Considering how Topps has treated Upper Deck this year through the court system, I think Upper Deck should sue Topps for the same frivolous lawsuits. I feel like I am looking at 2004 Fleer Authentix. Since Fleer is owned by Upper Deck, the Topps company should get dragged through the judicial system over card design.
I really want to like this set, but it just seems boring and useless. The card for Jose Contreras features a game that didn't involve him in the decision, but he did pitch well. I guess that's something.
This is a lazy attempt at a card set and a middle finger to Upper Deck. It seems to me that Topps created this set to flaunt their victories in an unsportsmanlike manner. This conduct should be beneath a company who was just awarded exclusive trading card rights to MLB.
This set will only accomplish to further create a wedge between card companies, who should be working together for the common good.
That being said, the set isn't bad, but it's phoned in. Topps tweaked a concept by another card company and will likely get away with doing so. The design is so five years ago, it actually came out five years ago as 2004 Fleer Authentix. There is no imagination put into the set, but there are 11 White Sox cards.
28 - Paul Konerko
66 - Jose Contreras
69 - Jermaine Dye
73 - Josh Fields
79 - A.J. Pierzynski
115 - Mark Buehrle
128 - Carlos Quentin
144 - Gavin Floyd
177 - Alexei Ramirez
182 - Gordon Beckham
189 - Jim Thome
I do like one aspect about the set, its player selection. Most non- base set releases will have anywhere from one to five White Sox cards. This has eleven. I found a few stray fat packs at Target yesterday, so I picked up one. It was lucky enough to have Jose Contreras in it.
This set has no reason to exist. I'm happy that there are eleven more White Sox cards to collect, but honestly I could have done without this release. It will be releases like this that gets Topps exclusive MLB license revoked and awarded to Upper Deck.
I still think that Upper Deck should sue.
1 comment:
I'm with you, just in principle alone.
Post a Comment