PSI "80's Montana" on Ebay - issues

[CollectGU]

I must say that this forum has now become very interesting. I was curious to see how the forum would react when one of it's own experts items were questioned, AND a compelling case has been made..

[ChrisCavalier]

I must say that this forum has now become very interesting. I was curious to see how the forum would react when one of it's own experts items were questioned, AND a compelling case has been made..

Hello Dave-

That's what makes the this site so great. Everyone can learn from one another. Whether you are an "expert" or "novice", everyone can learn more through this site. In fact, I think it is a problem when the collecting community accepts whatever an "expert" or "authenticator" has to say as if it was burned into tablets on Mt. Sinai.

I think the opinion of authenticators should be one data point, among other points, that should be used in the process of evaluating items. It seems odd that I have to say this but, contrary to what some collectors believe, no one is perfect. We all make mistakes. I believe no one is exempt from being able to learn from another. I know I have learned a great deal from the participants on this forum.

That being said, in today's world, I think authenticators do have a place. They can help people with informed opinions (i.e., additional data points). There are times when that can add value and that is what they are paid for. That does not mean their word is gospel and they cannot learn from others. In fact, I believe this site will inevitably help even "experts" to learn from others who participate. That is the beauty of it. The posts in this thread can apply to some unknown or an "expert".

In my opinion, different authenticators may have different approaches to authenticating items. As such, I believe the end user must know enough to understand the process and determine who they feel comfortable dealing with. Personally, I don't expect any authenticator to be perfect. But to me, it is the authenticator who demonstrates they will approach the authentication process with both knowledge and integrity, while also showing they are willing to keep learning and admit they may have been wrong in an attempt to do what is right is the one that will earn my trust.

I don't think any of the experts on this site will claim that they are perfect. However, they are extremely knowledgeable and try to share that knowledge to help the collecting community. While they are human like the rest of us, I believe what sets them apart is that they are not only knowledgeable, they are committed to trying to do the right thing.

We are in the midst of a revolution where collectors are having more access to information than ever before. Conventional wisdom may no longer hold. Collectors are asking more questions, experts are being asked to provide more information and the collecting community is benefiting from the knowledge offered through sites like this one. Personally, I am very happy to have the experts on this site be part of that movement and I think they feel privileged in helping to take the hobby to the next level as well.

Sorry for the long post. The quote above simply inspired me to share these thoughts.

Sincerely,
Christopher Cavalier
CEO - Game Used Universe

[G1X]

Gentleman:

I have avoided this discussion for a number of reasons, but let me now throw some oil into the water just to play the role of Devil's Advocate.

1. The first thing that struck me odd about the two Montana jerseys and the Elway that are being auctioned by the seller is the lack of a 100% nylon flag tag attached to the Russell tail tag. When Russell switched to the "eagle head" red, white & blue logo tag in 1983, the 100% nylon flag tag was found on a majority of Russell jerseys by the mid-1980s. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule (such as it being absent on some of the early versions of this tag). However, it seemed a little unusual that all 3 jerseys lacked the 100% nylon flag tag.

2. Everyone wants to argue about the photos and fonts, but no one is pointing out that the 49ers were wearing Wilson at various times during Montana's career with the 49ers. One must match Wilson font and Russell font before drawing any firm conclusions about the font being incorrect.

3. Photo matching is great - and it is also dangerous. Case in point are the photos showing no gap on the underside of the stripes and the rebuttal photos showing the gap. It is common knowledge among many football jersey collectors that there will be gaps in the stripes on the underside of the arms on some jerseys. Sometimes it can be difficult to find photo evidence, especially on older items. Just because a photo is found without the gap doesn't mean that there weren't jerseys worn during a long career such as Montana's where the stripe pattern was different.

4. Unless it is so painfully obvious that a jersey is "bad", trying to verify authenticity without actually holding the jersey in hand is not very wise on several different levels. From personal experiences over the past 31 years, I've made this bad mistake and embarrassed myself on several occasions.

5. Words of wisdom from personal experiences to any dealer or collector out there who have contacts with equipment managers, ex-equipment managers, team personnel, agents, players, etc. Trust no one but yourself!!! These contacts for the most part are not collectors so they don't always understand the nuances (and they may not even care) of most collectors' desire to own an actual game-worn piece as opposed to a team or locker-room only jersey.

6. Repeat of #4. Don't put too much blind faith in your sources. Still perform your due dilligence to be sure everything is "right" about the jersey before marketing it.

7. There have been several excellent postings in this string indicating outstanding research methodology. However, not mentioning the Wilson/Russell issue, the 100% nylon tag, and understanding the issue on the stripe gaps points out that there is a lot more to conducting research than simply "photo-matching".

8. Peace and harmony to all during the holiday season!

Mark Hayne

[EndzoneSports]

3. Photo matching is great - and it is also dangerous....

4. Unless it is so painfully obvious that a jersey is "bad", trying to verify authenticity without actually holding the jersey in hand is not very wise on several different levels....

Mark Hayne

Couldn't help but jump aboard and thow in my 2c worth. Mark brings up some excellent points; the two quoted above seem to merge somewhat as the focus of my opinion.

First I must point out that this is my opinion regarding the topic and should neither be construed as an endorsement of Bernie/PSI (or any other seller) nor as a criticism of the original poster (or anyone else who may choose to make a hobby out of photo matching).

The home PC, high speed Internet access and services such as Getty Images are wonderful tools of technology that have arisen as the hobby has evolved over time. Serious hobbyists and professional alike, however, both must realize that, they are just that--tools. Defined as "devices for doing work", they should not be mistaken for the work itself.

It seems that nowadays, every hack with a PC, an Internet connection and nothing better to do with his/her time has turned into and amateur authenticator. Apparently not for the purpose of profit, for they've not documented enough serious work with jerseys to have earned any credibility with the hobby at large; nor for the purpose of academic research, as their only outlet for publication would appear to be "hit and run" bashing on forums such as this (and no matter how P-C you tip-toe around it, pointing out inconsistancies in someone's item--which you have no interest in owning--by using barely relevant exemplar photos which prove nothing, qualifies as "bashing" in my book). Many such postings seem to be done solely with the arrogant, yet insecure posturing of a "look at me, I know more than you do" attitude. As Mark points out, one cannot make an authentication determination simply by looking at a photo or reading a description on a page, many nuances can only be imparted with a first-hand inspection. Despite the fact that the serious hobbyists and pros are all well aware of this, the "photo matching" junior authenticators seem to feel quite comfortable sitting in their padded desk chairs making authentication claims about items that they've only seen in a 150x300 pixel, 2-dimensional photo.

Photo matching, while possibly useful in VERY limited circumstances cannot replace a sound, broad education in your area of particular interest. While this education will indeed include the study of visual exemplars such as still photos, videos, etc., it needs also be understood that this is but a small part of the larger picture (pun intended). While photo matching may be possible for items in very recent years where nearly every sporting event is widely photo-documented (and now archived, thanks to services like Getty Images and Corbis), this is not at all practical for items of players that were worn more than 5-10 years ago. As such, its' usefulness has a very limited scope. While I would certainly not want to discourage anyone from learning and/or sharing there knowledge, there's something to be said for not putting all of your eggs into one basket.

After seeing some of the detail that has gone into some of these postings, I no longer worry so much about myself and whether or not I take this too seriously at times. I'm refreshed to know that there are others out there more disturbed than I. For those who stubbornly continue to believe that every jersey worn by every player in the last 35 years can, should and will be photo-matched, I suspect that these may be the same people who claim to be able to hear the difference in audio speaker cables. My though is that believers in either such farcical theory should not be left alone in a room with children or small animals.

Happy Holidays and
a Prosperous New Year!