UD & The Cup - A Troubling Question

[JeffthePug]

I apologize if this has already been covered, but I'm troubled by the language I noticed on the back of UD cards, specifically The Cup.

For the 2005-06 series of The Cup, the verbiage says ... "On the front of this card are authentic pieces of patches from [insert team] jerseys worn by [player's name] in official NHL games."

But on a later series (I think it was 2009), the verbiage says the GU item was used in an NHL game, with no mention of whether or not it was used by the player depicted on the front.

I'm hoping I'm just paranoid, but does that mean that the signature may be Sidney Crosby, but the uniform is from Aaron Asham???

[Samuwry7]

Jeff, you're a little late to the party. This is has been recognized and is known by most collectors, for a little while now.

I asked a UD employee about it once, and the fact of the matter is, most of the time, they use the correct player's jersey, but occasionally, incorrect jersey might accidently get used. I'd also speculate that if they run out of a player's material, they use some of another, but only when absolutely needed. The big names I'd very much doubt would have that issue, especially the biggest. There's a chance your Tootoo GU'd is actually from Dumont or something, I suppose, but its not likely.

[ralral33]

There's a chance your Tootoo GU'd is actually from Dumont or something, I suppose, but its not likely.

hey now i think it would be the other way around Tootoo is more popular then dumont hahahaha just joking

[RGM81]

It's not just The Cup - they have changed the wording on every memorabilia card in the past couple of years to the more vague description.

[30ranfordfan]

Yup. More vaugue keeps them safe, in the event of mistakes. IMO - this is a reflection of Upper Deck covering their own behinds, for when accidents happen (rather than some plan to use GU memoribilia on cards of players other than who it)

[Sdig14]

Yup. More vaugue keeps them safe, in the event of mistakes. IMO - this is a reflection of Upper Deck covering their own behinds, for when accidents happen (rather than some plan to use GU memoribilia on cards of players other than who it)

Why do they need to go out of their way to be ambiguous though?

How is someone who buys a card supposed to tell whether it was worn by Crosby or Letang? If someone came to UD and said "Hey, I think this patch isn't from a real Sid jersey", wouldn't UD simply refute that claim and say they always use the proper jersey?

I know there have been issues in the past, with both UD and other companies, but if they simply said from now on there will be no issues then they wouldn't need to have such a vague legal description on cards.

[30ranfordfan]

You're right, there really wouldn't be anyway for us to tell (between Crosby and Letang) but what if it was a mix up between Crosby and Ovechkin?

They've made mistakes (maybe not as big, or as potentially obvious, as a Caps jerseys on a Penguins card) in the past, and the re-worded disclaimer is their way of saying that it's happened in the past, and it's probably going to happen again.

Why do they need to go out of their way to be ambiguous though?

How is someone who buys a card supposed to tell whether it was worn by Crosby or Letang? If someone came to UD and said "Hey, I think this patch isn't from a real Sid jersey", wouldn't UD simply refute that claim and say they always use the proper jersey?

I know there have been issues in the past, with both UD and other companies, but if they simply said from now on there will be no issues then they wouldn't need to have such a vague legal description on cards.

[Sdig14]

Ya, I suppose you're right. I guess if you are anticipating that big of a mistake then you better come up with a pretty good ambiguous legal description that covers any and all blunders by those in charge of making these cards.

My luck I will pull a big PC item in 10-11 Cup and have it come out as the wrong team...

You're right, there really wouldn't be anyway for us to tell (between Crosby and Letang) but what if it was a mix up between Crosby and Ovechkin?

They've made mistakes (maybe not as big, or as potentially obvious, as a Caps jerseys on a Penguins card) in the past, and the re-worded disclaimer is their way of saying that it's happened in the past, and it's probably going to happen again.

[JeffthePug]

Thanks for the great responses. Some really smart, insightful takes on this issue.

I wonder, does it make sense to provide UD - or any card company for that matter - with the benefit of the doubt? Do we think that their integrity is somehow higher or better than those of any other business (hello, Wall Street?)? I have to think the temptation to purchase, say, a Eric Goddard jersey for $300 and then sell swatches as if they were Crosby's or Malkin's must be pretty high.

Does anyone know if UD has said anything publicly about this issue? It seems to me that I'm feeling suspicious - perhaps unfairly so - because it seems sneaky to suddenly change the wording. I think a straightforward explanation by UD would resolve this issue much better than having us guess. Or, do we (meaning hobbyists) really not care? Maybe we would rather stick our heads in the sand and pretend that there's no problem in what is, for me at least, an island of sanity and fun amidst the stresses and difficulties of real life.

[MasonRaymond0320]

Yeah, I don't think it's quite fair....if you bought a box of the cup for $300, you expect the REAL stuff! ITG would never do something like that..because they have higher standards! Imo
it comforts me that itg informs people and admits their mistakes, especially with that jersey that wasn't actually "game worn" during the olympics...I think it was a varlemov or nittimaki.