If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Def, and its of my favorite Steeler of all time as well , If you ever decide to part with it email me first please haha. I'm sure you don't want to sell it but you never know an emergency may come up some time "knock on wood" awsome helmet though. Would love to know how much you paid for it if you don't mind sharing. If so email me at southwestrep808@yahoo.com if you don't want to list price in public. Thanks!
I see, but dosn't that de-value an item sometimes. Because I know collectors that will not buy if a signiture isin't on back of jersey number. I guess everyone has there own prefrence though.
I generally don't like signatures on jerseys, especially when they are on the front, but in this case, thought that it enhanced the eye appeal. And you are right, it is a matter of preference. Whether other collectors like it or not in this particular case is irrelevant at this juncture, as I intend on keeping this jersey and passing it down to my son someday, given how rare authentic items from Steelers greats are. Hopefully, he will continue to value it too, and one day pass it down......
I see, but dosn't that de-value an item sometimes. Because I know collectors that will not buy if a signiture isin't on back of jersey number. I guess everyone has there own prefrence though.
Signed or not has been a debate that probably has 1,000's of threads in 100's of forums by now.
Being primarily a hockey jersey/stick collector, in my opinion, the norm is to not get jerseys signed for 2 primary reasons.
1. People think it detracts from the jersey and add's something that's not there.
2. High end jersey collectors (jersey's $5,000 and up), are usually too rich to care about getting a jersey signed and wouldn't waste their time tracking down Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, Sidney Crosby, Alex Ovechkin, Steven Stamkos and so on. I think it became the norm for hockey jerseys to not get signed because at one point in time, some person whom had no access to the player decided they would justify not getting the jersey signed because higher end players are more difficult to purchase and the average person doesn't have access to them for autographs. Unlike football superstars, hockey players like Crosby never have public autograph events or even private signings that you can send your items in to get signed.
If you want to get a $45,000 08 game used Winter Classic Crosby jersey signed, you would literally have to risk chasing him down after a game or practice and would potentially get one of his unrecognizable signatures. A person who can afford to pay $45,000 probably doesn't want to waste their time and efforts on having Crosby sign their jersey and potentially ruin it (which I have seen him do to many $375.00 retail jerseys). But the question still remains that if you were able to get a perfect 10/10 Crosby signature on a $45,000 jersey... would that increase the value since his good signatures are rare and not manufactured at dozens of signings every year? There is no real right or wrong answer because each person has a different opinion on whether an autograph increases or decreases the value of a jersey. Yet, if you got a $45,000 W.C Crosby jersey signed and it was horrible and he did the usual big dark blot instead of his number and it looks like a 1st graders handwriting using the opposite hand, I would say the value would definitely decrease. Each situation is different with every player and jersey.
Fan friendly lower end players that do 5 public signings per season are not valuable at all because every fan and autograph collector probably has a signed item of that player. Having a signed game used item of that player probably has no effect on the value, regardless of the game or event the jersey was used in.
To get back on topic, players like Hines Ward's autograph and "Game Used" inscription probably increase the value IMO because its basically his was of authenticating the piece of memorabilia. His items always come with a photographic LOA of him authenticating the item (signing & inscribing it) regardless of where you get his items from. You can often at least photo-match the signature and inscription to the LOA. I would never buy a Ward item that doesn't have a photo-matchable LOA because I would know that it is 100% fake. The 04 Pro Bowl jersey is a great example of how an LOA with signature and inscription increase the value since it can be authenticated to a photographic LOA and proven to be authentic.
I see, but dosn't that de-value an item sometimes. Because I know collectors that will not buy if a signiture isin't on back of jersey number. I guess everyone has there own prefrence though.
Players like Ward wrote "Game Used" because he has so many game issued jerseys. For example there are at least 3 more 04 Ward Pro Bowl Game Issued jerseys out there. By writing game issued, it's much harder for a scam artist to buy it and call it game used. He writes game used on his jerseys to authenticate them so no one can come up to him and claim they own a game used item that's not signed as such. A person can't take practice gloves given to them at training camp to a Ward signing and have him write Game Used, because he won't sign any "game used" items as he already signs all of his actual game used items after every game.
And why do players write game used or the date it was worn and team they played? It looks so tacky! Just sign your name on the number on back for football jerseys. Everything else looks funny IMO.
Name and Number is all I would ever ask for when getting something signed. And I would put my finger on the first number on back for him to sign in the spot I wanted it. I hate when they sign the mesh below numbers. And whats the point of writing game used on it? Isn't that what LOA is for or COA?
Leave a comment: