is there any shame owning a game issued instead of game used?

[yankees24]

for one of my favorite players, they had available both a game issued and game used jersey. I couldn't afford the used so I reluctantly settled for the issued, is there anything wrong with having a game issued piece?

[suave1477]

Nothing wrong with it at all.

The item was still intended for that player.

Whether just manufactured specifically for that player or sat in his locker and they never got a chance to use it. It is still linked to that player.

Sometimes you may have a particular collection and you need a specific piece yet that one piece is so rare chances of you finding another is slim to none.
Nothing wrong with filling in the void with an issued item.

This is just my 2 cents.

[cjclong]

Nothing wrong with it at all. I have one of the replica Babe Ruth bats that Louisville Slugger sells. I'd love to have a Ruth game used bat, and if I ever win the lottery I may get one. Until then the replica is the best I can do.

[brianborsch]

I agree. No shame at all! In fact, game issued items is what I primarily collect. I love game issued bats because of the fact that they were made for a specific player's use. That makes them a special item. I stay away from game used because there are alot of fakes out there, and outside of a photomatch, you have to speculate to some degree.

IMO It minimizes the risk of being mistaken fro what you have. That gives me more peace of mind in collecting. Plus I like a cleaner look as well.

[sox83cubs84]

Agreed. At times, budgetary concerns or scarcity or uncertainty about items advertised as GU/GW can make this a viable and decent option. I'd rather have a game-issued piece of a favorite than have nothing. Same goes for cost...a GI Sandberg would be affordable for me...A GU Ryno would not.

Dave M.
Chicago area

[mbenga28]

regarding uncertainty if an item was really game used, can't the same be said of an issued item - for example someone could just take a blank team jersey with the same sizing for that player and customize it with their name and number and say it was issued when it was never intended or near the player for use.

[Jags Fan Dan]

I agree, no shame in it. I have Jimmy Smith's back-up (issued) Pro Bowl jersey from 1999 and Brunell's from 2000, and I think it they are as cool as just about any game used stuff I have.

[hiflyer56]

I don't see anything wrong w/ it under one circumstance. Ex: You cant afford the $8,500 Adrian Peterson game worn jersey from JO. Instead you buy the $2,000 issued jersey. When your spending that type of money for an issued jersey, there's something wrong w/ that. Just my thoughts.

[ned flanders]

I don't see anything wrong w/ it under one circumstance. Ex: You cant afford the $8,500 Adrian Peterson game worn jersey from JO. Instead you buy the $2,000 issued jersey. When your spending that type of money for an issued jersey, there's something wrong w/ that. Just my thoughts.

I agree, nothing wrong with it at all. JO was at the CSA last year in Chantilly, Va and had an Adrian Peterson THROWBACK game issued I seriously considered buying for A VERY GOOD PRICE - Much less then $2k. I am still kicking myself for not buying it.

[coxfan]

Collectors are individualists, and that's the way it should be. The value of any item is just what it means to that collector. It may mean something totally different to the next guy, but that's his business.

This discussion reminds me of the small-town culture I grew up in in the 1950's. Back then you couldn't walk for exercise, for fear that people would gossip that you couldn't afford to drive your car or keep it in good condition! If a family ate in a local restaurant, people would gossip that the wife was a bad or lazy cook, etc. Small-town culture left little room for just being yourself; you had to meet all sorts of arbitrary social standards.

These days, individuality is more acceptable, and that's the way it should be.