One day in the 1976 season, I went into a store in downtown Washington, DC, called The Locker Room that had been established in the heat of Redskins mania a few years ago to take advantage of the city's newfound love affair with their suddenly-hot NFL team by selling officially licensed memorabilia. By 1976, they had branched out into other sports stuff. It was close to where I waited for the bus home from work. (Metro was just opening at the time, with just one short line, and all commuting between DC and the suburbs on public transportation was still done by bus.) One day when I went in, I was pleasantly surprised to find a box containing a complete set of the 1976 Topps trading cards for sale. I don't remember the price, and I didn't make much money then, but I remember figuring that it was just what I'd like to have. So if it was rather pricey, I probably decided to do without something else that week or month (such as new clothes or record albums).

I still have it, and it still remains the only year for which I ever bought a complete set of baseball cards. I remember going through it at some point in the late 1980s or early 1990s and noticing the lack of decent players' rookie cards. In fact, I looked only at the ones actually marked "rookies", and the only player with such a card that had become someone who had a career of much substance seemed to be Ron Guidry. I will have to dig the box out (I think I know where it is) and see if the Eck's card was also designated as a "rookie" or if it was a regular card.

The only thing that bugs me about the 2010 UD cards is that they use the same photo on the back as the front black-and-white version--I don't see any point to repeating the same photo on the front and back. I would have just left the B&W one off the front, but I guess without the team logos (or even the team names) the fronts would be a bit barren otherwise.

What do you think of the new MLB-unauthorized Upper Deck cards, which use action shots to obscure team logos and front posed head shots?