Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?
-
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
A. Mauer's been on the cover (twice!) so he has a prior working relationship directly with SDS.
B. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. It's a whole lot easier to build up demand for a legend if they go away for awhile.
That makes sense. I was just using Mauer as an example since he just came back and we just lost Posey. But your reasoning makes perfect sense. The way people talk about losing players after they retire for several years makes it sound like a policy. Like they are ineligible for 5 years like the HOF.
-
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
A. Mauer's been on the cover (twice!) so he has a prior working relationship directly with SDS.
B. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. It's a whole lot easier to build up demand for a legend if they go away for awhile.
That makes sense. I was just using Mauer as an example since he just came back and we just lost Posey. But your reasoning makes perfect sense. The way people talk about losing players after they retire for several years makes it sound like a policy. Like they are ineligible for 5 years like the HOF.
The loss of players is a policy since the players are no longer a member of the MLBPA and would no longer be licensed for the game through the MLB Players, Inc (. SDS loses the rights to use their name, image, likeness, numbers, nicknames, signatures, playing records, and biographical data (all of that is known as "publicity rights") unless they work it with the former player's agent directly. When they enter the HoF, then the players fall under the license agreement with SDS has with the MLB HoF itself. You can see the image of these associations in the beginning off the game that shows they have agreements with the different associations. The time in between MLBPA and MLB HoF, the players are not represented by an association that is licensed by SDS. So again, the short way of saying this is that it is SDS and MLB policy they are not in the game after they retire!
-
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
A. Mauer's been on the cover (twice!) so he has a prior working relationship directly with SDS.
B. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. It's a whole lot easier to build up demand for a legend if they go away for awhile.
That makes sense. I was just using Mauer as an example since he just came back and we just lost Posey. But your reasoning makes perfect sense. The way people talk about losing players after they retire for several years makes it sound like a policy. Like they are ineligible for 5 years like the HOF.
The loss of players is a policy since the players are no longer a member of the MLBPA and would no longer be licensed for the game through the MLB Players, Inc (. SDS loses the rights to use their name, image, likeness, numbers, nicknames, signatures, playing records, and biographical data (all of that is known as "publicity rights") unless they work it with the former player's agent directly. When they enter the HoF, then the players fall under the license agreement with SDS has with the MLB HoF itself. You can see the image of these associations in the beginning off the game that shows they have agreements with the different associations. The time in between MLBPA and MLB HoF, the players are not represented by an association that is licensed by SDS. So again, the short way of saying this is that it is SDS and MLB policy they are not in the game after they retire!
There is no agreement with the hall of fame and the Hall has no authority to make such a deal. There's over 100 hall of famers not in the game and the HOF is nothing more than a Museum.
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
A. Mauer's been on the cover (twice!) so he has a prior working relationship directly with SDS.
B. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. It's a whole lot easier to build up demand for a legend if they go away for awhile.
That makes sense. I was just using Mauer as an example since he just came back and we just lost Posey. But your reasoning makes perfect sense. The way people talk about losing players after they retire for several years makes it sound like a policy. Like they are ineligible for 5 years like the HOF.
The loss of players is a policy since the players are no longer a member of the MLBPA and would no longer be licensed for the game through the MLB Players, Inc (. SDS loses the rights to use their name, image, likeness, numbers, nicknames, signatures, playing records, and biographical data (all of that is known as "publicity rights") unless they work it with the former player's agent directly. When they enter the HoF, then the players fall under the license agreement with SDS has with the MLB HoF itself. You can see the image of these associations in the beginning off the game that shows they have agreements with the different associations. The time in between MLBPA and MLB HoF, the players are not represented by an association that is licensed by SDS. So again, the short way of saying this is that it is SDS and MLB policy they are not in the game after they retire!
There is no agreement with the hall of fame and the Hall has no authority to make such a deal. There's over 100 hall of famers not in the game and the HOF is nothing more than a Museum.
If SDS did not have an agreement with the MLB HoF, they would not be able to use their logo (among other things) in their game. So you are definitely wrong by saying they do not have an agreement with MLB HoF! The association that represents MLB HoFers and other retired players is the MLB Players Alumni Association through their Major League Alumni Marketing subsidiary. If you watch the beginning of the game, SDS also has an agreement with them for the "legends". Even though MLBPAA has over 7500 members, SDS is not going to add all of those legends! Not every player joins MLBPAA right away and just joining that association doesn't mean SDS is able to get their rights right away!
