Completed insert set – 2013 Topps Archives ’65 Football Mini Tallboys

25 02 2016

This is the 3rd insert set from 2013 Topps Archives I’ve finished off – after the 1983 All-Stars set and the 4-in-1 sticker set (both of which were comparatively a much easier to complete).

Info about the set:

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Set description:  “Modeled after the 1965 Topps football design.  Featuring active and retired MLB players.”  This was something of a new idea for Topps.  They had done retro designs out the wazoo in the past, but doing it across different sports was a pretty new idea. The original cards are oversize (2-½ by 4-11/16) and had only AFL players.  It’s famous for the rookie card of Broadway Joe Namath.

The Archive version is the same design and shape, except Topps had to shrink them to fit them into packs.  The 40-card set is as tall as a standard card but thinner.  The card fronts have the player photo over a solid color background. The city name is at the top in block letters, with the player’s name and position in a block at the bottom.  The backs are horizontal with statistics below a write-up on the left side.  A cartoon with a factoid is on the right.

Here’s my previous post on this and the other “cross-sport” set Topps did for 2013 Archives.  There are 3 players who were around in 1965, that could have theoretically been in this set: Denny McLain, Al Kaline, Roberto Clemente

Set composition:  40 cards, 1:5 (2013 Topps Archives)

Hall of Famers: 4 – Al Kaline, Cal Ripken, Mike Schmidt, Roberto Clemente

How I put the set together:

  • 9 cards from two hobby boxes
  • 1 card from a retail blaster
  • 10 cards from Beckett Marketplace
  • 11 cards from Sportlots
  • 8 cards from COMC
  • 1 cards from the National card show

Card that completed my set:  #MT-MT – Mike Trout

2013 Topps Archives 65FB Mini Tallboys Mike Trout

I got this from COMC in September of last year.

Thoughts on the set:  Love it.  The idea of crossing sports for Topps Archives is a really good one.  I hope Topps does keeps doing that with this set.  I particularly like this design, and Topps stays consistent across teams – all the Reds players have the same color scheme.  That gets good marks in my book.  I’d change 2 things.  First, I’d only include guys who would have had 1965 cards, because I love the idea of “cards that never were”.  Second, it’s lettered not numbered, which always ticks me off.  I thought this set was only 36 cards (it’s actually 40) for nearly a year because I read that somewhere.

Best card (my opinion):  #MT-DM – Denny McLain

2013 Archives McLain 65 Mini Tall Boy

There are better historical players in the set, but you don’t see a ton of Denny McLain cards out there.  Plus, the fact that he played in 1965 makes it cooler than the rest as well.

My Favorite Reds card:  #MT-RD – Rob Dibble

2013 Archives 65 mini tallboy Dibble

It’s really tough to beat out the Eric Davis card at the very top.  But, like McLain, you don’t see a lot of Rob Dibble cards out there.  Awesome Topps included him.

Here’s the full scan of the set:

2013 Topps Archives 65FB Mini Tallboys complete

2013 Topps Archives 65FB Mini Tallboys complete 2

2013 Topps Archives 65FB Mini Tallboys complete 3

2013 Topps Archives 65FB Mini Tallboys complete 4

Any other tidbits:  If you’ll notice the Trout card has the team name at the top, whereas other cards have the team’s city.  The Angels are the only franchise to get this treatment – Albert Pujols also has a card like this.  This further highlights how ridiculous their city designation is; I guess Topps decided it didn’t want to fit “Los Angeles of Anaheim” at the top.  Clayton Kershaw has a card and they do have “Los Angeles” for him.




2 responses

26 02 2016

When I got back into cards about 3 years ago, I wondered why Topps always referred to the Angels by their nickname when other teams would be referred to by their geographic designation. I had figured the unwieldy name had something to do with it, but I recently read this on Wikipedia: “The team usually refers to itself as the Angels or Angels Baseball in its home media market, and the words “Los Angeles” and “LAA” do not appear in the stadium, on the Angels’ uniforms, or on official team merchandise.” It may be a stipulation from the team that they are only referred to as “Angels” on licensed products, but I don’t know.

26 02 2016

Weird. They were the ones who made a conscious decision to be listed as the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. The top of their website says:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: