วีดีโอ

That’s what I’m saying! Drives me crazy. Damn the man!

Makes sense

Hey. Yeah. What did you have in mind?

I can send the pictures on eBay, but would you be open to a SGC 10 2014 Bowman Blue Wave Mookie + a 2023 Bowman WBC Bobby Witt Orange Ref /25?

That might work. Yeah. Send some pics. Thanks.

@@bdpsportscards109I sent em over big dawg

Nice cards. Where are you, geographically?

$125 raw. Hard grades. In a 10 it’s more. But for ROI…$4 for $100+ card; I’ll take it.

@@bdpsportscards109 hell yeah great return. For how rare those are they don’t sell very high. I see Jason Dominguez at $200

@@bdpsportscards109 oh wait that’s for the base card not the #/5. That card is huge I just realized it was numbered lol

@beliedat2457 yeah. They should be more. Dominguez at $200 is a good buy. Think he’s going to be the real deal.

I think you’re right.

I agree

@FunnyFamilySkitsDJB Thanks for tuning in!

Ha. Nothing for 50. Sorry. Appreciate you tuning in, though. Ripping wax from those years brings back so many great memories. I love doing it. Let me know how it goes.

Thanks! Appreciate you checking out the channel.

Thanks! Appreciate you tuning in.

Thanks!!!

Might have to get used to it

Thanks!

Downtowns are super hot because every breaker in the known universe is artificially pumping them up. Yes. Demand drives pricing, in any market, but supply usually has a lot to do with that metric, as well. Supply and demand are inextricably linked, but not an exact science

@@bdpsportscards109 the teal have an actual print run of 35 😂 way more rare. Hell orange scope are printed twice as much as the teal. No idea why the teal get no love. Ultimate short print card of optic. It’s the rarest pull from megas

@@bdpsportscards109 I offered it for $1000 on eBay and couldn’t sell it lol. Pop of 5 print run of 35. Makes no sense to me. I’d rather have pulled his downtown lol

@beliedat2457 It’s a strange phenomenon, but happens every year. Certain sets/inserts don’t get the love they deserve. You’re right. It should be more valued and sought after. Hard to explain.

Yup. Crazy to say but…

Thanks, Betty!!!

Yup. Topps Chrome has been pretty good to me

Sorry you didn’t enjoy it. For the record, they’re not theories. I may not be one of the big players in the collecting world but I know a lot of them well. Some are friends. They’ve confirmed how PSA operate and that the process is anything but unbiased.

Yeah. No complaints. I’ve had good luck with Select soccer over the years. I’ve been trying to avoid Panini products of late but this box was marked way down and I couldn’t resist. Glad I picked it up. Thanks for tuning in.

Thank you! Glad you like the content. Appreciate the positive feedback.

It’s not about keeping something a secret. This PSA grader gave the card an 8, the next might give it a 9 or a 10 or a 2 (I’ve seen it) What’s the difference between selling the card raw before or after it’s been in a slab? It happens every day in our hobby. Many of the raw cards up for sale or auction have gotten grades collectors were unhappy with/didn’t agree with, which were then cracked and listed. I’m sure I’ve purchased many cards that had been in slabs, previously. I always follow eBay’s rules and am fully transparent anytime I’m asked a question. I get where you’re coming from but grades on cards are opinions, not facts. We’ve all cracked and resubmitted subpar grades and gotten 10s in the past. It happens all the time. That Stroud may very well be a 10. Remember, PSA hired hundreds (if not thousands) of new graders a few years ago. Some are good, some are not. They barely trained them before sending them into action. Grading cards was never an exact science; now it’s a complete crap shoot.

Thanks, brother! Sorry you didn’t win.

Also could you explain what an up charge is? Thanks!

I believe they’re /35 but I’m not certain. Panini messes with the colors of the velocity from sport to sport and it’s hard to keep them straight. I deal almost exclusively in raw cards these days when it comes to modern but there are times, like with your Stroud, that getting cards graded still makes sense.

