A question for EVERY single member of this forum

[camarokids]

retail replica jerseys are $299.00 a piece at Tropicana Field . For the unsuspecting masses . What a waste when you can get a common players gamers for $165 at Ball Park Heroes and elsewhere....

[richpick]

Personally, I don't do this. I view these items as American cultural artifacts that should be cared for in the same fashion as important coins, stamps, paintings, etc. However, if you paid your hard-earned money for an item and trying on a jersey or swinging a bat brings you enjoyment (or makes you feel closer to the game), then I don't see a problem with that at all.

Reid

Wow Reid,
American Cultural Artifacts? This seems a little strong for most items! If your are talking about a Willie Mays game used jersey or something in that category I agree but you believe all game-used items are American Cultural Artifacts?

[RyanZimmerman11]

Wow Reid,
American Cultural Artifacts? This seems a little strong for most items! If your are talking about a Willie Mays game used jersey or something in that category I agree but you believe all game-used items are American Cultural Artifacts?

If everyone that owned a Willie Mays GU jersey in the 50's-60's ran around spilling mustard on them while wearing them at the family cookout, what would we have today?

Not many nice Mays GU jerseys, that's what.


So what's wrong with me taking extra care of my GU Zimmerman jerseys? Hopefully 55+ yrs from now they'll still be in great shape....and either he'll be a HOF'er or the equivelent of Dale Sveum.

[richpick]

i once heard someone on this forum say that, in reference to game used items, it's not so much that we own these items, as much as we hang on to them and preserve them for the next generation. i thought it was a great quote.

i share reid fontaine's mindset that these items are no different than any other cultural artifacts that you'd see in a museum. there's a desire to preserve and pass on these tangible pieces of history. what's the difference between jackie robinson's rookie jersey and a rembrandt? why would you treat one any differently than the other? i've never heard anyone who collects ancient greek urns say that the fun part of the hobby was filling them with water and sticking flowers in them. the fun part of the hobby for them was in possessing such an incredible piece of human history.

I disagree

that said, i realize that people collect for different reasons. some apparently see the "fun" part of this hobby in being an adult walking around town wearing a gamer or in watching their toddler catapult a spoon full of pudding onto a jersey that clinched their hometowns only division title. for others, the fun part is in feeling that, although you don't have the budget of a museum, you're still keeping a inherant and colorful part of american history alive by preserving these pieces. it'd be as inaccurate to call one group "too serious" as it would be to call the other group "irresponsible".

noone's talking about an expectation that items come directly from players. they're talking about an expectation that previous owners didn't wear them while mudwrestling with the family dog. there are antiquities out there, hundreds of years old, that have passed through dozens of hands and yet not sustained any damage. it doesn't matter how people have owned an item but rather how they've taken care of it. i've seen several high-end paintings that have passed through many hands. strangely, i've yet to see a van gogh or a rembrandt with a big peanut butter stain.

rudy.

I disagree kingjammy with the bold statements above. First of all you go buy a Rembrandt painting and I will buy a game-used Jackie Robinson uniform and we will swap. If you are stating that both are historically important I agree but the Rembrandt painting is far more important than the uniform becuase there will be only 1 of that painting painted in the 17th century. How many Robinson uniforms are there?

Your second point about high-end paintings is also not accurate. Most works of art in museums have undergone restoration work. Smoking, oily hands, punctures, paint cracking, poor stretchers, etc. have caused numerous amounts of damage to paintings but expert restorers have spent many hours and considerable cost to the owners to restore these paintings.

Do you remember recently when Steve Wynn the owner of Wynn Las Vegas had friends over to view his Picasso painting which he had just sold for $139 million dollars and he put his elbow through the painting? Accidents happen to all collectibles I just find it hard to believe that forum members are so upset that a collector slips on a jersey for a few minutes when card companies are cutting up the jerseys which in essence is removing them out of the hobby for good.

Richard

[both-teams-played-hard]

I just find it hard to believe that forum members are so upset that a collector slips on a jersey for a few minutes when card companies are cutting up the jerseys which in essence is removing them out of the hobby for good.

Now, that's a good point!

[Eric]

I agree that cutting up the jerseys is the biggest injustice being done of all.

However, I think points are getting confused here. The original point was that people can choose to do whatever they want to the items in their collection, but in the case of AMI recently, it seems to be pushing it a bit to be using pieces for photo shoots and screwing around.

If you want to defend swinging a bat in your own collection, that's one thing, but if I were running an auction house I'm not sure I'd be happy seeing the boys in the back room screwing around like that.

Yes, the hobby is supposed to be fun, but there's something to be said for running a company professionally.

That's my opinion.
Eric

[hiramman]

I agree that cutting up the jerseys is the biggest injustice being done of all.

However, I think points are getting confused here. The original point was that people can choose to do whatever they want to the items in their collection, but in the case of AMI recently, it seems to be pushing it a bit to be using pieces for photo shoots and screwing around.

If you want to defend swinging a bat in your own collection, that's one thing, but if I were running an auction house I'm not sure I'd be happy seeing the boys in the back room screwing around like that.

Yes, the hobby is supposed to be fun, but there's something to be said for running a company professionally.


That's my opinion.
Eric

I agree with Eric 100%. I have no problem with wearing my non-roster jersey around, but my 1985 Clemens home jersey is being well maintained. I like to have fun, but I'm also not stupid.

I think this thread is great. I love seeing the vast differences in everyone's opinions. It's just like our hobby. Some folks collect one thing because it's important to them, while others collect totally different items for the same reason.

And by the way Ryan Zimmerman11, if you're a size 56, I don't think you'll be fitting in one of Zimmerman's jerseys. I'm a 50 and just can't seem to squeeze into some of my jerseys and wouldn't try. I like fun, but I'm also not crazy!

THAT'S WHAT MAKES THE HOBBY FUN!

[RyanZimmerman11]

I agree with Eric 100%. I have no problem with wearing my non-roster jersey around, but my 1985 Clemens home jersey is being well maintained. I like to have fun, but I'm also not stupid.

I think this thread is great. I love seeing the vast differences in everyone's opinions. It's just like our hobby. Some folks collect one thing because it's important to them, while others collect totally different items for the same reason.

And by the way Ryan Zimmerman11, if you're a size 56, I don't think you'll be fitting in one of Zimmerman's jerseys. I'm a 50 and just can't seem to squeeze into some of my jerseys and wouldn't try. I like fun, but I'm also not crazy!

THAT'S WHAT MAKES THE HOBBY FUN!

I hear ya on that That's why I said if I could...lol

[karamaxjoe]

This thread may go on forever so I figured I'd join the party.

First I'd like to say I disagree with the AMI models wearing the flannels in the catalog. The two concepts don't go together and if I'm in the mood for that kind of stuff, I'll just grab a mens magazine. I prefer my hobby to be clean.

Secondly I think we are going a little overboard on the concept of trying on game used jerseys. How many flannels in your collection were probably recycled to the minors and had a number of no name players use them. Does this make the jersey any less valuable or it's authenticity compromised? Most of the wear from game used flannels comes from the fact that someone in the minors beat the crap out of it. It would be great to know the jerseys in my collection went straight from the original player to my hands, but that's impossible. The first jersey I ever received originated with the White Sox and was donated to my father-in-laws American Legion Team. The jersey probably saw action for one major league season and three semi pro seasons. I don't believe this compromised anything with the jersey and I'm happy with it just the same.

Finally I do rate my stuff right up there with art. We wouldn't be collecting all this stuff if we didn't have the same passion as an art collector. Handling a piece of art doesn't compromise the piece and trying on a game used jersey is just the same.

Mike

[Nathan]

I think that I recognize that my own role is simply to hold onto and preserve something for the future.

Let's take the example of the #75 Mets jersey that's been brought up. If that's in my hands, it's not going anywhere on me. Personally I wash my hands before handling anything so I don't introduce enormous amounts of microscopic material onto an item. But let's say there's some sort of unique history to what would normally be regarded as a common item. What if a #75 Mets jersey is from, say, the only player to ever come from a certain small town in Idaho? What if he's the first Major Leaguer to have a parent born on a certain Indian reservation? Just because I regard something as common doesn't mean it is.

I have two hockey jerseys in my collection that would be considered "common". One is from a goalie who dressed for nine games and never saw the ice during a game, and the other is a from a guy who played in one pre-season game before being sent to the minors (where he's remained ever since, two years later). Why do I treat these gently? Because those are the first two guys from an entire country to make it onto NHL ice, and these are the jerseys they wore for their own personal first game. I'd be steamed beyond belief if I found out that someone had bought one and used it in pickup hockey or something because it's nothing special to them.

If something happened along the way as a result of improper storage by the team or a bad load of laundry by the equipment manager, that's disappointing by at least it's in a team capacity. For someone to add wear (insignificant as it may seem to be) by wearing it around the house or to a game or whatever...I don't go for it. Not spilling beer doesn't mean that there isn't still damage being done. Heck, they don't let the Constitution or Declaration of Independence be photographed with a flash. Would one picture hurt it? No, but the accumulated effect of many pictures would.