Shady Football Helmet Deals...

[DrJ]

I understand and do appreciate your input. I could have not even posted about this and just sat back but I just wanted to bring up that the chronology of the facts was backwards and not accurate. I guess I was just offended because I know the good things I've done and look at the good in other people first. I NEVER expected to see an item I've sold/traded to show up on this forum unless it was in a positive way. I'll just end by saying everyone should get their facts straight before making accusations - I think that's a forum rule. I'll get off my soap-box now and just leave it at that...

[aeneas01]

aeneas01 - the Charger helmet is back at auction, but it has number 41 on back. I thought you said the last seller switched it from 41 to 14 (presumably to make it more valuable)??? Here are the facts. The Charger helmet in question was at auction long ago and the pictures showed the 41 written inside (twice if I recall) but #14 on back (probably a switch by someone due to #14 being Fouts). I don't think the seller had switched it because as I recall he was selling a collection of someone elses and just didn't come across as knowledgeable in his auction writeups. I purchased the helmet anyway because I was interested in the style and don't collect star players without impeccable provenence (i.e. team letter). When it arrived in the mail it had 41 on back. I assumed the seller probably got so many emails about the discrepancy that he switched it. Maybe many in my shoes would have shot off a nasty email, but I actually preferred that the 41 was correctly placed on back because to be honest I probably would have made it correct myself. I researched and found that Ernest Jackson wore #41 during the period the helmet was dated to. I also found a photo of Jackson wearing a helmet like this with the same mask. I eventually obtained another yellow-bolt Chargers helmet and decided to part with this one because the other was in better condition. I sold the helmet as a game-used Ernest Jackson helmet based on my research. I sold it for about $12 more than I paid, but I never charge full shipping so I probably did good if I broke even. I admit, I don't recall mentioning that 14 was on back at one time - that was an oversight on my part, but an honest one. The helmet left my possession the same way I received it and I 100% believe that the helmet truly is an Ernest Jackson game used helmet. Now everyone can feel free to let me know what I did so horribly wrong!

drj: your above post prompted me to go back to my photodatabase and re-check my information - what i found was that you are entirely correct and that i in fact incorrectly posted the sequence of sales - my apologies, especially to you, given that it appears you are personally involved with this helmet.

here is the correct info based on the information i have on file: the bolts helmet with the exterior number 14 sold in or around march of '06. it was later sold again in or around november of '06 with the exterior number corrected to match the interior number (41). the photo date in my database for the first photo (14) was 03-07-06; i erroneously read this as 03/07 which is what i based my wrong conclusion on. again, my apologies.

interestingly, or not surprisingly, the helmet sold for more when correctly numbered - not much more, but more. as far as correctly adjusting these numbers is concerned, under these circumstances i don't see anything remotely wrong with this nor do i think it's remotely or morally incumbent on the seller to inform prospective buyers of this information. just as wouldn't see anything remotely wrong with, or worthy of disclaiming, the correcting of jaw pads that were attached to a helmet incorrectly.

as far as the use of "game used/worn" to describe a helmet is concerned, it's my personal opinion that this term should be used only when supporting documentation, such as a loa, can also be provided. the irony here, again imo, is that there are forum members that i consider equally expert at identifying actual game used items when compared to the pros that get paid for such authentications. even so, i still think it's wrong to portray an item as "game used/worn" without a letter of authenticity or something similar that can support the item's origin.

sadly, there are far too many unscrupulous sellers who play "loosy-goosy" with the term "game used/worn" when it comes to football helmets - as far as many are concerned, if the helmet shows any game use they feel free to use that term regardless if the helmet was even used by the team in question, i.e., white helmet that has seen some action + dolphins decals purchased on ebay + american flag and warning decals purchased on ebay = game used dolphins helmet. happens every day.

yet, having said this, i see absolutely no problem with someone listing an item as "what i believe to be game used/worn" followed by supportive information such as the seller's experience in the hobby, photo matches, etc... as a matter of fact, i believe helmets listed in this manner tend to draw equal or more interest than helmets listed as "game used/worn" without authetication because of the honesty of the item description.

what's also very interesting is how well a helmet can sometimes do without the benefit of any claim whatsoever to authentic lineage - for example, in october of 2005 someone listed an earl campbell texas helmet on ebay. this thing was an absolute beauty - a near mint clearshell macgregor adorned with the exact same facemask and chinstrap campbell wore at texas. the helmet was an exact match in every possible way. yet did the seller list this helmet as a game issued, game worn, game used, campbell owned or anything else that would give the impression that it once belonged to campbell? no. he listed it as an authentic vintage texas helmet that he meticulously reassembled to look like the exact same helmet campbell wore. the seller included in his ad a shot of campbell on the cover of sports illustrated along with a few other photos showing how precise the helmet was. the thing sold for $3,800 and had a ton of bids!

[DrJ]

I appreciate your looking back at your files, noting the error and apology. I don't know how long you've been collecting, 12+ years for me, but I haven't seen many, if any, 1980's helmets with team COA's and those are the only COA's I trust at all and then the helmet still has to pass my test. I will never say I'm an expert, but I have no problem in my ability to deem something authentic and game used in my opinion and list it as such. I personally think I do a better job than most of the so called professional authenticators out there and I don't buy any helmet because it has a COA, I only buy it if I think it's legit. But yes, I've made mistakes before and been burned, I admit it. But anyone who collects helmets should be able to look at that helmet and tell that it is a 100% legit game used Chargers helmet showing terrific use. I think in your original post you even noted how it looked to be a terrific lid (I don't remember your exact quote). Anyway, no hard feelings on my part and just so you know I DO APPRECIATE WHAT YOU ARE DOING IN CREATING A HELMET DATABASE AND POINTING OUT ISSUES. And I don't sell many helmets as I'm a collector and not a dealer, but I will take heed of your advice and try to incorporate it into any future listing I may have. I might point out too that I think you are the same guy who contacted me when I sold that Steelers clear shell and applauded me for being so accurate in my description. And you might recall that at that time I relayed to you that I had just thrown a helmet in the GARBAGE because someone had pointed out an issue to me. If I were out to be dishonest and make buck I wouldn't be throwing helmets in the trash. Like I said, I try to do things right and that's what shocked me about the original post. Take care and keep up the good work.

[aeneas01]

I appreciate your looking back at your files, noting the error and apology. I don't know how long you've been collecting, 12+ years for me, but I haven't seen many, if any, 1980's helmets with team COA's and those are the only COA's I trust at all and then the helmet still has to pass my test. I will never say I'm an expert, but I have no problem in my ability to deem something authentic and game used in my opinion and list it as such. I personally think I do a better job than most of the so called professional authenticators out there and I don't buy any helmet because it has a COA, I only buy it if I think it's legit. But yes, I've made mistakes before and been burned, I admit it. But anyone who collects helmets should be able to look at that helmet and tell that it is a 100% legit game used Chargers helmet showing terrific use. I think in your original post you even noted how it looked to be a terrific lid (I don't remember your exact quote). Anyway, no hard feelings on my part and just so you know I DO APPRECIATE WHAT YOU ARE DOING IN CREATING A HELMET DATABASE AND POINTING OUT ISSUES. And I don't sell many helmets as I'm a collector and not a dealer, but I will take heed of your advice and try to incorporate it into any future listing I may have. I might point out too that I think you are the same guy who contacted me when I sold that Steelers clear shell and applauded me for being so accurate in my description. And you might recall that at that time I relayed to you that I had just thrown a helmet in the GARBAGE because someone had pointed out an issue to me. If I were out to be dishonest and make buck I wouldn't be throwing helmets in the trash. Like I said, I try to do things right and that's what shocked me about the original post. Take care and keep up the good work.

wow - small world! yes, it was me that contacted you about your steelers helmet! you see, i am positive about this hobby - so much so that whenever i come across an honest seller, which was certainly the case with you, i contact them as soon as i can!

for those members that might be interested, last may i came across an extremely rare, beautiful clearshell kelley steelers helmet listed on ebay. the moment i saw it i immediately knew that i had come across it before - but this time around it looked even nicer (if that were at all possible!). so it was off to my photodatabase where i quickly discovered that it had sold on ebay in october of 2005.

but this time around a beautiful vintage full-cage schutt adorned it which matched the helmet 100% better than the previous facemask. but what struck me most about this listing was not the knock-out helmet; it was the honest, careful and accurate description of the helmet. like the honest seller of the earl campbell helmet that i mentioned earlier, here was another honest seller with an absolute gem on his hands - another honest seller that didn't feel the need to embellish, to misrepresent. and, as it turns out, that seller was drj!

before:



after:



in the wrong hands, either helmet (the steelers, the campbell) could have been easily and unscrupulously listed as something it wasn't in an effort to hit a big payday - but i'm happy to report both did very well on their own merits!

as far listing a helmet as "game used" i think we're going to just have to, as they say, agree to disagree drj. i feel pretty comfortable identifying a helmet as game used but just couldn't list it as such unless i was 100% certain. but, as i've mentioned before, i wouldn't hesitate listing it as "what i strongly believe to be game used" and include my reasons. that way if i happen to be wrong, i have nothing to worry about because i did not represent it as game used. but if i claimed something was game used based on my experience and was later confronted with proof that it wasn't, well let's just say i wouldn't want to put myself in that position.

[DrJ]

as far listing a helmet as "game used" i think we're going to just have to, as they say, agree to disagree drj. i feel pretty comfortable identifying a helmet as game used but just couldn't list it as such unless i was 100% certain. but, as i've mentioned before, i wouldn't hesitate listing it as "what i strongly believe to be game used" and include my reasons. that way if i happen to be wrong, i have nothing to worry about because i did not represent it as game used. but if i claimed something was game used based on my experience and was later confronted with proof that it wasn't, well let's just say i wouldn't want to put myself in that position.

I don't think we disagree on the matter at all, I do as you describe in your above post. I point out where I got the helmet (i.e. online auction, dealer, team, etc), why my research gave me the opinion that the helmet is used and may have belonged to X player, that the helmet was represented to me as game-used by the previous seller and I always say please do your own research before bidding because I do not have a COA (if that is the case). I also start the auction at $9.99 with no reserve so I run risk too, not just the bidder. I sold what I'm sure was a fantastic helmet that I paid about $400 for not long ago for less than $100 - but that is the risk you take because many bidders don't appreciate honesty enough and it scares them away. And since I buy my items at retail (i.e. I have no great contacts in other words), I generally do take a loss, but that's part of collecting. But throw some junk out there with a COA and a good story and you can make a ton - I've seen that done a lot as you have too. Anyway, I'm glad the hobby has you and thanks for all of your good communications. Good post on the Redskins helmet in the other thread, very informative and I will follow it.

P.S. - Let's shut this thread down, I'm sure the readers are tired of hearing it...

[aeneas01]

I don't think we disagree on the matter at all, I do as you describe in your above post. I point out where I got the helmet (i.e. online auction, dealer, team, etc), why my research gave me the opinion that the helmet is used and may have belonged to X player, that the helmet was represented to me as game-used by the previous seller and I always say please do your own research before bidding because I do not have a COA (if that is the case). I also start the auction at $9.99 with no reserve so I run risk too, not just the bidder. I sold what I'm sure was a fantastic helmet that I paid about $400 for not long ago for less than $100 - but that is the risk you take because many bidders don't appreciate honesty enough and it scares them away. And since I buy my items at retail (i.e. I have no great contacts in other words), I generally do take a loss, but that's part of collecting. But throw some junk out there with a COA and a good story and you can make a ton - I've seen that done a lot as you have too. Anyway, I'm glad the hobby has you and thanks for all of your good communications. Good post on the Redskins helmet in the other thread, very informative and I will follow it.

P.S. - Let's shut this thread down, I'm sure the readers are tired of hearing it...

i misunderstood you drj - obviously you and i are on exactly the same page when it comes to misrepresentation vs honesty. btw, i'm sorry to hear that you've taken losses in the past, especially in those cases where you believe your honesty may have scared bidders away. at least your great looking steelers helmet sold for quite a bit more than the previous time it was listed on ebay!