1977 Brett jersey

[kcrhino]

Check out this E-Bay listing for a GU 77 george Brett jersey. With a jersey of this value, wouldn't it get better action from one of the big auction houses rather than on E-Bay?
A quick glance also shows this same seller has a 1975 Johnny Bench...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230113646105&ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:1

[kcrhino]

One correction....the Bench is not listed as GU...

[CollectGU]

Rudy can confirm, but that looks like a 78 tag on a 77' jersey...

[kingjammy24]

it's a little hard to tell because the end portion of "wilson" has been mutilated. i'm not sure what happened there. usually, the quickest way to tell is just by looking whether the (R) is on the top or bottom of the "n" in "wilson". in this case, you can't tell.

anyway, dave o'brien is right. it is a 1978-85 tag. you can tell from the fonts used for the size numbers. the 78-85 style tag had serifs on the size numbers. the previous style tag didn't have serifs on the numbers.

here is a tag from a 1977 wilson bluejays gamer:

http://img110.imageshack.us/img110/2673/wilsopv8.jpg

the (R) issue on wilson tags is discussed here:
http://www.gameuseduniverse.com/vb_forum/showthread.php?t=7511

1977 is pretty close to 1978. close enough that it might be plausible that a 1977 got a tag that was primarily seen in 1978. it depends on when the jersey was made and when the exact cusp was when wilson physically made the new tags. i don't know the cusps. jerseys can be made and sent to players throughout the course of an entire season. a jersey made just prior to spring training 1977 (for use in the 1977 season) should have a 1974-77 style tag. however, what if wilson came up with a new tag design in august 1977 and planned on using it on the new batch of jerseys it would issue at the start of the 1978 season. what if a late season order was placed in august 1977. isn't it possible that this late season order would unintentionally/inadvertantly receive the new 1978-85 style tag that would ordinarily be seen en masse in 1978? i think it's possible. it all depends on when the cusps occurred for new designs, how wilsons production schedules ran, and when exactly a particular jersey was ordered. it's possible for a small number of jerseys out there to have received new tagging in advance of when most of the teams would see it (ie: spring training) simply because late season orders coincided with wilson redesign production schedules. kim stigall once had a few 1989 mets common player gamers that had the new 1990/91 style rawlings tags. it's very rare for sure but i don't think there was anything fishy about kims jerseys. i just think that, with a 1 yr difference, it's possible that late season orders may have sometimes overlapped with a wilson redesign and therefore a small handful jerseys managed to get tags that would only be seen en masse in the following season. if your intent is to collect only "perfect 10" jerseys that have no anomalies, then on a 1977 wilson jersey i'd want a 1974-1977 style wilson tag. adhering to a "no anomalies" policy may mean that some legit jerseys slip through the cracks simply because, as we all know, jerseys don't always adhere to the "rules". on the flipside, at least you'll be able to sleep easier without wondering whether your tag doesn't match because of a legit reason or because it was doctored.

a 2 or 3 yr jersey/tag difference is different can of worms.

by the way, none of this was meant to comment on this particular brett jersey. i was just discussing possible reasons why you might see a 1978 style tag on a 1977 jersey. personally, i don't like how the tag on this brett is mutilated specifically at the portion which would help discern the date of the tag but that's neither here nor there.

rudy.

[yankees159]

Another thing that has struck me as strange about this jersey is the 77 stiching has no seperation. Look at Rudy's 77 stiching and then check out the Brett. The 77 in the Brett looks like the stitching is continuous.

[CollectGU]

The item is no longer available for sale....

[karamaxjoe]

Take a look at the Brett jersey in the latest Robert Edwards Auction. Same year as the ebay jersey although it has a Wilson tag from 73 and earlier. Funny how the same problem exists in another auction.

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/site/bidplace.aspx?itemid=9369

Mike

[kingjammy24]

mike,

the REA brett has an interesting story behind it regarding the wilson tag.
according to the ad, "MEARS has made special note that the Wilson tag is appropriate for the era but is the earlier version with the pre-1973 washing instructions. It is fascinating that MEARS notes that the use of this style instruction tag is almost certainly related to the fact that the Royals had to buy an entire second order of road uniforms in 1977 as a result of being victimized by a large clubhouse burglary in Milwaukee that summer."

personally, i'm confused how it's "appropriate for the era" if it's the "pre-1973 version". to me, an appropriate tag for a 1977 jersey would be a 1974-77 tag. how is a "pre-73" tag appropriate for a 1977 jersey? unless, by their use of the "era", REA/MEARS is referring to the entire 70s as a whole. the tag is not appropriate for a 1977 jersey. if it were, then there would be no need for a special explanation.

anyway, apparently the jersey is from barry halper so i'm sure it's good. the rest of the story is interesting. somehow, a second order of uniforms in 1977 meant that wilson used pre-1974 tagging. i'm unsure what the connection is between jerseys being stolen, a late season order, and a pre-1974 tag on a 1977 jersey but MEARS feels it's all related. if you can see the connection, let me know.
personally, i'd have said that wilson just goofed and put on an old tag. if it were any old jersey, i'd stay away. however, in this case the halper provenance speaks volumes.

anyway, the really interesting to me is the tag itself. i've never seen a wilson tag quite like it. it's one to add to the file i guess. i know lon lewis knows a lot about wilson tags. maybe he can comment.

here is the 68-73 tag i'm used to seeing (left) compared to the one on the brett (right):

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/2392/wilsoki1.jpg

check out the "o" in "wilson" and the serif on the "2". crazy stuff huh.

rudy.

[yankees159]

This question is for Rudy, someone who's opinion I greatly respect. In a previous post you said "apparently the jersey is from barry halper so i'm sure it's good". ."however, in this case the halper provenance speaks volumes"

This seems to be a comment that is out of character for you. A few questions:

1. Why do you hold Barry Halper provenance in such high regard?
2. Have you ever seen common player jerseys with tagging descrepencies?

Best regards,

Todd

[staindsox]

Actually there were numerous fakes in the Halper collection (he didn't know about them either). Given the sheer size of his collection, it was bound to happen. The Hall of Fame acquired many items before the collection was put up for auction. They even did thread analysis on the jerseys, hats, etc. and there was more than one that didn't pass forensic tests.

Chris

[staindsox]

As a side note, Halper claimed to have had a game used jersey from every single Hall of Famer with the exception of Eppa Rixey. It's understandable that some of his things turned out to not be genuine.

[kingjammy24]

hi todd

good questions. when i wrote those comments, i knew they were a bit of a slippery slope. you're right in saying it's out of character. it's ridiculous to say that a jersey "came from so-and-so and therefore it must be good". i made it because i have a very high regard specifically for brett and mantle items that come from halper. despite this however, it's still not a very bright statement. as has been said, every item must stand on its own.

"1. Why do you hold Barry Halper provenance in such high regard?"

to my knowledge, halper seemed to acquire many of his game-used items directly from the players/teams. he had incredible direct access to players. in a time when it seems every charlatan can say "acquired from a team source!" without the least bit of proof, many of barry's items seemed to have incredible provenance, especially his george brett and mickey mantle items. you could tell they were given to barry directly from brett and mantle from the personal letters and inscriptions. wouldn't you agree? i thought halper had a great collection and much of the provenance impressed me. in my experience, it's rare to find a collector who has the
access and relationships to star players as halper did. (of course, most collectors aren't partners in the yankees.)

"2. Have you ever seen common player jerseys with tagging descrepencies?"

definitely! every now and then an odd common player jersey will pop up. it seems some people try to justify it by saying "why would anyone fake a joe schmoe jersey?". i don't think you can justify anomalies in a common player jersey based solely on the notion that it's unlikely to have been faked. it's false logic. it's like seeing a smashed window on your car and concluding it couldn't have been an attempted burglarly because your car isn't valuable and has nothing of value inside. it rests on some sizeable assumptions.

for one, it assumes that the only jerseys that are doctored are superstar jerseys. they aren't. usually it's the superstar jerseys that are hit the most but there are several reasons why a common player jersey may have been fraudulently doctored. it may have been someones test run or it may be their m.o. after all, a ripken or mcgwire is always going to attract a lot of attention and suspicion from both collectors and authenticators. every ripken that comes up is discussed by dozens of people and everyone is going to spend far more time and be more deliberate than they would on an albert belle. with this in mind, you could probably make as much money pumping out a greater number of lesser known yet popular players. that is, you could do all the work for a ripken and hope it survives all the scrutiny and attention and lands you $4k. or you could avoid all the hoopla and silently pump out brady andersons and albert belles that aren't going to get half the scrutiny and will still sell for a decent dollar. it's a page out of the walmart book in that you're focusing on quantity not quality. there are people out there with ripken population reports. anyone keeping a brady anderson population report? plus, it's a little odd if you're the guy who always somehow manages to have the biggest superstars. you could fly under the radar much easier if you focused on pumping out local fan favorites. you won't sell 1 for $4k but the numbers will eventually add up. plus, you'd have legions of people blindly operating under the assumption "it must be real because only superstars are faked!". you're playing perfectly to what they believe. forget about pumping out the mcgwires and focus on the dave stewarts and you'll still be able to get a decent return and avoid all the scrutiny. most people analyze mcgwires to a huge degree. part of it has to be the feeling that they can't afford to get burned on a $3k jersey. would they be as rigorous with a dave stewart? they should be but they aren't. most people probably tell them "don't worry. it's just a stewart. only the mcgwires and hendersons are faked" ;)

secondly, it assumes that if an anomaly isn't specifically the result of fraudulent doctoring then it must be the result of some legit team-initiated action. there's more of a grey area in between than just those two scenarios. here's an example: joe ballplayer is a common player. he's a local favorite though and is known for his physical play. a big fan of his buys a legit game-issued jersey of his to wear during his adult league games. the jersey acquires substantial wear. the fan sells it on ebay and after making its way through the market, it's eventually sold as "game used". someone figures "wow it has a lot of use. it's got to be real use because who would bother doctoring up a joe ballplayer jersey?". the use isn't real but it wasn't intentionally doctored either. there's a grey area in between that accounts for many discrepancies.

thirdly, todays common player may have been yesterdays superstar for a brief shining moment. you may be looking at a 10 yr old jersey and thinking the player is regarded as a common player now and forgetting how he was regarded one amazing season 10 yrs ago. forgers like to hop on the bandwagon and cash in during the frenzy when prices and popularity are at their peak. ryan howard's had one solid year. he's a very hot player right now. as a result, there are many howard jerseys floating around purporting to be gamers. hypothetically speaking, if howard tanks this year and never has another year 1/3 as good as 2006, then in 10 yrs he'll be known as a common player. most people will have forgotten how his hot year in 2006 led to a ton of his jerseys being pumped out. someone may get one and think "ryan howard? who'd ever fake one of his jerseys?" because they forgot about 2006.

rudy.

[kingjammy24]

"Actually there were numerous fakes in the Halper collection (he didn't know about them either). Given the sheer size of his collection, it was bound to happen. The Hall of Fame acquired many items before the collection was put up for auction. They even did thread analysis on the jerseys, hats, etc. and there was more than one that didn't pass forensic tests."

chris, can you give anymore details about which items? were they outright fakes or just not exactly what they were purported to be but still legit?
i know about the mantle glove that billy crystal bought from the halper collection. however i wouldn't call that one a fake per se in that it was a legit mantle glove. it simply wasn't from the time period that most people thought. mantle himself was mistaken when he told halper that he used it in 1958. halper believed him.

i'm interested in the items that the HoF acquired and these forensic tests that they did. what did they test for specifically and in what areas did the items fail? i guess i'm just wondering whether they were solely trying to date the items or were they trying to ascertain even greater detail? how badly did the items fail? eg: if a "1953" jersey was made from fabric first available in 1959 then, again, it's not a fake per se it's simply mislabeled.
after all, a mantle gamer is a mantle gamer and you wouldn't toss one out simply because it was used in '59 instead of '53.

rudy.

[staindsox]

I cannot specifically remember which items did not pass, but I know some were outright forgeries (the Hall completely rejected some items). I think these were more of the Mike Kelly, Cap Anson era game jerseys. I know they extracted threads, I would guess to date the cloth, but cannot be certain. I know they even did x-rays on the 1947 Jackie Robinson hat to reveal a scrap of leather sewn into the left side of the hat to help pad his skull if he were thrown at. From what I remember, most of the problem items were pre-war stuff. He started collecting back in the 1950s and obtained almost everything from that point on in-person. Anyway, the Hall had first crack at his collection, so if anything didn't pass their tests, it never made it into the big auction. I don't know what they did and did not look at. I know they acquired a 1908 era Cy Young jersey, Babe Ruth's camelhair coat, a Joe Jackson bat, a Gehrig bat, Federal League pennant, among a ton of other things. They had a Halper display for a few years. Hope this helps a little.

Chris

[David]

Barry Halper knew George Brett and got at least some of his Brett game used items directly from Brett. Brett gave Halper the infamous pine tar bat. Brett later wanted it back, and traded for it. I believe Brett gave him a game used World Series bat in exchange.

[kingjammy24]

todd,

what do you think of halper provenance?

rudy.