Billy Ripken's Confession: '89 Fleer

[Extra Innings]

I thought I would start a thread about the recent news of Billy Ripken's confession of writing F**K Face on the knob of his bat since that was quite a collectible card at one time. Here is the link to the article:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/28116692

I still don't have this card, but I do I have one of the blackout varieties that I pulled from a pack.

[Mike D.]

Wow, hard to believe that was 20 years ago. In 1989, I turned 13 in June...I'd been collecting for about 2 years, and had gotten my first Beckett for Christmas 6 months earlier.

That was a wacky time for collecting...error cards were the G/U and certified autographs of their day.

[Captain Cold Nose]

And to think all they used to do was unzip their fly before having their photos taken for cards.

I can't remember who did that, except the player had glasses.

As for Ripken, absolutely shameless. Kids were buying those cards. Just like Mike D, who gets respect. Your cash and your jewelry is what he expects.

[Dalkowski110]

"I can't remember who did that, except the player had glasses."

Claude Raymond. The hilarious thing is that Topps REUSED the photo and it appears on two different cards.

Ray Sadecki was part of a similar card, though had no part in it or ill intent. On his 1964 Topps card, have a look at the far left of card, directly across from Sadecki's face. Topps cropped a sign so that it said "A$$," albeit with S's and not dollar signs. A similar example of this is 1967 Topps 1966 NL Pitching Leaders, and to be specific, the picture of Bob Gibson. Gibby would stick his glove hand index finger out of the glove and over on top of the middle finger pocket of his glove, a bit like a person crossing their fingers. Well, it's just small enough on the card and with just the right angle to give it the illusion that Gibby is flipping us the bird. He's not, and larger negatives of the image have surfaced that PLAINLY show he's not. But it's become so ingrained as him doing so that even the billripken.com website has that one down as him flipping us off.

EDIT: With that said, as this 1968 Topps proofs shows, Bob Gibson did try and at least have some fun at the Topps photographers' expense by posing as a left-handed pitcher...

http://www.sportscollectorsdigest.com/upload/contents/290/field_1748/Proof1968Gibson.JPG

[ipitch]

So, anyone want to admit that they overpaid for a FF Ripken? I was patient...I waited a few years and bought one for $5. :)

[frstbasmn13]

So, anyone want to admit that they overpaid for a FF Ripken? I was patient...I waited a few years and bought one for $5. :)

Wow, $5! That's pretty good since eBay has it selling right now for $16 or so, I'm shocked that it's even selling for more than a couple bucks, but I'll probably wait until after xmas when all the prices our down.

[Dalkowski110]

"So, anyone want to admit that they overpaid for a FF Ripken?"

I bought one for $9.99 plus tax when I was 8 years old.

[Mike D.]

As for Ripken, absolutely shameless. Kids were buying those cards.

I really blame Fleer...is it their claim that they only had one photo of Ripken, and that they didn't bother to look at it before they put it on a card?

I mean card companies aren't exactly known for their crack quality control teams (and their design teams aren't much better....but I digress), but you'd think keeping swears off the front of cards would be a priority.

Basically, it boils down to the fact that Fleer was either inept, or they created and released the card on purpose, for the publicity. I'm not sure which I think it is, and I'm not sure which is worse.

[Dalkowski110]

"Basically, it boils down to the fact that Fleer was either inept, or they created and released the card on purpose, for the publicity."

After listening to enough stories about this card from my ex-boss, I'd have to say the latter.

[houfan]

Have to agree with that. I think Fleer did it for the publicity. I guess it worked for them...and the card...at the time.

[Zito75]

So, anyone want to admit that they overpaid for a FF Ripken? I was patient...I waited a few years and bought one for $5. :)

I know a guy that paid $200 for one. I was in like 9th grade when that card came out and remember selling a few to my friends, but go no where near $200. People that weren't even collectors were buying those boxes in bulk from Costco. Wacky times indeed!

[Captain Cold Nose]

I really blame Fleer...is it their claim that they only had one photo of Ripken, and that they didn't bother to look at it before they put it on a card?

I mean card companies aren't exactly known for their crack quality control teams (and their design teams aren't much better....but I digress), but you'd think keeping swears off the front of cards would be a priority.

Basically, it boils down to the fact that Fleer was either inept, or they created and released the card on purpose, for the publicity. I'm not sure which I think it is, and I'm not sure which is worse.

Every young journalist in the learning process, or even those just learning journalism because they needed the elective credits, hears stories about how reporters test their editors by trying to slip in stuff into their stories. I have a copy of an article for a local paper where a construction worker talked about the Second Coming happening because a road was finally getting fixed. "He should be here shortly after the last bit of gravel is paved," was how the worker was quoted, or something to that effect. The article was printed, quote and all.

I do believe Ripken is as responsible as Fleer for this. If Fleer did in fact catch the profanity and released it anyway, then it is worse than inept Quality Control that had dogged them greatly since day 1. Remember how both Fleer and Donruss sets in 1981 were rife with errors?

Now, if Fleer was a victim of poor QC, then what Ripken did was betray the trust of the Fleer Company by going above and beyond in his photo. He tried to pull something and left it up to them to catch it when all they're doing is looking for a nice photo to use and to make their deadline. It's not unreasonable to think they certainly don't expect to see profanity buried like it was on the card. They probably spend a handful of seconds per card before moving it along.