@beliedat2457 Sure. What PSA does is ask you to select a value when submitting for “insurance” purposes, so if the card gets lost in transit or damaged during the grading process (happens but rarely) you’ve already set the replacement value. There’s no arguing. So, what most collectors do is submit at the lowest grading level and wait to see what PSA does. PSA charges a grading fee based on the value of the card, not solely the service they provide. Essentially, they take a percentage of your cards value in order to grade it. For instance, if you get a $5000 card graded, PSA charges you more than if you get a $500 card graded. Yes, before you ask, they are the only grading company that behaves this way. It is a very shady business practice but it’s baked into the cake because SGC and Beckett simply don’t have the market share to challenge PSA or force them to change their ways. In my sub, I sent all the cards in with an assumed valuation under $300. A lot of those cards raw or in a PSA slab exceed that value but I’m never going to do PSA’s dirty work for them and agree to pay more than I have to, up front, to grade the cards. You can usually get away with it if your cards are sub 1K but once they cross that threshold or if PSA needs an infusion of capital, they’ll hit you with an up charge. So, I paid $14 to grade that CJ Stroud Checkerboard. As soon as the grading team assigned it a 10, they flagged it and I was sent an email. The email informed me that the card required a grading fee of $74, not $14, and I needed to approve the change before they could proceed. That’s an up charge. Grading cards can get expensive if you’re grading big cards and they get good grades. I once got a $450 up charge to grade a Mahomes rookie auto that I submitted in the 2nd tier. It got a 10 and they hit me with the up charge. It’s unscrupulous but brilliant, if you think about it. They give no extra service, simply charge more money. But, in the end, you’re happy to get that email because it means the value of the card you submitted just went up significantly. I know this was a long answer. Hope that explains it.

@@bdpsportscards109perfectly! And thanks for taking the time to respond.

@beliedat2457 Anytime

Out of a what kind of box? That’s a nice pull! Especially out of anything retail. Congrats!

Appreciate it. The 2nd half of that sub has some fun stuff in it as well. Thanks for watching!

Did you have trouble finding optic nfl 2023 in your area

@johndepoley3724 Yeah. That stuff has been really hot. Downtown value has exploded recently.

I hear ya. Collecting cards is different for everyone. I grade modern cards often times to sell them and capitalize on the hot new rookie or player of that moment. I’m a vintage collector at heart. Thats what I hold onto. That’s my passion.

It’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s reality. I’m not saying the Rice should’ve gotten a 10. It’s not a 10. An 8 is a fair grade for that card. What I’m saying is that you and I have no chance of ever getting a 10 on a card like that. Even if it were perfect, it would take an act of God to make that happen. If you don’t think PSA artificially controls the pop counts of older wax, you’re kidding yourself. They’ll throw some bones to the segment of the hobby that have a financial stake in PSA and they’ll do it sparingly to boost sales when they need an infusion of capital, but if you think graders have autonomy and that the quality of the card is the primary factor in the grade it receives, then you’re not paying attention. That’s not a conspiracy theory, that’s the game as it’s set up. How many 86 Jordan’s have gotten 10s in the last 4 years? You think that’s because all the packs of 86 Fleer opened in that time were inferior to the ones opened in the 40 years that proceeded it or do you think PSA made a business decision when card values exploded and competition increased to keep the pop count on that iconic card low to keep the value high? There are a thousand examples like that across the hobby.

@@bdpsportscards109 Checkerboard Stroud was very lucky to Gem. So you win some and lose some. Grading is subjective. I only send cards that will gem and they still mint some but at 70% Gem rate I can’t complain.

@Teabagonyou At 70%, you’re doing very well! You have a good eye.

Came to say the same thing lol. Stroud should be a 9 with that corner too

@@StrongCards88 well off centered as well. I will take wins on my biggest cards even if some smaller ones don’t Gem.

I agree. It can be infuriating and it’s a shakedown, for sure, but part of the game if you grade with PSA. The PSA slab still adds so much value, when compared to SGC or BGS, that everyone just swallows it. Doesn’t make it right, but as long as the hobby treats their product that way, they can keep doing it.

Follow the link below: Autographed NFL Jersey Giveaway! PSA/Beckett Certified. Free to enter! Subscribe and Win! th-cam.com/video/lMy32y-Gg-k/w-d-xo.html

Whatnot is crazy platform. Virtually no regulation or oversight and it used to be worse! There are deals to be found on the app but you have to be very discriminating and wary of any breaks with repacks. I’ve had success hanging around and getting into things in smaller rooms with less activity. I’ll also try and be on the app at off times on less popular days. A Wednesday morning around 10am, for instance. Not much going on but some cheap breaks with potential. As for the kind of repack breaks you’re describing…they are a nightmare. The repacks are always loaded with cards no where near the value the spots sell for and those streams prey on problem gamblers and folks with money to burn. They can be entertaining, at times, but more often than not it gets sad watching people buy spot after spot and struggle to stop.

@bdpsportscards109 yeah that's what I was thinking I doubt I will participate unless like you Said I find a low cost high value break, i dont like breaks tho learnedmy lesson few years ago. Thanks

Thanks! We both kind of thought so but I don’t know Pokémon well enough to be certain of anything. Looked it up after we finished filming and found out what it was.

Yup. Great product for kids to rip.

Completely missed it

Yes. Jim Brown ran behind hall of fame lineman, but Brown had as much a hand in them being hall of famers as they did. Jim Brown was a much better football player than Emmitt Smith and you’d be hard pressed to find anyone who’d take Smith over Brown in their backfield. As to your point about Emmitt breaking tackles and making plays in that Super Bowl or in the regular season…yes Emmitt was a very good running back. A great running back. In the history of Football, there’s an argument that he’s a top 10 back of all time. I don’t subscribe to that argument and he’s lower for me, but I’m not saying he was an average player. He was great. What he wasn’t was close to the greater of all time. He should not be in that conversation and far too often, is. He’s Chris Carter, not Jerry Rice. That’s not bad, but if Carter had been a Cowboy and won 3 super bowls as the #1 receiver (which he would’ve been) Cowboy’s fans would be talking about him in the same conversation with Rice, Fitzgerald, Moss, but those of us who saw those guys play know he wasn’t that. That’s what I’m saying about Emmitt. He played a really long time. He was durable and that’s not nothing, but he’s only looked at the way he is because of the top line stats and that’s not how you judge a ball player, in any sport.

As you mention Rice, why is he not disqualified in his accomplishments and labeled a stat stacker because of his longevity or because he played with two hall of fame quarterbacks and a very successful Niners organization. You throw out Rice's name like it is a given, and I agree with you, but Rice is subject to the same criticism as Smith and yet you throw his name out as if it is a given that he is great but not Smith. Rice played for 21 seasons with two hall of fame quarterbacks 3 Superbowl wins several playoff births, 4 conference finals. Why is Smiths accomplishments diminished by longevity, team success, and team talent, while Rice is just assumed Goat?

​@@bdpsportscards109regarding Chris Carter analogy: Smith did not just play for super bowl winning teams. He was THE major factor in the success of those team. That original line with Aikman and Irving went 1-15 before Smith came. The cowboys with their line, Aikman, Irving, Novichek, were 1-6 without Smith. Their line, Aikman, Irving, Novichek were struggling to stay in the one Superbowl until they fed the Rock to Smith. The only lineman with any pomp before playing with Smith was Larry Allen, and Smith had two Superbowls and three rushing titles before Allen came. There are few multiseason succesfull teams who relied so heavily for their success on one running back.

Appreciate the response. Allow me to address your points one by one. My issue with Smith as a receiver isn’t that he doesn’t match up favorably with wide receivers, it’s that he’s 13th all time in receptions among running backs (soon to be 15th as Kamara and McCaffrey are less than 10 catches away from passing him), despite playing way more games than almost everyone else on the list. He’s behind the likes of Matt Forte and Ronnie Harmon. Furthermore, a catch percentage over 80% is not an accomplishment when the great majority of the targets are within 10 yards of the line of scrimmage, which his were. In fact, anything less would indicate a receiver with a hands of stone. His YPC average isn’t a product of goal line carries. I’ll let you look up how many carries in his career happened inside the 5 yard line and what percentage of his total carries they represent. I’ll give you hint, it’s a very small number. Barry was taken out of the game in short yardage situations but that didn’t boost his YPC, it simply resulted in Barry having fewer touchdowns. I addressed the longevity/compiler argument by looking at Emmitt’s YPC by season as well as his career. In his prime, at his best, in his best seasons he could barely hold a candle to most of the backs I listed, certainly the ones at the top of all time list like Sanders and Brown. I won’t even have the line argument. To suggest that the Cowboys line of the dynasty years in the early 90s, behind which he gained most of his yards and scored the bulk of his touchdowns, wasn’t one of the three greatest offensive lines in professional football history is just silly. Yes, he won one SB without Larry Allen. Look at who else was already on that team leading up to 1994. Look, I’m not saying Emmitt wasn’t a great running back. He was. But to suggest he’s in the discussion for best of all time, as many Cowboy fans and someone like yourself seem to be suggesting, is crazy. The numbers don’t back it up and anyone who watched him play knows he simply wasn’t that guy.

​@@bdpsportscards109I agree with much of what you responded. I do think 80+ percentage means something. I think it is indicative of the kind of back Smith was. Dropped passes, loss of yards carries are losses of downs. Losses of downs puts the team in a difficult situation. Losing downs puts decreases your teams chance of success. Gaining a few yards consistently is better FOR THE TEAM than inconsistent boom runs. The claim that you make that Brown made his line can be said with demonstrable evidence of Emmitt Smith and his line. That is what Nate Newton claimed if Smith. For his first three rushing titles, he had two undrafted guys with no all pros. One lineman was cut from the redskins. again, with the length of his career, there were a lot of different lineman. He just happened to be behind the beat line for 15 years. I do not buy it. Many of Smith's original line where in the league for years and never went to a probowl or all pro until Smith. This is demonstrable. Additionally, if Smith's line made him great rather than the other way around then why did Smith so out perform his backups while Sanders backups outperformed him. "Anyone can run behind that line" is demonstrably false, we saw that scenario. We saw the scenario of others running Behind Barry's line. It is demonstrably. I did do the work looking at ypc removing goal line runs from both Smith and Sanders, my conclusions are demonstrable in that. Smith's was still like 2 tenths behind Sanders, but that does not include other in game short yardage situations. The play by play stats back then are not as thorough as they are now. There are great scat/open field backs like Sanders. According to Sanders, he tried to run like a rabbit. Sometimes you need that. Sometimes you need a bus like Bettis. Smith is neither as illusive as Sanders nor as powerful as Bettis, but he was a really nice blend of the two styles that made him an every down, every situation back. Another point about Smith is his post season production. Regarding durability and performance, he had the equivalent of an all pro season in post season performance. He generally performed better in big games. That testifies to a players greatness. The claim that many of his stats were in situations that did not matter is not entirely true. The giants game at the end of the 93 season was a big game, and Smith played big regardless of what extent one believes he was hurt. The Superbowl I mentioned, the cowboys rarely have the ball to him in the first half and it looked like the bills were going to win just as they did in the regular season when Smith was out. But the second half of that game was different from the first half and the earlier game in one way - not the line, not Aikman, not Irvin - Emmitt Smith. That is greatness. For me greatness is not about the best in this one dimension or that dimension. Greatness is not blowing up yards in a climate control dome in a week division. Greatness is being one of the best all round backs, good in the most situations, who plays big in big games. That is Smith. There are others as well. I know this is unpopular opinion, and I glued in whenever Sanders' played, but I do not think Sanders is all that great. A couple of years I even had him on my fantasy league. His running style was difficult to block for, Lomas Brown testifies to this. Dancing backs are hard to block for, you have to hold blocks longer and anticipate changes in the direction of the play. I believe, as fun as he was to watch, Sanders style was a liability for the success of his team. The success of his team and his backups while he was out demonstrates this conclusions. He also underperformed in the playoffs. I may be mistaken but I think there was a year when the Lions beat the Cowboys in regular season game and playoffs, clearly being the better team, yet Sanders underperformed in that playoff game. If I wanted a highlight reel, I would pick Sanders any day. However, If I wanted to build a winning NFL team, I would take even Bettis before Sanders. Please don't hate me. I love Sanders, but i want someone who spends the currency of downs and consistently has something to show for it. I want a back the line can be encouraged to know that when they put on the block he will fall forward. Sorry for the long rant on probably what seems like craziness. I get it.

Almost. Trying to get up that hill. Thanks for the support. Really appreciate it.

Thanks! It’s a beauty

I agree. Thanks for tuning in.

Thanks!

Thanks, Preston. I thought laying out the pricing might make the whole process too cumbersome. More so than it already was. Almost all the breaks were less than $40 with a couple straying north of $50. There’s one more installment coming in a few days. Spoiler alert: The cards I was looking for are finally revealed.

@@bdpsportscards109 Fair enough. Either way, it was a fun series of videos. I continue to enjoy all of the content you put out. Next step 500 subscribers!

Thanks, Betty! As always, appreciate the support.

Thanks. I enjoy doing them and my son loves seeing the “old” cards.

You’re right. Maybe those two are related. Thanks for tuning in!

Absolutely!

Thanks! Appreciate the compliment

Thanks! Appreciate the kind words.

Yup

Thanks, my man!

Who doesn’t?!

Thanks, Val!

Ha. If only wishing made it so.

Appreciate it