The Deliberate Omission of Pete Rose's Name in 2013 Topps

[Jaypers]

Pete Rose Stripped Of All-Time Hits Record… By Topps Baseball Cards | ChicagoSide

[BOOMER7]

....rather than worrying about the INTEGRITY issue with Mr. Rose perhaps
Topps should stop with the "shady" redemption expiration tactics they use in their product line with collectors.

[DaBaddestHic]

I think that's pretty sad. People can try and erase Pete Rose from baseball as much as they want, but it's not gonna happen.

You can debate whether he belongs in the HOF, what type of person he is, etc, all you want. But people should know about him and be able to make a decision for themselves.

[guru]

Originally Posted by DaBaddestHic

I think that's pretty sad. People can try and erase Pete Rose from baseball as much as they want, but it's not gonna happen.

You can debate whether he belongs in the HOF, what type of person he is, etc, all you want. But people should know about him and be able to make a decision for themselves.

[pokerbroker]

Not to mention he totally attacked Topps when it is actually their MLB license that prevents them from printing Pete Rose's name... fail

[anusinha]

Originally Posted by pokerbroker

Not to mention he totally attacked Topps when it is actually their MLB license that prevents them from printing Pete Rose's name... fail

This. You can't put Pete rose on any MLB licensed card.

[Jaypers]

Originally Posted by anusinha

This. You can't put Pete rose on any MLB licensed card.

Guess this is pretty much a non-story, then. My bad.

[DaBaddestHic]

Originally Posted by anusinha

This. You can't put Pete rose on any MLB licensed card.

Hmm, I thought there was something about that, but I assumed it meant he couldn't have a card with his picture on it or something similar. If it extends to mentioning his name at all then I guess it is what it is.

I don't see why the Topps spokesperson wouldn't just say that though.

[VWBUS1978]

Originally Posted by Jaypers

Guess this is pretty much a non-story, then. My bad.

ALL GOOD!

your track record for awesome threads means you can start a thread like this, even if it is a non-story! we still love ya!

[Brad]

Originally Posted by pokerbroker

Not to mention he totally attacked Topps when it is actually their MLB license that prevents them from printing Pete Rose's name... fail

The reporter obviously won't let the facts get in the way of a poorly-written rant.

[Natitude]

Did Pete Rose trademark his name? Maybe that's why?

[Jaypers]

Chris Olds weighs in.

Beckett News Pete Rose’s exclusion in MLB products is nothing new — and it’s MLB’s call

[houdini]

Originally Posted by Brad

The reporter obviously won't let the facts get in the way of a poorly-written rant.

[ScooterD]

Originally Posted by anusinha

This. You can't put Pete rose on any MLB licensed card.

Sorry... double post

[ScooterD]

Originally Posted by anusinha

This. You can't put Pete rose on any MLB licensed card.

hmmmm......

[mwheeler27]

Hand-painted, gold-leafed, pack-inserted, regular-sized baseball card with not only his name, but his picture, from none other than...Sportkings:



...where the Hit King belongs.

[Jaypers]

Rose was banned from baseball in 1989 and hasn't appeared on a Topps card since.

Or has he?

From 2006 Topps --

[JzWand]

The whole excluding Rose from anything to do with baseball just needs to stop.

I mean do we really need to go as far as to not even being able to mention his name?

I think thats going overboard TBH.

Ban him from the HOF and from working with MLB in any capacity. Fine.

But to pretend like he never even existed is just juvenile and far too personal.

[jlzinck]

God "journalists" are so lazy today.

This was the top trending story on Yahoo this morning when I logged on.

HUNDREDS to links and references to it and none state that it is because of Rose himself and that it's MLB who has the issue.

It's a shame.

[Tim]

Originally Posted by JzWand

Ban him from the HOF. Fine.

Completely disagree.

[mcgahee21nfl]

Originally Posted by jlzinck

God "journalists" are so lazy today.

This was the top trending story on Yahoo this morning when I logged on.

HUNDREDS to links and references to it and none state that it is because of Rose himself and that it's MLB who has the issue.

It's a shame.

Couldn't agree more. Also the title is so misleading. What ever happened to journalistic integrity

[JzWand]

Originally Posted by Tim

Completely disagree.

I actually think he should be in as well but I can at least understand the ban.

But not being able to mention his name on a baseball card is overboard IMO!

[ohiomike]

Do people really think Pete Rose was forgotten about by licensed manufacturers for 20+ years? There is a reason why no company with a MLB license has ever produced a Pete Rose card for its products since his ban. Said company would no longer have their license if they did. If you want newer Pete Rose cards, they are going to be unlicensed with no mention of team names anywhere to be found.

[mwheeler27]

Originally Posted by ohiomike

If you want newer Pete Rose cards, they are going to be unlicensed with no mention of team names anywhere to be found.

Not exactly true. I have all kinds of different Pete Rose cards with team names on them.

Here's one of many:

[ohiomike]

You might want to be careful showing certain sportkings cards, and potentially bringing this to the attention of someone who might care. SK could EASILY be sued (and successfully) by MLB for stuff like that. Upper Deck's 2010 baseball product had the same kind of language listed at the bottom, had no mention of team names, and had all logos at least partially obscured, and MLB was successful in their lawsuit against them. That card shows full team nicknames and I've seen at least one card you've shown of Jeter where the Yankee logo is completely visible on the card. Artist renderings don't get around copyright infringement. I love the sportkings line for their base cards, and I'd hate to see anything happen that would further restrict their use of baseball players.