I think I spent about $10 for it a few years back.

[Mike D.]

I do believe Ripken is as responsible as Fleer for this. If Fleer did in fact catch the profanity and released it anyway, then it is worse than inept Quality Control that had dogged them greatly since day 1. Remember how both Fleer and Donruss sets in 1981 were rife with errors?

Now, if Fleer was a victim of poor QC, then what Ripken did was betray the trust of the Fleer Company by going above and beyond in his photo. He tried to pull something and left it up to them to catch it when all they're doing is looking for a nice photo to use and to make their deadline. It's not unreasonable to think they certainly don't expect to see profanity buried like it was on the card. They probably spend a handful of seconds per card before moving it along.

"Betray the trust of Fleer"? Seriously? That assume an awful lot. Like he knew the freelance photographer who took the picture was going to sell it to Fleer to put on a baseball card.

Basically, what Ripken did was dumb, not malicious. Nothing good can come of walking around a public place, especially a place with kids, with a "dirty word" written on your person or property. Sure, you hear that word in the locker room, but it's usuallly a smart idea to leave it there.

But comparing that to what Fleer did is small potatoes. Fleer bought the photo, selected it from some number of photos they had purchased, and then put it on a card, and ran it through quality control. They may have even enhanced the image to make it MORE legible.

[Captain Cold Nose]

"Betray the trust of Fleer"? Seriously? That assume an awful lot. Like he knew the freelance photographer who took the picture was going to sell it to Fleer to put on a baseball card.

Basically, what Ripken did was dumb, not malicious. Nothing good can come of walking around a public place, especially a place with kids, with a "dirty word" written on your person or property. Sure, you hear that word in the locker room, but it's usuallly a smart idea to leave it there.

But comparing that to what Fleer did is small potatoes. Fleer bought the photo, selected it from some number of photos they had purchased, and then put it on a card, and ran it through quality control. They may have even enhanced the image to make it MORE legible.

I missed the first bit entirely. If that's the case, the freelance photog and all, then Ripken was simply playing a juvenile joke. For that he gets a pass.

I can see Fleer missing it in QC. I do suspect their checks consist of simply looking at the photo for a few seconds and moving it on. Very sloppy. Yes, they did set themselves up for it if that is what happened. If it is the more sinister "we knew it all along" scenario, the fact so many early 90's stuff is still gathering dust on sotre shelves pretty much shows the impact of the "opps" gimmick. The end did not justify the means.

[Dalkowski110]

"I can see Fleer missing it in QC."

I can't. QC in the 1960's (Claude Raymond, Ray Sadecki, a number of guys hitting or pitching lefty when they were really righties or vice versa) and 1970's (Billy Martin and the middle finger) was FAR less rigorous than QC in the late 1980's, at least for photos.

"The end did not justify the means."

I agree. Although, of course, Fleer didn't just want to release the obscenity cards. They also wanted to release their 2 dozen plus variants of corrections, too. And billripken.com points out that evidence from the factory suggests that almost all of these were created after the most common correction (black box placed over the bat handle) had been put into packs.

[Mike D.]

Interesting stuff...and hard to believe that was 20 years ago. Who'd have thought we'd be talking about what should have been a common from the ultra-cheap 1989 Fleer set, or Bill Ripken, 20 years later. :crazy

[Captain Cold Nose]

"The end did not justify the means."

I agree. Although, of course, Fleer didn't just want to release the obscenity cards. They also wanted to release their 2 dozen plus variants of corrections, too. And billripken.com points out that evidence from the factory suggests that almost all of these were created after the most common correction (black box placed over the bat handle) had been put into packs.

Wait, the black box variant, which I did get in the handful of Fleer packs I purchased that year, came out first? I haven't dug that deeply here, admittedly, but in 1989 they were claiming the opposite. How many variants were there, four, when all was said and done?

I need to check these sites out. I feel like I'm six and have just heard the real news about Santa.

[Dalkowski110]

"How many variants were there, four, when all was said and done?"

Over two dozen, if you count sub-variants.

"Wait, the black box variant, which I did get in the handful of Fleer packs I purchased that year, came out first?"

First came the obscenity, THEN the black box, then the kazillion other corrections that were supposedly "lead-ins" to the black box.

[MadHatter]

A similar example of this is 1967 Topps 1966 NL Pitching Leaders, and to be specific, the picture of Bob Gibson. Gibby would stick his glove hand index finger out of the glove and over on top of the middle finger pocket of his glove, a bit like a person crossing their fingers. Well, it's just small enough on the card and with just the right angle to give it the illusion that Gibby is flipping us the bird. He's not, and larger negatives of the image have surfaced that PLAINLY show he's not. But it's become so ingrained as him doing so that even the billripken.com website has that one down as him flipping us off.

1972 Topps Billy Martin card: Billy actuslly admitted to flipping off the photographer when they shot his photo, except he did it with some subtlety and it made it onto the card.

http://espn.go.com/photo/2006/1127/061127_martin_195.jpg

[Dalkowski110]

Yep, I have that card. I mentioned it in passing in Post #15.