So design is only part of the greatness of the '86 Topps; the enjoyment of collecting it is unsurpassed. The lack of any marquee rookies is actually a strength of the set because, if there were one or more big rookies, collecting the set through packs/sets would probably not be much fun; the pricing would make it expensive, there would be scams and tricks you would have to learn about and deal with all the time (like searched packs) and you'd probably end up declining purchases all of the time, or being let down by purchases enough times to take enjoyment out of the whole thing. With '86 Topps you dont have to worry about much when buying them; I don't think anyone would ever try and create fakes or put any time/effort into putting together any kind of scam because its not worth it; the prices are such where you buy a lot of them and you can feel fine throwing away the any of the ones that don't look excellent to the naked eye (because if there is one thing you can see, you know the card is worthless), which creates an added bonus of limiting the number of cards you actually keep and the space the cards will take up. The set has so many hall of fame players in it (it may have the most of any set ever) where I'm continuously surprised when going through a set the big names keep on coming (Paul Molitor, Jim Rice, Ryne Sandberg, two Pete Rose cards, Clemens, Puckett, Ozzie, Reggie Jackson, Carew, and on and on. There are probably 15-20 cards that can make the purchase satisfying if just a couple of them are keepers. Its just such an easygoing experience and I don't think I've ever been let down or felt like I wasted money. The problem is there are not as easy to find in the wild, and I refuse to buy anything on ebay. If I could, I would only collect 86 Topps but its impossible to continuously find them for sale, even at card shows.
The lack of popularity also bodes well potentially for grading now and down the line. I really do think there are population controls for big cards/sets because its in PSA's interest to have eye-popping sales prices and thats only possible when population stays low. But I really doubt PSA would do this where unnecessary for a set that not many people are interested in. You add in that the condition-sensitivity issues and there will not be many people caring for the cards and protecting them, I see a the prices of them steadily inching up and up over the log haul to a respectable amount instead of wild swings up and down. I was watching the prices go up and up in small amounts throughout the boom and it was only until a few months ago I actually saw a Nolan Ryan card go down a little from a high of $1,000 to $900. But when you look at the depth of how many cards in that set go for at least $30-40 with 10's, I think thats impressive and shows the overall strength of the set that isn't dependent on only one or two cards.
I can give props to other sets in terms of design. Even 1986 Donruss competes and is better in one respect: it captures the essence of that year, what that year actually looked and felt like at the time. But the cards look too similar to one another and it gets boring, doesn't work well on that many of the cards, where 1986 Topps actually changes from card to card based on the prominent colors of the team name and the length of the name, the different photos, etc. that keeps it interesting from card 1 through the end -- however, the Jose Canseco "Rated Rookie" is an incredible card and looks better than the 1986 Topps Update for sure, but its just an individual card here and there that looks better and not as a whole set.
So to all those haters out there who do not rank it even #1 for the decade, how about what year overall was the best from Topps, Donruss, and Fleer taken together? I say 1986 is the best year in that regard because of how good Donruss was that same year (Fleer was ok I suppose but they were pretty bad before then too).
