Sometimes, unique autograph content can be a better idea on paper than it is when has to be executed. Most of the time, the idea works well, but once time and sitting on collector shelves take over, these notions of new methods of getting autographs into packs can turn into disasters. Autographs on materials other than cards, pictures or stickers can be good at first, but because collecting is a year over year hobby, sometimes the years can be a bad thing. I was asked a question this week if the stickers were even tested and confirmed to stand up over time, and to tell you the truth, Im not sure. The hobby has been around for over 100 years, are companies thinking about how cards will hold up that long? I doubt that they are even considering the time span that collectors will have to pass things down to the kids every one cares so much about.

I have almost shifted 100% to collecting on card autographs, and I will admit that this is the first time a discussion like this has crossed my mind. Here are some of the more recent ones companies have tried to be ahead of the rarity game, but likely behind on the memorialization game.

Autographs on Patches/Jersey

This is by far the most common use of other materials in the industry, and it may be the worst for longevity. Because patches and jerseys consist of threads strung together, the weight of the ink can bleed into more threads as the card sits at an angle. If stored on a flat surface or in a box that keeps it lying down instead at a angle, the autograph may stay put. Thickness of pen is also a factor, as a thinner pen produces less ink when the player signs. If a player has a quick and light pressured autograph, it may never be a problem. Any autograph that is not taken care of is going to get destroyed eventually, but a signature that is taken care of should never be at risk. When Panini released the first images of their LCE (longest card ever), I was shocked at the way it was produced. Obviously getting the players to all sign the card AFTER the premiere would be impossible, but there had to be another way than patches strung together with scotch tape. There is almost no way to store this card correctly, and those autographs are going to bleed like Nolan Ryan after his fight with Robin Ventura.

However, as we have seen with a number of different Topps sets, the alternative is so bad, that these types of autographs may be worth the risk over the alternatives. Here are some awful ones from Lettermen Football, and of course the horrid looking ones from the recent release of Marquee baseball.

Autographs on Leather/Pleather

Fleer and Upper Deck were the first companies to try out the sweet spot signatures, and although some of them have stood the test of time so far, others have not. Most of the ones that have lasted are the ones with a ball point pen signed on the leather, not the marker on the leather. Additionally, the sweet spot football cards have lasted 5 years because of the pens used as well, even though they look awful. The white leather signatures from Timeless Treasures and National Treasures of this year used blue marker pens, but we havent had the aging to see if they will stay. Leather, if actually Leather has shown to be a great material, but I know these arent real leather. Additionally, they have no connection to the actual game the players are involved with, and the cards look hideous. If they can be done well, leather isnt a bad substitute for a card, but the challenge of making the execution visually appealing is very difficult.

Autographs on Acetate

I think the clear material of Acetate is a great idea for cards, but there arent any historical comparisons to show that it will last. My first inclination is that the autographs on these types of cards will stay because its a synthetic material, but again, Pen quality is going to make a huge difference. Staedtler pens are the standard in cards, but whether or not they are all used for every signing is not clear. Most of the time acetate is used, its basically the equivalent of an on card autograph, where the previous ideas are just substitutes for on card autographs.

Autographs on Equipment

In 2005, Upper Deck made some of my favorite cards of all time, having players sign pieces of helmets and shoulder pads used in a game. Although helmets have been signed for ages, shoulder pads rarely bare a signature. The plastic used isnt always smooth either. Upper Deck tried to recreate the plastic helmet from this set a few times with Sweet Spot, and so far the results have been good.

Autographs on Foil

Im putting this in here, because foil is not the standard material that ends up being signed for sets. That hasnt stopped Panini from using foil stock to produce cards that will be hard signed ad nauseum, and I am a person who thinks that fading is going to be a much larger problem with these cards than any other. If you look at some of the hard signed foil cards from the late 1990s, some of them have already started to fade away. The foil is naturally glossy and slick, which obviously prevents the ink from sticking to the card.

My motives for doing this post should be very clear. Autographs need to be on card. Period. Unique autograph content needs to be focused on what is signed, not what the autograph is signed ON. Stickers may last for 10 or 15 years, but after that, there arent any existing examples to give us a clue. I understand that this is not a primary concern of card companies, but the hobby has always had a factor of time involved. Its the same with any collectible that carries value. The definition of collecting is a scaled down version of hoarding, and the idea is that the people who buy are going to keep the cards for a long time. It shouldnt be the driving force, but the on card autograph content can negate all of these circumstances. That is all that needs to be explained. Shoot for on card, and the rest isnt hard.