Why old sports cards are awesome

My mom and dad are slowly making me move out my many, many shoe boxes of old sports cards currently in their storage room. As I've been flipping through them, I came across a 1992-93 Skybox card for Dallas Mavericks coach Richie Adubato. Because the spirit moved me, I flipped the card over to read this blurb on the back:

"Richie enjoys tennis, Broadway shows and shopping for ties."

These thoughts immediately came to mind.

--Surely Adubato is the inspiration for those "Most Interesting Man in the World" commercials, right? We've got no doubt about this now.

--In the past 15 years, how many times has anybody not related to Richie Adubato looked at the back of a Richi Adubato card? Once? Twice? I feel a little like I'm an archeologist that's the first living human to stumble into a long-buried tomb in centuries.

--Is this the greatest card blurb ever? Surely nothing can top this, right?

A running back's best skill is being a running back

Dominic Rhodes is a running back. His position is running back. He's also returned 135 kicks in his career, and caught 101 passes. But he's run the ball 625 times in his career because he is a running back (550 going into 2007).

That might be why on the back of Dominic Rhodes' 2007 Bowman football card (#35), the following is listed under "Skills:"

"Running the football is the best part of his game"

If running the football is the best part of Rhodes' game, then I am glad that he became a running back. Can you imagine if it said "playing pass defense is the best part of his game"? What if it said "tackling ball carriers is the best part of his game"?

Julius Jones is also a running back. He's had 885 career carries (721 going into 2007). He's had 84 receptions. He's never returned a kick or a punt. He doesn't make tackles, and he doesn't get interceptions.

And listed under "Skills" on his 2007 Bowman football card (#34):

"At his best when carrying the ball."

That's also good news. If Jones is actually at his best when covering wide receivers, kicking field goals, throwing passes, or blocking defensive tackles, then throughout his career coaches have been badly misusing Jones. Luckily, coaches have realized Jones is at his best when carrying the ball (not kicking off, not tackling ball carriers, not throwing passes, not punting, not running routes), he has played running back.

(Thanks to Holy Hitter for getting these cards and pointing out the amazing scouting reports on the backs).

A lousy player's football card: 2007 Topps Chrome Troy Williamson

In 2005, Troy Williamson had 24 receptions, 372 yards, and 2 touchdowns. In 2006, Troy Williamson had 37 receptions, 455 yards, and 0 touchdowns. Oh, yeah, and according to Wikipedia he had 11 drops.

How does Topps interpret this course of Williamson's career? Just check out the back of his 2007 Topps Chrome to fine out:

"Vikings offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell predicted that Troy would be a bigger part of the team's new West Coast offense in 2006, and indeed he was. The second-year wideout with the game-breaking speed was third on the team in receiving yards, including the first 100-yard game (six catches for 102) of his career in a Week 2 win over Carolina."

The back of sports cards is like Garrison Keiler's Lake Wobegon: all the players are above average. Where do we even start? Williamson was a bigger part of the team's offense, because he increased his numbers by 13 receptions and 82 yards (but didn't score a TD)? That we're supposed to be impressed that he ranked third on the team in receiving yards? Third!?! Yep, I pulled out the exclamation point/question mark/exclamation point for that one. It is quite a feat for a starting wide receiver to rank third on his own team in receiving yards.

Well, let me step back here a second. Bevell predicted Williamson would be a "bigger part" of the offense, not a better part of the offense. Williamson was on the field more, and he did drop all those passes. He definitely was a bigger part of the offense in 2006 than 2005, just not in a good way. Actually, in a negative way. He was a bigger part of the offense, and that's probably why the offense was so bad. So yes, Williamson did have an impact on the Vikings' offense in 2006, in the same way that VD can have an impact on your sex life.

Sports and War

The 2007-08 Upper Deck First Edition basketball set has a rookie insert set called "2007 NBA Rookie Draft Notices."

