regarding photo shoot, there is no empirical evidence to support the fact that Jim Brown was issued a different jersey (made from the same materials as used by the Chicago Bears and worn by Gale Sayers) for photoshoots. I find it highly unlikely that if a request was made to photograph Jim Brown, that a new, special jersey would have been made for him to wear. Also, judging several photos that I referenced, the shots appeared to have been taken at different dates. Thus, implying this was a jersey worn more than on just one occasion, which was not consistent with one photo shoot session. There is nothing to support this point.

i'm don't think anyone suggested that jim brown may have been furnished with a special jersey manufactured solely for photo shoot purposes. what i believe was suggested is that isn't it possible jim brown (and the rest of the team for that matter) was issued a jersey for game use but didn't particularly care for the style and/or fit for game use so he instead opted to wear it only for photo shoots? isn't it possible that, for whatever reasons, this style of jersey was shelved by the bears? there are examples of this situation occuring with other teams (see the '72 rams). isn't this possible given that a conclusive game photo of brown actually wearing such a jersey in a game has not been produced?

Question: Did you find a photo of Jim Brown wearing this tear away style jersey in a game.

Answer Troy: Our attempts were inconclusive. There are several clear photos of Jim Brown wearing Durene materials. Less than a dozen, but they do exist. It is challenging to find available footage to be used for photo matching. We referenced all of the available images, and consulted with dozens of period printed publications. Any pub collector will know that most images, especially action shots, were quite grainy as they appeared in these 1960s periodicals. We did examine scores of images that were photographed too far away to determine the actual materials of the jersey. What our imagery analysis did conclude that the numeral font, sleeve length, and collar design were consistent with the photos, we just could not get enough close up images of the materials. So, did we base our final opinion without a “photo match” to Jim Brown? The answer was no. In addition to the several images of Jim Brown wearing this tear away style material, we have found photographs of other teams (BEARS) and other examples of actual tear away jerseys that were worn by other teams and players. I am sure that the other football jersey collectors out there could provide additional teams and players that wore tear away style jerseys from the 1960s. There is empirical evidence to support the fact that tear away jerseys were worn in the NFL. The fact that other NFL player and teams were documented as wearing tear away materials, this Jim Brown, coupled with the photographs of Jim Brown wearing tear away materials, were the basis of our opinion.

wouldn't it be more accurate to state that mears was only able to uncover "less than a dozen" clear photos of brown wearing durene during their research? certainly you can't believe that less than a dozen such photos exist? i have more than this in my photo database, clear photos of brown wearing a durene jersey, just from my helmet research activities.

Question: The jersey did not have any team repairs, how could it get an A10 grade:

Answer Troy: With respects to game wear and grading, the following information is listed in the jersey grading criteria section of the website and has been used by the MEARS evaluators during the process of assigning grades:

Degree of wear: With respect to grading, degree is independently measured by the staff of MEARS. Game wear is measured from light to heavy. Per the MEARS grading standards, the range of game wear may be determined from light to heavy, while still having the maximum points awarded to the jersey. A jersey may exhibit a light range of overall wear, but still be awarded the highest grade per the scale.

I think the issue is personal preferences vs. MEARS grading standards. Collectors have the right to collect what they want. If your personal preferences are the jersey has to have photo matched team repairs and NFL documentation, that is fine and acceptable, as your very own personal preferences. You may only collect jerseys that match your self-defined criteria. You are not required to buy anything that you are not comfortable with.

MEARS grading standards are the guidelines that we have created. When MEARS evaluates an item, the process (worksheet) and final results (LOO) capture our thoughts and methodology. This work and information is provided to the buyer. He has the ability now to follow the MEARS logic trail, and see if he agrees or disagrees. In the case of the Jim Brown, the winning bidder and several underbidders were in agreement with the MEARS opinion. They purchased the jersey knowing that the photo references we provided were not game action shots. They purchased the jersey knowing there were no visible team repairs. They purchased the jersey knowing the exact degree of use. The MEARS letter satisfied their personal preferences. Obviously with the continued debate, we did not meet others idea of game use or personal preferences.

i believe that the your question "The jersey did not have any team repairs, how could it get an A10 grade" is poorly framed given the question collectors are asking is why a jersey with such relatively light use was awarded an a10.

If an item is found not to have been evaluated properly, the buyer is protected by the MEARS Buyers Protection policy, the only program like it of its kind. This is not the case of the Jim Brown jersey; it is simply a matter of different personal preferences.

your protection policy is tremendous. so is the swift manner in which you respond to concerns. when i discovered quite a few problematic game used football helmets auctioned through mastro in the past, helmets that mastro claimed were authenticated by mears and came with mears loas, mears immediately (and i mean immediately) sought to correct the problem. buyers were contacted and money was refunded.

