2008 Bowman Chrome Football Forum

I am going to take my side here and say no. The first card of everyone should not be a rookie; only players. What's next, all the trainers and owners in MiLB sets getting rookie cards too?

I probably sound more hostile than I am. It really doesn't matter terribly to me, but it was something I found interesting. To me, a rookie card should be a card produced in the player's first season, and that's it. If his first card comes out in his third year of playing, that's not a rookie to me, although I understand it potentially receiving rookie card status. Coaches, managers, trainers, owners, mascots, cheerleaders, heck anyone else you can think of shouldn't be labeled as rookies. 

But again, that's my humble opinion =)

http://www.tradingcarddb.com/ViewCard.cfm/sid/16/cid/3940/1948-Bowman-12-Johnny-Sain Not a RC

http://www.tradingcarddb.com/ViewCard.cfm/sid/2067/cid/618474/1986-87-Fleer-4-Danny-Ainge Not a RC (in more ways than one!)

http://www.tradingcarddb.com/ViewCard.cfm/sid/2067/cid/618527/1986-87-Fleer-57-Michael-Jordan?PageIndex=1 Not a RC

Right?

So then no RC for Sain at all (and a lot of others in that set), Jordan's was actually in Star Co (don't get me started on that one), and Ainge's was actually in Baseball (1981, IIRC)? We're going to make our own rules and ignore the rest of the hobby? 

I agree the coaches should not have RC designation.   Maybe FC (first card).   Do movie stars, ninja turtles and race horses get RC designation?   We all know the answer to that one.

Fair point. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of modern day cards, when there are so many brands and inserts and pre-rookies, etc. that it seems there should be a logical cutoff of when a rookie isn't a rookie. I believe that the RC stamp on Topps cards has helped curb that a little.

So in order for us both to meet in the middle, there would have to be some sort of cutoff date for when a non-first year card is no longer a rookie...which is a whole other can of worms!

I withdraw my thought on a non-first year card being a non-rookie in light of a swaying argument from vrooomed, but still stand that the coaches should not have an RC designation lol

I think it was somewhere around 2004 or so when the new official rules came out regarding what constitutes a RC and what doesn't. I would happily agree with that being the cutoff date if you think that's reasonable.

(BTW, I'm also all for getting rid of the XRC designation, but it's so pervasive throughout the hobby now, I don't see how we can do that without alienating a lot of the people in the hobby.)

Back to the coaches/managers - I realize Beckett isn't everything (but it's huge in the hobby) - I honestly think if they use the RC on a card, we kinda need to follow. (As much as I don't like that.) I agree with what you are saying that they shouldn't have RC. However, FC opens another whole quandary as then we start going down a path where every PID should get a FC on one, correct? I'd stay away from the FC stuff.

This completely changes my mind, because I want need a Splinter and Shredder rookie cards.

I have their RCs if you are interested......also have one for Mr. Ed  and every Garbage Pail Kid card as they are all RCs...lol.

Rookies are players, not coaches or umpires or whatever else.  If someone wants to know that it is one of these types first card issued,can we not just put that in Note 2?

As for what Beckett does, if it is only Beckett'sway, then I don't think we need to follow them. After all, I wouldn't follow them jumping off of a cliff just because they did...I might help them jump off but definitely would not follow suit.

Y'all beat me to it. I was about to ask where I can find a Darth Vader rookie card. 

Honestly, I feel that our site eliminates the need for a RC designation in the notes.  Click a name, and you will see a sequential list of all their cards.  Immediately able to see what their first card, first pro card, first "nationally distributed in packs" card, etc. was.  Oldest is always at the top.  A Beckett magazine offered no such convenience; it was print media.  You couldn't look down the list of 1980 Topps and immediately know that Henderson's card was his RC but Smith's wasn't.  You would have to look at lots of other sets to figure it out without their RC designation.  I feel that websites like ours have made it unnecessary to add RC beside a card.

i am intrigued by Joe's Mister Ed card though.  I didn't know that existed.