Tweet
or better stated, what constitutes a game used equipment "research center"? i tend to imagine a facility that not only employs experts in the field but also houses tools and equipment not typically owned by john q. collector. perhaps a carbon testing laboratory, infrared reflectography and ultraviolet light exploratory processing capabilities, thermoluminescence dating gear, etc., etc.
overkill? maybe. but what about the ability to at least determine the age of ink, of magic marker, scribbled on a game used piece of equipment, on the inside of helmet for example? shouldn't a game used equipment research center at least be able to determine whether or not "lamonica" was scribbled on the inside of a helmet 40 years ago or 6 months ago by employing some sort of ph or oxidation testing? i would think so.
if a game used equipment research center is nothing more than a handful of passionate collectors that have accumulated photos, reference material and equipment, then i'm not really sure what separates a research center from an active/serious collector(s). i would think a distinct difference between the two should be apparent, no?
at the absolute least, i would think a game used equipment research center would either own or have access to an exhaustive library of photos and film footage and know how to efficiently and effectively reference this material. certainly a library above and beyond what is available to john q. collector. but as far as mears's research center is concerned, i'm not sure this is the case. take the jim brown jersey for example, which mears recently sold at an rea auction and which recently sold at mastro. despite their efforts, mears was unable to locate a single, conclusive image of jim brown actually wearing that particular style of jersey in a game - according to troy kinunen of mears:
Our attempts were inconclusive. There are several clear photos of Jim Brown wearing Durene materials (me: not to be confused with the style of jersey in question). 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...
contrary to troy's claims, obviously more than "less than a dozen" clear photos of jim brown wearing a durene jersey exist - in fact many more exist. and of course there is obviously no way troy and/or the mears staff could have possibly "referenced all of the available images..." because that would mean a known quantity existed and that troy/mears referenced each and every one of them. there is not a known quantity and, as such, it's pretty safe to assume troy/mears didn't reference all of them.
while i was taking a closer look at the helmets listed at mastro, i promptly came across conclusive film footage of jim brown wearing the "tear away" style of jersey, the style of jersey in question, in a game. an image that apparently eluded mears. how is this possible? i don't operate a research center nor do i have access to an exhaustive photo/film reference library. yet i had no problem locating such an image. hopefully the buyer of this jersey can use the photo(s) and film footage to his advantage when it comes time to sell.
troy went on to state in his article that enough circumstantial evidence existed, even if a conclusive game image could not be found, to assure mears that jim brown wore this particular style of jersey in a game. in this case troy and mears were right. my concern is the same verdict, based on strong circumstantial evidence, could be easily applied to similar situations - yet the verdict would be wrong. herschel walker posing again and again with a rawlings rts helmet comes to mind. so does deacon jones posing again and again with tk helmet fitted with a bd9 facemask. both helmets were used by the teams in question, both helmets were used throughout the league, grainy photos suggesting the possibility exist. should this be considered sufficient proof? is this the best a collector should expect from a research center? i don't think so.
as i've mentioned in other posts, i really like some of the things mears has brought to the table and to be clear i have absolutely no beef with mears. but i also believe their attempt to apply a grading system to game used garments and equipment and their attempt to be known as a research center are nothing more than crude, transparent contrivances designed to exploit the hobby of game used collecting. and i think it reflects poorly on the industry.
here are some photo captures of jim brown stretching at a game - his shoulder pads can clearly be seen through his jersey. further into this film sequence the brightness of brown's white undershirt is conclusively evident through his semi-sheer jersey as he dodges tacklers and stretches for more yardage. these photo captures were taken from nfl films' fields of glory: african american pioneers in pro football. similar footage of brown can be found on other nfl films dvds.
...
overkill? maybe. but what about the ability to at least determine the age of ink, of magic marker, scribbled on a game used piece of equipment, on the inside of helmet for example? shouldn't a game used equipment research center at least be able to determine whether or not "lamonica" was scribbled on the inside of a helmet 40 years ago or 6 months ago by employing some sort of ph or oxidation testing? i would think so.
if a game used equipment research center is nothing more than a handful of passionate collectors that have accumulated photos, reference material and equipment, then i'm not really sure what separates a research center from an active/serious collector(s). i would think a distinct difference between the two should be apparent, no?
at the absolute least, i would think a game used equipment research center would either own or have access to an exhaustive library of photos and film footage and know how to efficiently and effectively reference this material. certainly a library above and beyond what is available to john q. collector. but as far as mears's research center is concerned, i'm not sure this is the case. take the jim brown jersey for example, which mears recently sold at an rea auction and which recently sold at mastro. despite their efforts, mears was unable to locate a single, conclusive image of jim brown actually wearing that particular style of jersey in a game - according to troy kinunen of mears:
Our attempts were inconclusive. There are several clear photos of Jim Brown wearing Durene materials (me: not to be confused with the style of jersey in question). 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...
contrary to troy's claims, obviously more than "less than a dozen" clear photos of jim brown wearing a durene jersey exist - in fact many more exist. and of course there is obviously no way troy and/or the mears staff could have possibly "referenced all of the available images..." because that would mean a known quantity existed and that troy/mears referenced each and every one of them. there is not a known quantity and, as such, it's pretty safe to assume troy/mears didn't reference all of them.
while i was taking a closer look at the helmets listed at mastro, i promptly came across conclusive film footage of jim brown wearing the "tear away" style of jersey, the style of jersey in question, in a game. an image that apparently eluded mears. how is this possible? i don't operate a research center nor do i have access to an exhaustive photo/film reference library. yet i had no problem locating such an image. hopefully the buyer of this jersey can use the photo(s) and film footage to his advantage when it comes time to sell.
troy went on to state in his article that enough circumstantial evidence existed, even if a conclusive game image could not be found, to assure mears that jim brown wore this particular style of jersey in a game. in this case troy and mears were right. my concern is the same verdict, based on strong circumstantial evidence, could be easily applied to similar situations - yet the verdict would be wrong. herschel walker posing again and again with a rawlings rts helmet comes to mind. so does deacon jones posing again and again with tk helmet fitted with a bd9 facemask. both helmets were used by the teams in question, both helmets were used throughout the league, grainy photos suggesting the possibility exist. should this be considered sufficient proof? is this the best a collector should expect from a research center? i don't think so.
as i've mentioned in other posts, i really like some of the things mears has brought to the table and to be clear i have absolutely no beef with mears. but i also believe their attempt to apply a grading system to game used garments and equipment and their attempt to be known as a research center are nothing more than crude, transparent contrivances designed to exploit the hobby of game used collecting. and i think it reflects poorly on the industry.
here are some photo captures of jim brown stretching at a game - his shoulder pads can clearly be seen through his jersey. further into this film sequence the brightness of brown's white undershirt is conclusively evident through his semi-sheer jersey as he dodges tacklers and stretches for more yardage. these photo captures were taken from nfl films' fields of glory: african american pioneers in pro football. similar footage of brown can be found on other nfl films dvds.
...
Comment