A picture of the player is on the left of the card. On the right appear the words "ORDER TO REPORT." Below that reads "To: (player's name)." In a small box labeled "SELECTIVE SERVICE INFO.," you can see the date of birth, hometown, position, and team of the player. Below is an image of a red stamped seal. The seal is a circle with an eagle in it; the circle includes the words "SERVICE REQUESTED" and a banner in the seal reads "DRAFT NOTICES."

Let's accept that the word "draft" for conscription into military service and the word "draft" for selection to a professional sports team has the same root. The Oxford English Dictionary (institution subscription required) includes the following noun and verb definitions with usage as early as the 18th century: "The drawing off, detachment, or selection of a party from a larger body for some special (spec. military) duty or purpose; spec. (esp. in U.S.), selective conscription" and "To draw off or out and remove (a party of persons, animals, or things) from a larger body for some special duty or purpose. Chiefly in Mil. use, and in Stock-farming: see quots. Also (chiefly U.S.), to conscript." The word has the meaning of selection for special service, but was usually associated with military service well before pro sports leagues held "drafts" (the OED doesn't even include reference to a sports draft), so I suspect sports leagues borrowed the term from the military usage.

Even if pro sports borrowed the word draft from the military usage, isn't it a little extreme for Upper Deck to make such a clear analogy on a card? "Draft Notices" sent by the "Selective Service" System inform men that they are being required to report for military duty, where they must sacrifice whatever plans they had for their lives, get training in how to kill people, and then possibly risk their lives in warfare. Is it responsible for Upper Deck to draw such a clear parallel between conscripts and basketball players, for whom a draft notice means playing professional basketball for millions of dollars?

A lousy player's football card: 2006 Topps Mark Bradley

The back of Mark Bradley's 2006 Topps card (#226) reads:

Bears coach Lovie Smith called Mark's game against the Lions on October 30, 2005, "his coming-out party." Unfortunately, it was also his going-down party, as the emerging rookie suffered a season-ending knee injury. Bradly had corralled five balls for 88 yards that day, solidifying his starting job. Fortunately, he is expected to be A-OK in 2006.

In my puerile revelries, a couple of interns are sitting around at Topps laughing about the time they got a story about a person "coming-out" and then having a "going-down party" published on the back of a football card.

Too juvenile? If forced double entendres aren't your cup of gin, you probably won't find my pictures of sports cards next to toys very enjoyable, either.

No, Mark Bradley: you're going down!

A lousy player's football card: 2006 Score Donovan Morgan

Since I know you don't know who Donovan Morgan is, I'll tell you everything I learned from the front of his Score 2006 card (#300). Donovan is a WR and he wears #11 for the Houston Texans.

Now here's what the blurb on the back of the card tells us:

Morgan entered the season finale of his second NFL campaign with just one career reception. In Week 17 at San Francisco, however, he had three for 33 yards.

In the words of Ron Burgundy, "Don't act like you're not impressed."

I have nothing against Donovan Morgan. I don't mean to call you lousy (for I suspect Morgan will google himself and find this webpage). Sorry, Mr. Morgan: it really seems unnecessary for me to pick on people like you who are probably worked really hard and are honored to play in the NFL at all. My real vexation is toward Score. Why, Score, did you feel the need to make a Donovan Morgan card in your set? Getting this Morgan card prevented me from getting a card that might have been slightly enjoyable on some level. The only people interested in this card are Morgan's family and maybe--maybe--some hardcore Louisiana-Lafayette fans. Instead, Score gives us a card of a player we're not ever likely to care about.

Hmm. Three for 33 in the finale, when nobody cares and coaches are just trying out the youngsters. Still....that's something. He might be able to make the Viking roster.

A lousy player's football card: 2006 Topps Arnaz Battle

Here's what card #142 of Topps 2006 collection says about 49 WR Arnaz Battle:

After making eight catches in his first two seasons, Arnaz snared 32 passes for the 49ers in 2005 (including his first three touchdown grabs) despite missing six games. His performance has convinced Coach Mike Nolan that the former college quarterback has a bright future in San Francisco. "He will be a part of this as we go forward," Nolan said.

How do you make 32 receptions in one season sound impressive? By comparing it to eight catches in two years (actually, it was 0 in '03 and 8 in '04). Suddenly you can think, "Wow! In 2005 Battle caught FOUR TIMES more receptions than he had in his previous career! That's improvement!" But really, going from "completely inadequate" to "just below mediocre" isn't that impressive.

Topps also editorializes that Mike Nolan thinks Battle has "a bright future with San Francisco." What Nolan said was, "He will be a part of this as we go forward." Does "he will be a part of this" mean "bright future" to you? Not to me.

However, maybe Battle does really have a bright future. After all, in '06 he improved to 59 receptions for 683 yards in 16 games, improving from "just below mediocre" to "simply mediocre." Though the 49ers deemed it worthy to acquire Darrell Jackson and Ashley Lelie this offseason: despite Battle's "bright future," he's probably a good #3 WR.

See arnazbattle.com for more information.

A lousy player's football card: 2006 Fleer Charlie Frye

I love reading the blurbs on the backs of football cards--frankly, I wish I had a job writing the blurbs on the backs of football cards. The best blurbs are written for lousy or average players. The writers usually go to great lengths to praise the players for the most minor of achievements. Here at PV, we'll chronicle and interpret some of the best. We'll try to make this a regular feature.

Here's what Charlie Frye's 2006 Fleer card (#22) says on the back:

"Frye showed a lot of moxie as a rookie under center, and it was evident when he defeated the Raiders in Week 15."

With all due respect to Jonathon Moxon, here's what "moxie" really means:

"He's not very good at all, but he tries really hard and shows some sort of charisma despite his lack of talent."

Let's be honest: Peyton Manning is never said to have "moxie." Moxie is reserved for scrubs.

It's also interesting to find that "he" defeated the Raiders in Week 15 of 2005. Evidently the rules of football were changed and one man, Mr. Charlie "moxie" Frye, was able to take on the entire Oakland franchise all by his lonesome. No doubt that was impressive--"he," Charlie Frye, beat the Raiders. Even though the '05 Raiders were 4-12, it's still impressive for a single human being to be responsible for one of those twelve losses.

That Cleveland victory over the Raiders? The score was 9-7. The moxie of Charlie Frye got his team 9 points; luckily the incompetent Raiders couldn't muster more than 7 points. For the game, Frye threw for 198 yards and an interception. Somehow that was enough--Frye did help the Browns score a total of 3 field goals on drives of 23, 45, and 43 yards. I think it is perfectly reasonable to claim that Frye beat the Raiders.

"Come see my moxie, Luke! It's a lot like the Force."
"But I wanted to pick up some power converters!"

A lousy player's football card: 2006 Topps Frisman Jackson

I love reading the blurbs on the backs of football cards--frankly, I wish I had a job writing the blurbs on the backs of football cards. The best blurbs are written for lousy or average players. The writers usually go to great lengths to praise the players for the most minor of achievements. Here at PV, we'll chronicle and interpret some of the best. We'll try to make this a regular feature.

Here's what the back of Frisman Jackson's 2006 Topps card (#76) reads:

"Now in his fifth season, Frisman's next start will be his first--and based on his progress in 2005, it may not be too long in coming. A part time QB in college, he went undrafted in 2002. He was actually released by the Browns in '04, but they quickly resigned him. Jackson's 24 catches last year included a 68-yard TD in the season opener."

WHAT THE CRAP. The goal of a football card blurb is to praise the player, even if it goes beyond all reason. But what are the distinguishing features we learn about Jackson on this card?

--He's never started a game in the NFL.
--He wasn't good enough to be drafted.
--He was once released.

There's so little to praise in Jackson's career, Topps actually points out that he's never been good enough to start and he was once released. They actually mention that he's been cut. But Topps does give him some praise: they do mention his one career touchdown reception specifically.

This is a great blurb--it's just barely covert ripping. Here's what the sub-text reads:

"Frisman Jackson sucks. We're sorry you got his card in this pack. Better luck next time."