Design Timeline: Score

This post is part of an ongoing feature The Great Griffey Base Card Project.

Score started in ’88 as the first brand besides Topps, Fleer, and Donruss to offer cards on a major scale.  They hit the ground running with the best card backs in the industry: full-color with detailed blurbs and a portrait on white card stock.  Everyone else was still stuck on stat boxes and limited information on brown cardboard.  Then ’89 Upper Deck came along and everybody swooned.  Pretty soon every brand had comparable color/paper features and Score tried to stay afloat by branching out of the low-end market with Summit Edition which lasted all of two years.  It wasn’t long before they were elbowed out by the big boys and their entry-level sub-brands. 

I always had a soft spot for Score for two reasons: first, I really dig the wonderfully feng-shuied back.  They fit a whole lot of information into a pleasing layout.  Second (and this is both a positive and negative attribute of Score) they aren’t afraid of color.  Right out of they were printing with every color of the spectrum, mixing and matching sometimes to their own detriment.  They were going nuts with it until ’93 when they backed off the colors and it somehow looked even worse.  ’94 and ’95 were only OK.  Oh, you’ll see….

Here is every Score design by year from 1989 to the end of the brand:

1989:

Behold!  The baseball field set.  This is the traded set, but I would be remiss to not include it.  There were a few different color layouts in this set, and the Griffey you see here had more pastel than any other.  Sadly this would not be their last foray into pastel territory.

1990:

They did away with the white borders all together and went with a striking three-color layout: outer border, inner border, font.  The set featured the same crazy color combos as you came to expect from Score including orange-yellow-green, green-yellow-aqua, and red-yellow-purple.  A few of the Highlight and Rookie cards actually used white borders and didn’t look quite as wack-a-doodle.  At least the inclusion of the team logo was a nice touch.

1991:

The moved the name to the top and made that first letter super huge.  This allowed the more creative of us to spell out fun words by taking Steve Sax, Ellis Burks, and Xavier Hernandez and fanning them like a poker hand to spell naughty words.  Finding that Xavier Hernandez card was tough - I can only assume because other kids were doing the same thing.  Sadly, no players in this set had names that begin with “U,” so a few choice words were out of the question.  Also the card design is ugly.  Did I mention that?

1992:

First I should probably mention that the set as a whole is actually pretty good.  That being said, again the color combos are really bizarre.  Griffey’s aren’t bad because they kind of match his team colors, but ask any player who ended up with peach and aqua design elements if those colors match his team (Joey Cora who was with the White Sox at the time got a card in exactly those colors.  The White Sox).  That side-mounted color bar is a serious commitment to the design, too.  It’s a third of the whole card, and all it holds is the team logo.  I’m not a graphic designer, so there may be some visual golden ratio they are shooting for; but as a baseball card collector this is still really weird. 

1993:

This is the first of several years when Score toyed with a drastic change in aesthetic.  This one is characterized by the modernized font and spacing of letters in team-colored bars.  Pretty forgettable, but you can see what they were going for. 

Before we move on, is there anything more boring in this whole world than a paragraph describing the design of 1993 Score?  This must be what baseball card collectors do instead of counting sheep.

1994:

The cross-brand mass-modernization of card design that occurred in the early-to-mid 90’s was not lost on Score.  This year they introduced a glossy finish and continued to evolve their new muted, minimalist design strategy.  Here they give us a low-profile name plate with small fonts in italics.  While not unattractive, this set is terribly condition-sensitive due to its dark border.  The color of said border remains a mystery to this day (navy blue?  midnight blue?  I’m going with some variation of blue).  The shiny Gold Rush parallel of this base set is pretty cool.

1995:

This design could only be made by Score.  The last time they would go bonkers with color or use a team logo, it features a bizarre green pattern over a sand-colored backdrop that also looks to be textured like sand.  The picture has shading on two sides so it appears to float above the backdrop.  Its edges as well as those of the name plate are deckled as though they had been ripped out of a magazine. 

