Glavine Collection: 2008 Topps Allen & Ginter Relic #AGR-TG

Another card that Derek sent my way recently. I dig the A&G framed relics, even if they might seem a little boring. I'm not sure I get the design on the frame though.

Braves Collection: Triple Threads, Triple Relic, The Big 3

Well, here's my latest pickup and I can't really say that it's one of my favorite cards of my favorite three players. In fact, I'd say it just looks off. There's just something weird looking in the faces of all the players. I'd go as far to say it's off-putting. That's not really a surprise because Triple Threads sort of Triple Sucks.

On the other hand, it's a card of my three favorite players. I like the Maddux patch and the Glavine bat. It has a nice home in my collection, even if I won't be pulling it out to show off.

Glavine Collection: 2005 Topps Total #125

This is the set that got me back into card collecting.  Naturally, Topps dumped it from their schedule immediately. After all, why make a nice set devoted to most of the players on each team's roster when you can make more, dull, boring, expensive high end products where you get a chance to pull Felix Pie's auto?

I will never forgive Upper Deck for moving the industry away from cardboard. Topps Total may have been printed on white stock, but it was still cardboard!!!

Glavine Collection: 2001 Upper Deck #372

A lefty about to bring his arm toward the plate? A deadly serious look on his face? A tomahawk across his chest? Must be Tom Glavine.

Full bleed picture? Colors that pop? Understated but classy card design? Must be Upper Deck.

Glavine Collection: 2000 Topps Limited Edition #241

Hey look!!!! Its a "Limited Edition" parallel of Glavine's 2000 Topps base card! It must be very limited because while I have seven of his base card, I only have four of this version.

I'm in the money!!!!

Glavine Collection: 2001 Upper Deck MVP #171

Am I allowed to love this set? I love this set. If I weren't trying to complete roughly 9000 other sets, I'd go after this one.

Glavine Collection: 2000 Topps Finest #37

There are days when I wonder why I bother as a player collector. At least half my Glavine cards have Tom captured at this exact spot in his delivery. Some days, I flip through my player binders and a marvel at the differences from issue to issue, but sometimes, I just think that thanks to the pictures, every card looks the same.

Look at him. I really have a hard, hard time believing he could have been a professional hockey player.

Glavine Collection: SP Authentic #372

I like this card ... quite a bit actually. Still, I don't think the position gimmick to the left adds anything of value to the card. Could just be me.

Glavine Collection: 2000 Topps #241

Greg Maddux cards often feature a goofy face. Its a nice change of pace because otherwise, virtually every picture of a great pitcher in their motion tends to look the same. Now, Tom Glavine cards often catch him in his pitching motion. Fine. No problem. Typically, as for a lot of southpaws, it looks great ... it just doesn't vary much from card to card. The problem with Glavine cards is that, unlike the goofy faced Maddux, he has the same deadly serious look on his face whenever he's pitching.

Check out the close up below. That's the definition of a deadly serious look.

Glavine Collection: 2000 Fleer Tradition #192

Look at Fleer with their "throwback" design from 2000. We could say it was a blatant rip off of the 1954 Topps Design, but that wouldn't be very nice, would it? Either way, I LOVE this card. Makes me want to get the set.

Glavine Collection: 1997 Pacific Crown Collection #232

Egads I hate Pacific. (No offense anyone!) Everything to the right of that awful Gold border is great. The border is just tacky looking. It looks out of place. I really hate that logo.

The bilingual backs are almost enough to save this card, but not quite. I know for a lot of people, the 90s are the epitome of great card making, but I don't see it. I miss cardboard.

Glavine Collection: 2009 Upper Deck First Edition #15

I have mixed feelings about the 2009 Upper Deck design. I like it on cards where the shading on the background behind the team logo represents the team, as it does on this Glavine. There are, however, cards where it does not. I don't like those. (Thanks to AdamE for the card!)

Glavine Collection: 2001 UD Reserve #94

OK. I'm going to bitch and moan about a good looking baseball card that I'm happy to have in my collection. I do like this card a lot, but I do not care for the green bar on the left. Yes, as I say repeatedly, I would prefer cards where these types of colors are keyed against the player's team's colors. If they aren't going to do that, at least switch up the colors of these design elements from card to card. Otherwise, as a set, the cards just look too damn similar. (At least this set includes some background behind the players to break the color monotony. If they didn't do this, it would be EE, which is a fine set for player collections, but just awful as a set.)

Glavine Collection:2004 Fleer inScribed #45

inScribed? They named the set inScribed?

I must say, I like the way they superimpose the signature over the (ugly) Mets logo on the back.

Glavine Collection: 2002 Topps Total #37

Topps Total is what base Topps ought to be. Obviously, that's my own opinion. The cards are nice and simple. They are printed on cardboard. (Well, very thin cardboard.) Most importantly, Total treated every player on every team as IMPORTANT and deserving of a card. If Topps was still making Total, I bet Eric O'Flaherty would have had a Braves card by now.

Of course, Tommy was going to get a card in any set Topps put out at the time.

Thanks to Derek for this card! The only other Glavine cards I have from Topps Total show him in that AWFUL Mets uniform.

Glavine Collection: 1989 Bowman #267

Here it is, Tom Glavine's card in the first Bowman set in a billion years. This was the grand return. The cards were even sized the same as they were in the early 50s. I have a ton of cards from this set lying around, but somehow, I didn't have the Glavine card until Derek sent it over. Thanks dude! (Yes, I hate this set. Yes, I love this card.)

Glavine Collection: 2005 Leaf #132

I still want to cry every time I see a card of Glavine in that damn Blue and Orange. Still, a nice card from Leaf. Very, very nice. (Thanks to CubsFan731 for the card, even if Glav is a Met!) 

Glavine Collection: 2004 Fleer Genuine Insider #6

I'm going to ignore the boring design of this card. What I'm not going to ignore is the ORANGE and BLUE colors in the Mets uniform. Leave it to the Mets to choose the worst possible color combination for a uniform. Ugh. Its a stupid color combination, and since it's STUPID, you might think the Wilpon family has something to do with the Mets colors. They don't though. The Mets color selections were seen as a tribute to the NY Giants and the Brooklyn Dodgers, two vastly superior major league franchises. (Too much? I go overboard. I don't quite hate the Mets that much ... just almost that much.)



Really, I hate blue and orange because I associate them with the Auburn Tigers and the Florida Gators.

Glavine Collection: 2002 Topps T206 Relic TR-TGL

Although my experience at the FCB National Card Show back in February was underwhelming, I did pick up a few nice cards. I have precious few Glavine relics, so any chance to pick one up makes me happy. I was talking with one dealer who also collects Glavine, and he had this in a pile of cards he had just bought from someone else. He was pretty sure he already had it, so he sold it to me. At a decent price no less since I had a stack of other cards I was getting from him.

Glavine Collection: 2008 Topps Trading Card History #TCH37

Thanks to BA Benny, a Mets fan, for sending me, a Braves fan, a card of one of my three favorite players in a Mets uniform. (No sarcasm intended!!!! I'll take any Glavine card I can get my grubby little hands on.)

Topps did a terrific job on the back of this card. Could you possibly ask for a more informative description of the design than "1910 Baseball Card"? Well, in a strange bout of  non-laziness I pulled out my Standard Catalog of Baseball Cards with the full intention of researching the origin of the design. Upon seeing the number of sets released in 1910, the laziness returned.

Does anyone know?