Sincerely,

Troy R. Kinunen

MEARS

[aeneas01]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

for me, it's all original/unrestored or nothing. a nameplate removal, whether by the team or not, would decrease the value and collectibility. that said, i think restoring it is even worse. at least when it's removed, the jersey is still "original" in the sense that nothing unoriginal has been added to it. putting a restored nob on it just taints the whole thing.
personally, while i wouldn't want a jersey missing the original nob, if i had to take it, i wouldn't want it restored. i'd just live with the aberration. and ultimately be unhappy with it. if a grail jersey came up for me, say a 1991 joe carter shirt, and it was the only one that would ever come up, and it was missing the name, i'd probably pass on it. i know i'd just constantly be disappointed in the missing name and it'd bother me too much to enjoy the jersey fully. i know i'm probably in the minority feeling this way. it would just forever be an imperfect piece and the imperfection would gnaw at me everytime i looked at it.

rudy.

i feel exactly same way about football helmets - i would rather have an original vintage helmet without the facemask than a vintage helmet fitted with a "similar" mask. the davis (packers) helmet currently listed at mastro is another good example - if nothing else it appears to be an authentic and very rare xl "husky" packers gamer. but along the way it was fitted with a reproduction (helmet hut) suspension webbing unit given that it was a gutted shell. although helmet hut did a very nice job (as they always do), this is something i would never choose to do to an original shell. but that's just my personal taste/preference - and i can easily understand why adding a reproduction suspension unit to this sort of vintage shell would make another collector very happy.

...

[cohibasmoker]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

Jake51,
Tom, One of the things I like about the forum is learning how other collectors think. In your opinion, how does the name plate being removed from a vintage jersey effect it in your mind, as far as collectability and value difference, compared to one that would have the name left on it? Somethimes a jersey with the name removed may be the only opportunity you have to get that player. Do you think reproducing the name, accurately, and installing it would make the jersey better?

Anyone elses opinions are welcomed here too.
Roger

As long as it is disclosed that the nameplate was replaced, that's fine.

- I can't speak on why some teams removed nameplates but back in the early 1970's, the Eagles removed nameplates if a jersey was sent to a charity. Why? It was explained to me that the team owned the jersey but NOT the NOB - so if a jersey was being donated to a charity, the NOB was usually removed.

- Since we're talking about the Eagles, back in the early 1970's, there were definately examples where players used previous season gamers on the practice field. Some had the NOB removed while some still had the NOB. It was NOT a common practice but there were examples. Most times, the players wore a very simple green/white numbers or white/green numbers Sand-Aire jersey with green sweatpants or shortened game pants.

Jim

[Jake51]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

Hi Roger,

While I would prefer to have the original nameplate attached, not having the nameplate would not stop me from going after a vinatge piece that I was interested it.

As to value, I think that comes down to personal preference. For me, I will go after a vintage Broncos jersey with the same amount of effort regardless of the nameplate being there or not because I know they are few and far between and if I were to wait for one with a nameplate for a long time.

As to adding a nameplate after the fact, personally I am not a fan. I want the jerseys I have to be original and if that means no nameplate, so be it.

Great question! What is your opinion on the topic?

Thanks,

Tom

[RKGIBSON]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

Jake51,

Tom, I'm like you, and everyone else, I would rather have the nameplate in place. I have only bought one jersey that had the nameplate removed since I have been in the hobby. It was a HOF players jersey that had been recycled into a practice jersey. The sleeves were cut off and hemmed also.
Being in the auto restoration business, I always want to fix things. To be honest, I had a nameplate made and had it sew on, it bothered me. I could see exactly where it was, the size and the odd shape that it was sew on. I found a picture and tried to have the name reproduced and screened exactly, that cost me. The sleeves did not bother me.
I can respect you for not worrying about them being gone. It is just part of the history of a piece. I see both sides.
Roger

[CollectGU]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

Are the final selling price numbers on Masto's website correct? If so, the Brown sold for for $47K down from the 70K it sold at REA. That is a big drop. Some other realized prices on their website are so shockingly low that it is now safe to say that this recession has really hit the collectibles market really hard, much like the real estate market.

Regards,
Dave

[cohibasmoker]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

Are the final selling price numbers on Masto's website correct? If so, the Brown sold for for $47K down from the 70K it sold at REA. That is a big drop. Some other realized prices on their website are so shockingly low that it is now safe to say that this recession has really hit the collectibles market really hard, much like the real estate market.

Regards,
Dave

Dave, that may be a factor but who made the decision to have a live auction on a "Monday"? Contrary to popular belief, people do have to go to work.

Jim

[lund6771]

Re: The Jim Brown Jersey

Are the final selling price numbers on Masto's website correct? If so, the Brown sold for for $47K down from the 70K it sold at REA. That is a big drop. Some other realized prices on their website are so shockingly low that it is now safe to say that this recession has really hit the collectibles market really hard, much like the real estate market.

Regards,
Dave

I thought the same thing Dave...also not just the final prices, but look at how many bids were placed across the board....

I also couldn't believe that they would have chosen to have a live auction on a MONDAY????...aren't most people working that day?

I would guess that prices will continue to fall no matter where an item is sold....If I owned an auction house, the first that I would do right now would be to drop my greedy 20% rates...

The first one that does that should see the level of interest increase on both ends....if they don't, I could see e-bay getting a lot more active with really good items and not be a just a dumping ground