Now, when I look at designs like this I try to remember all the EXTREME nonsense that was floating around back then.  Remember that?  Every product was suddenly “eXtreme to the max, dude!” particularly those that dealt with kids.  The letter “X” started showing up in more places, oversized and red and bleeding like it had been scratched out by a bobcat.  It was embarrassingly overused.  I think Score was trying to capture a piece of that Xtreme <guitar riff> spirit with this design as well as their new logo. 

If this set had a smell, it would be sports deodorant.

1996:

This is my favorite Score set.  They were finally all grown up and putting together clean, attractive card designs.  The great split-fountain name plate over the S-curve in the border and the name on the right feels balanced and stylish.  I even like the tear in the top right corner to reveal the logo.  This one is a big hit with me.

1997:

This one’s a little dry, but still a pretty good-looking set.  The font is simple and in all lowercase with the same prominent letter spacing as they had in ’93.  The logo is centered on the bottom of the picture and this time includes “A Pinnacle Brand” below it.  I think Score was trying to overcome the perception that their cards are “cheap” with this design.  It does come across as high-end though a little plain.  This set reminds me of fruit-at-the-bottom yogurt without the fruit.

1998:

This is a whole set of checklists.  I know that sound weird, but I feel like every card in this set looks like a checklist.  While I like the side-orientation, the design is made up of a bunch of unrelated elements.  It feels messy and thrown together.  I do like the glow effect around the surname and the logo.

And with that, the Score story comes to an abrupt end.

________________________________________________________________________________

Score was their own worst enemy with eleven years of relatively forgettable designs.  They had a few things going for them, but not enough to save them from the brand bloodbath of the late 90’s.  They’re still around making football cards - go pick up a pack and mail any New Orleans Saints you pull to me.

Here’s all the Score design from 1989 through 1998.



Design Timeline: Bowman

This post is part of an ongoing feature The Great Griffey Base Card Project.

This is going to be the most boring timeline yet.

Bowman is among the all-time big boys.  It's one of the very few sets that was around before Griffey played and one of the even fewer that stuck around after.  Despite this fact, I have never been a big Bowman guy.  I’ve picked up the occasional pack here and there out of curiosity, but I have no real attachment to the set.  Some years I completely forget it exists, yet I have a strange reverence for their ownership of the rookie card.  That’s marketing for you.

At the same time Bowman has given us thousands of cards for guys who may otherwise never have  gotten cards of their own not to mention autographs and super refractors and a ton of inserts that just look like base cards but with chrome variants, color parallels, and American flag backdrops.  It’s all very confusing.  How do Bowman collectors keep up?  And what is the difference between a BBTPP and a BPTP and a BBBPPT<fart noise>BPP?  Even with a Beckett in hand it takes fifteen minutes to figure out what card I’m looking at.  They’ve created a monster, but it wasn’t always that way…

Let’s take a look at every Bowman base card design by year from 1989 to 2010:

1989:

Bad start, I know.  The thing about this set that’s so frustrating is that I love the design here.  I love the border, I love the photography, and the signatures are great.  I don’t even mind having to occasionally flip the cards over to read the names for the guys I don’t know.  Really - it’s a great-looking set…..but that extra quarter-inch, man.  I get mad at these cards.  Like Yosemite Sam mad where I’m all jumping up and down on my hat and yelling “tarnation,” which I’m not even certain is a word anymore.  I actively try to shed these card regardless of the players on them (except Will Clark - I kept that one).  I will admit, though, that the "Tiffany" version is beautiful and one of my favorite cards.  Still, this set needs a mohel.

1990:

I’ve seen this referred to as the “Rastafarian Set,” but those are just the colors of the Bowman logo.  Still, there really isn’t much to this design.  The tri-colored name plate also serves as a border with the tiny player name along the bottom and the logo up top.  I don't care for this set, but someone out there does - I have proof.

A few months ago I ordered a few boxes of packs from dacardworld.com, and with my boxes was an extra box of 1990 Bowman which I hadn’t ordered.  There was an invoice with someone else’s name and everything.  After e-mailing their customer service department and asking what I should do with the box, they replied “Keep it - it’s not worth sending it back.”  It was true, too.  According to the invoice this box cost the same as its own shipping, so why bother?  Obviously someone out there wanted this thing really bad.  I suppose there’s a fan out there for every design no matter how unspectacular.  If you're out there, '90 Bowman guy, I question your taste.

1991:

I really like purple.  I really like split-fountain color fades.  I really like the colorful logo.  So why isn’t this my favorite Bowman set ever?  

1992:

 

A collector favorite, this design is clean and simple; and while I usually prefer multicolored designs, the prominent white border sets off those red bars real nice.  The photography is excellent and the bright red Bowman B talks to you.  Not only that, but this year they switched to a high-quality card stock with full-color backs and glossy fronts.  Swoon.

1993:

The yellow and white with the red Bowman logo combine for a look that’s a little fast-foody.  You can really see the natural progression in design here from the ’92 set - still, they managed to cheapen it with that Arby’s font and the mustard and ketchup colors.  I think that even if this set had really great photography (which it does not), it would be known only as “that ugly set with great photography.”  There’s an early Jeter rookie in this set that’s worth a pretty penny, despite its ugliness. 

1994:

I think they nailed this one.  Full-bleed at last, this is a deceptively simple and balanced design that works well with the photography and emphasizes that big, awesome B of theirs.  Plus it’s got foil on every card for the first time in Bowman history.  It’s not the most intricate design ever, but it’s cool and oh-so-90’s.  Luke Perry probably helped design this set.

1995:

It looks like Bowman took a page from ’94 Upper Deck with that compressed and monochromatic version of the image on one side.  We also get a nice team logo (finally) and two kinds of foil.  Players are superimposed over the compressed side picture but not the bottom name plate, a detail that may seem subtle but looks really good.  It could be argued that this card is cluttered and overdesigned, but I like it.

1996:

Same here - a lot of stuff going on, but it looks good.  They returned to a full border in simulated cloth (see the little threads?) that gives a warmer feeling than a plain white border.  I like the nice, big foil letters and the red foil brand logo.  The bright colors against the earth-tone background inspired me to nickname this “the Native American set.”

1997:

Every piece of the design here is bold and simple, but this is also the beginning of an era.  Here is the first set wherein they really focused on the red for stars, blue for rookies idea.  It’s also the first of many sets to come with more condition-sensitive black borders.  Why?  Because they’re jerks - that’s why.

1998:

The set designs really start to run together at this point in the timeline.  ’98 is the beginning of the vertical signature years.  They are dominated by a photo with the signature running vertically up one side and name below in foil.  All three have some sort of red border to signify that this is a star card and not a rookie.

1999:

The same description as above but with a dark wood-grain pattern in the background.  This is my favorite of the three vertical signature designs. 

2000:

The last time we would see a team logo on a Bowman base card for ten years and the only time they would include the set year on the front.

2001:

The last of Bowman’s fundamental design changes, this year they decided to center everything.  The gold foil looks good against the black border, and this is the first year of the now-characteristic white shaded area containing the signature.  Even older and wiser me used to get excited by these, thinking they might be real signatures and maybe I just got an autograph hot pack.  I’m pretty stupid sometimes….   Still, this is one of my favorites of the decade.

Perhaps it’s their adherence to the red-for-stars theme, but for the remainder of the timeline the base designs do not stray far from this standard layout.  There’s the occasional name moved to the top or slightly off-center name plate, but it’s all the same basic design.  Say what you will about ugly sets (I have), but at least they are usually easy to differentiate. 

2002:

Here we have some simulated blinds in the background.  They moved the name to the top here, but everything remains centered in this set. 

2003:

The photo here is shaped vaguely like a HOF plaque the border of which wraps around below to form the name plate.  One of the better designs of this period.

2004:

Everything is centered again here with angular top and bottom borders around the photo.  Simple as it is, I really like the name font on this card.

 

2005:

Perhaps the most radically different design of the ‘00s but still pretty ugly.  The rounded opposite corners are used awkwardly, and those red lines peeking from behind either side feel out of place.  A cluttered, unenjoyable card.  Awful, awful card.

2006:

A step back into the right direction, this is a simple and attractive design.  The layered border looks great and the spot where it cuts in to accommodate the logo is balanced by a similar design in the autograph field.

2007:

Okay, I’m really running out of ways to say the same things.  This is roughly the same design as last year but with the corners cut and more red.  Man, are these designs ever boring.  I hate this timeline.

2008:

No foil and a border that’s bit more curvy and stylized.  The nameplate looks like movie film here.  And so on...

2009:

Another favorite.  The autograph field is offset by the horizontal lines in the background, I really dig the baseballs on either side displaying the number and position, and the hourglass shape reminds the card holder of a sexy lady.  It’s got a cool font, too.  This set is likeable and downright memorable.

2010:

The first in 11 years with no printed signature, this set’s design is very simple.  The team logo looks great encircled on one side, and they nailed the border.  The more I look at this card, the more I like it.

Bowman continues to make lots of similar-looking cards with confusing numbers to this day.  Go buy a pack and feed the beast….

 

______________________________________________________________________________

I guess you have to hand it to Bowman in that as they developed, their designs and themes became more uniform.  They never even changed their logo in all that time.  That stability is something you get from no other brand.  “Stability” - what a boring quality.

Here’s every Bowman design made from 1989 to 2010:

Design Timeline: Donruss

This post is part of an ongoing feature The Great Griffey Base Card Project.

In the family of baseball card brands its always been obvious that Topps is the daddy, Bowman is the mommy, Upper Deck is the asshole older brother, Score is the tomboy sister, Fleer is the dog, Pacific is the wacky Mexican next-door neighbor who’s always getting into wacky adventures, Pinnacle is the smooth Tennis instructor who’s always trying to bed Topps’ wife, and Leaf is the gay uncle.  But who is Donruss?  While I’m a huge fan, Donruss’ identity has always been a mystery to me.  

Whatever family character it ends up being, "manic/depressive" is an accurate term for Donruss.  This group is the Mr. Toad's Wild Ride of design timelines - you never knew what they were going to spit out the following year, but you knew it would be somewhere between greatness and, well, whatever you call the 1990 set.

Let's take a look at the twists, turns, highs and lows of the Donruss base card design timeline:

1989:

I love this set.  Check out the great split-fade colors on every card, the strobing rainbow effect when the cards are stacked together, the texturing in the black side borders.  Score did something similar in their ‘88 set where there were a handful of primary colors that made up huge segments of the base set.  Donruss expounded on that by adding a two-color fade to every card and by dispersing the color variations evenly throughout the set.  While I’ll admit I do have some emotional attachment here, I still say it’s one of the greatest Donruss sets and among the best designs of the 80’s.  Oh, and it has a Griffey rookie.  Did I mention that?

1990:

Red.  As.  Balls.  I'll try to be constructive in my criticism: I think this set would have been more popular in several colors like that aforementioned '88 Score set.  Can you imagine this design in yellow and green and purple?  It's a lot less horrifying than that unforgiving red.  Plus this does exist in blue and I think it looks kind of awesome.  This is embarrassing to admit, but I don't even mind the overall design here - it's that awful red that makes this a universally loathed set.  There, that wasn't so bad <punches kitten>.

1991:

 

 

The diagonals of the ’86 set and the speckles of the ’90 set combined with the most basic of bright, primary colors to create a set that, while not as horrible as its predecessor, comes across as cheap (it was also overproduced as all get-out which didn’t help).  The green-bordered MVP cards look alright, I guess.  

1992:

 

Classy - where did that come from?  This is the first of seven straight designs from Donruss that comes across as more adult.  Better card stock this year, plus silver-toned lettering for the name that looks pretty good with the light blue bars.  Not bad.  Again, some different colors would look good here, but not bad at all.

1993:

Donruss’ last non-glossy offering features a simple 3D-effect nameplate and a white border.  Not much to comment on here save the fact that there’s not much to comment on.  Very simple and a bit lacking, but it could be worse.

1994:

I want to know what happened at the offices of Donruss to spawn such a drastic redesign of the flagship set.  The ’94 base card is a beast.  Full-bleed but with substantial design elements filled with color and gold foil.  The interesting fonts and great holofoil-infused parallel make this another favorite Donruss design.  The bold, colorful new Diamond Kings also looked amazing.

1995:

Touting one of my favorite back designs in the timeline, this one is just a slightly upgraded version of the previous year’s base card.  Here we get a silver banner beneath a portrait and my personal favorite redesign of the Donruss logo.  Sure, the name is a little harder to read in this set, but it’s the price you pay for awesome.

1996:

Their most modern design yet, here they really embraced the full-bleed with a shiny, centered Borg ship containing all the tidbits of information that belong on card fronts.  The name at the top of the card in a line of team-appropriate color is pretty low-impact visually, so the Borg ship is the dominant feature of the card.  The design here is modern and balanced, and it has grown on me.  Still, it comes off a little dry.

1997:

Same here - a nice, clean, modern design that bores me to tears.  Even the new logo is sterile.  Come on, guys.  Let’s bring back some of the gaudiness of ’94.

1998:

Yeah!  Lots of color, sweet banner, team name in script - this set is bright and fun and the parallels look great.  Is that team name in the same script as the 1990 set?  Are they making fun of us?

Sadly this is the last set Donruss would make before declaring bankruptcy and being bought out by Playoff, a mostly football card company.  For the next two years there would be no Donruss base set.  These 1999 and 2000 designs are actually inserts from their 2001 comeback set that showed what might have been.  For the sake of thoroughness, here are the 1999 and 2000 "throwback" sets:

1999:

I wonder if this design was already completed and copyrighted when Donruss went under.  That would have added some authenticity to the set.  The design here reminds me of ’92 Score in that the elements divide the card in two.  The vertical lines streaming from the player’s body give the appearance of motion, but the card still feels a bit ho-hum.  Even the sweet blue foil (seriously - I dig it) can’t save it. 

2000:

This is a lot better.  I’m crazy about the border here - no restrictive black lines or solid colors.  Just a slight tint of team color that fills the bottom and fades its way to the top.  This is accentuated by a white fade from the top of the section inside the border.  The logo looks alright in gold foil, and I love it when brands include the year right on the front, a trend Donruss would continue right to the end.  Overall the design here is organic and a little fun.

2001:

Back to honest-to-goodness base sets here, this design is riddled with God blessin' the USA.  At first I thought it was a result of the sudden, fierce patriotism of the post-9/11 world; but it turns out this set was released in May of that year.  That’s just Donruss loving America.  Isn’t that nice?

2002:

Behold the last half-decent base design under the Donruss name.  This one is loaded with great tidbits: team-appropriate color accents, little ball fields in the corners, banners, pinstripes, you know - baseball stuff.  

I should lump the next three designs together into a single paragraph of description, but that wouldn’t feel right at all.  Instead I’ll write a single paragraph describing all three and split it up among them.  Here we go:

2003:

A very simple design featuring a run-of-the-mill shot of Griffey batting.  I haven’t seen that since EVERY DONRUSS SET OF THE 2000’s.  And with Donruss' sudden and flagrant recycling of images, you get even more of the same shots.  Let's mix it up some, guys.  He's a freakin' Gold Glove winner, you know.

2004:

I mean, don’t get me wrong, not trying is way easier than trying, but there are things you can do to make the bottom-nameplate-plus-team-logo snoozer strategy of design more interesting.  Like foil.  Or anything.  Try anything!

2005:

And what’s up with the simulated silver foil in the logo?  Could they not afford reflective foil?  There's whole brands whose base cards are made entirely out of foil, guys.  Slap some on that card!  I'm falling asleep here.

And that was the end of Donruss.  It looked like they still had a shot with the 2002 set, but after that it became more and more obvious that the end was near.  It took three years of sub-par base sets before the ol' girl was put to pasture.  Still a quicker ending than Lord of the Rings.

______________________________________________________________________________

Fine, so I bad-mouthed one of my absolute favorite brands of all time.  After ’98 it wasn’t even them anymore, so I don’t feel too guilty.  I will admit that the font on the '04 set is pretty cool, but a font does not a base set save.  Oh, well.  A comeback this late in the game is pretty much out the window, but I'd still love a throwback set someday.

Ooh, I just figured it out - Donruss is the loveable misfit uncle who went away to rehab and came back not as fun.  Nailed it.

Here's every Donruss Griffey base card: