Stickers vs On Card Autos

[CrawfordFan13]

Auto's are better if they are directly on the card itself. That way we know that the card was actually in the players hands.

What if the Auto was on a Moises Alou or Jorge Posada card :new_shock Id lysol the card (if you dont know why I said those 2 baseball players Im sure you dont want to).

But now on the subject

I personally agree with some of the last people who posted here, I like whatever looks better. But in my opinion its mostly sticker autographs that look better, on some of the autographs that are signed right on the card looks cool but some others look bad, some sticker auto's look bad too but I say when the stickers look good the card looks much better.

[golfermatt91]

i agree with trampus i hate those sage autos you can never see the auto, and why do they use a black pen on a black background.

[TheTruth85]

I have a leftwich auto which is right on the card and it looks more authentic, but i also have a kevin jones autograph and that is on a sticker but it looks nice. Fits the card with the shiny type.

[DanielSweeney]

I do like the autos on the cards better. I just think they look better.

I like the Sage autos because they are more affordable, but I agree that they don't look as good. They look especially crappy in scans.

[goutnout]

i prefer the sticker approach becuase you dont have to worry about the player not signing in time. and no one has even mentioned that ink will eventually run into the paper on the card while as on the sticker...it wont?. also i wonder if the players ever ding up the cards or if they get messed up in delivery.