-
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
A. Mauer's been on the cover (twice!) so he has a prior working relationship directly with SDS.
B. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. It's a whole lot easier to build up demand for a legend if they go away for awhile.
That makes sense. I was just using Mauer as an example since he just came back and we just lost Posey. But your reasoning makes perfect sense. The way people talk about losing players after they retire for several years makes it sound like a policy. Like they are ineligible for 5 years like the HOF.
The loss of players is a policy since the players are no longer a member of the MLBPA and would no longer be licensed for the game through the MLB Players, Inc (. SDS loses the rights to use their name, image, likeness, numbers, nicknames, signatures, playing records, and biographical data (all of that is known as "publicity rights") unless they work it with the former player's agent directly. When they enter the HoF, then the players fall under the license agreement with SDS has with the MLB HoF itself. You can see the image of these associations in the beginning off the game that shows they have agreements with the different associations. The time in between MLBPA and MLB HoF, the players are not represented by an association that is licensed by SDS. So again, the short way of saying this is that it is SDS and MLB policy they are not in the game after they retire!
There is no agreement with the hall of fame and the Hall has no authority to make such a deal. There's over 100 hall of famers not in the game and the HOF is nothing more than a Museum.
If SDS did not have an agreement with the MLB HoF, they would not be able to use their logo (among other things) in their game. So you are definitely wrong by saying they do not have an agreement with MLB HoF!
Agreement for the logo? Sure. The HOF has literally as much say on who gets put in the game as we do though. 11 Hall of famers have been removed from the game since legends were added to DD(and that isn't counting Dawson and Rice). Wouldn't happen if the HOF had anything to do with rights. Not to mention at minimum we would have at almost every hall of famer and negro league legend if the hall had a say
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
A. Mauer's been on the cover (twice!) so he has a prior working relationship directly with SDS.
B. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. It's a whole lot easier to build up demand for a legend if they go away for awhile.
That makes sense. I was just using Mauer as an example since he just came back and we just lost Posey. But your reasoning makes perfect sense. The way people talk about losing players after they retire for several years makes it sound like a policy. Like they are ineligible for 5 years like the HOF.
The loss of players is a policy since the players are no longer a member of the MLBPA and would no longer be licensed for the game through the MLB Players, Inc (. SDS loses the rights to use their name, image, likeness, numbers, nicknames, signatures, playing records, and biographical data (all of that is known as "publicity rights") unless they work it with the former player's agent directly. When they enter the HoF, then the players fall under the license agreement with SDS has with the MLB HoF itself. You can see the image of these associations in the beginning off the game that shows they have agreements with the different associations. The time in between MLBPA and MLB HoF, the players are not represented by an association that is licensed by SDS. So again, the short way of saying this is that it is SDS and MLB policy they are not in the game after they retire!
There is no agreement with the hall of fame and the Hall has no authority to make such a deal. There's over 100 hall of famers not in the game and the HOF is nothing more than a Museum.
If SDS did not have an agreement with the MLB HoF, they would not be able to use their logo (among other things) in their game. So you are definitely wrong by saying they do not have an agreement with MLB HoF!
Agreement for the logo? Sure. The HOF has literally as much say on who gets put in the game as we do though. 11 Hall of famers have been removed from the game since legends were added to DD. Wouldn't happen if the HOF had anything to do with rights. Not to mention at minimum we would have at almost every hall of famer and negro league legend if the hall had a say
You are trying to play me as BooBoo the Fool if you think I'll believe that SDS just paid to flash a logo for the beginning of their game! Their is a lot more that comes with that agreement than a few second flash of that logo!
-
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
A. Mauer's been on the cover (twice!) so he has a prior working relationship directly with SDS.
B. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. It's a whole lot easier to build up demand for a legend if they go away for awhile.
That makes sense. I was just using Mauer as an example since he just came back and we just lost Posey. But your reasoning makes perfect sense. The way people talk about losing players after they retire for several years makes it sound like a policy. Like they are ineligible for 5 years like the HOF.
The loss of players is a policy since the players are no longer a member of the MLBPA and would no longer be licensed for the game through the MLB Players, Inc (. SDS loses the rights to use their name, image, likeness, numbers, nicknames, signatures, playing records, and biographical data (all of that is known as "publicity rights") unless they work it with the former player's agent directly. When they enter the HoF, then the players fall under the license agreement with SDS has with the MLB HoF itself. You can see the image of these associations in the beginning off the game that shows they have agreements with the different associations. The time in between MLBPA and MLB HoF, the players are not represented by an association that is licensed by SDS. So again, the short way of saying this is that it is SDS and MLB policy they are not in the game after they retire!
There is no agreement with the hall of fame and the Hall has no authority to make such a deal. There's over 100 hall of famers not in the game and the HOF is nothing more than a Museum.
If SDS did not have an agreement with the MLB HoF, they would not be able to use their logo (among other things) in their game. So you are definitely wrong by saying they do not have an agreement with MLB HoF!
Agreement for the logo? Sure. The HOF has literally as much say on who gets put in the game as we do though. 11 Hall of famers have been removed from the game since legends were added to DD. Wouldn't happen if the HOF had anything to do with rights. Not to mention at minimum we would have at almost every hall of famer and negro league legend if the hall had a say
You are trying to play me as BooBoo the Fool if you think I'll believe that SDS just paid to flash a logo for the beginning of their game! Their is a lot more that comes with that agreement than a few second flash of that logo!
Could be, but it's not any players, I can tell you that with absolute certainty.
-
@DoIHearBossMusic_MLBTS said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
Be nice if he re-upped with SDS at least after a year, skip 23 and make him a legend in 24.
Shoot I say do it in 23.
-
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
A. Mauer's been on the cover (twice!) so he has a prior working relationship directly with SDS.
B. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. It's a whole lot easier to build up demand for a legend if they go away for awhile.
That makes sense. I was just using Mauer as an example since he just came back and we just lost Posey. But your reasoning makes perfect sense. The way people talk about losing players after they retire for several years makes it sound like a policy. Like they are ineligible for 5 years like the HOF.
The loss of players is a policy since the players are no longer a member of the MLBPA and would no longer be licensed for the game through the MLB Players, Inc (. SDS loses the rights to use their name, image, likeness, numbers, nicknames, signatures, playing records, and biographical data (all of that is known as "publicity rights") unless they work it with the former player's agent directly. When they enter the HoF, then the players fall under the license agreement with SDS has with the MLB HoF itself. You can see the image of these associations in the beginning off the game that shows they have agreements with the different associations. The time in between MLBPA and MLB HoF, the players are not represented by an association that is licensed by SDS. So again, the short way of saying this is that it is SDS and MLB policy they are not in the game after they retire!
There is no agreement with the hall of fame and the Hall has no authority to make such a deal. There's over 100 hall of famers not in the game and the HOF is nothing more than a Museum.
If SDS did not have an agreement with the MLB HoF, they would not be able to use their logo (among other things) in their game. So you are definitely wrong by saying they do not have an agreement with MLB HoF!
Agreement for the logo? Sure. The HOF has literally as much say on who gets put in the game as we do though. 11 Hall of famers have been removed from the game since legends were added to DD. Wouldn't happen if the HOF had anything to do with rights. Not to mention at minimum we would have at almost every hall of famer and negro league legend if the hall had a say
You are trying to play me as BooBoo the Fool if you think I'll believe that SDS just paid to flash a logo for the beginning of their game! Their is a lot more that comes with that agreement than a few second flash of that logo!
BooBoo the Fool lolol
Youre a funny guy dap
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
A. Mauer's been on the cover (twice!) so he has a prior working relationship directly with SDS.
B. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. It's a whole lot easier to build up demand for a legend if they go away for awhile.
That makes sense. I was just using Mauer as an example since he just came back and we just lost Posey. But your reasoning makes perfect sense. The way people talk about losing players after they retire for several years makes it sound like a policy. Like they are ineligible for 5 years like the HOF.
The loss of players is a policy since the players are no longer a member of the MLBPA and would no longer be licensed for the game through the MLB Players, Inc (. SDS loses the rights to use their name, image, likeness, numbers, nicknames, signatures, playing records, and biographical data (all of that is known as "publicity rights") unless they work it with the former player's agent directly. When they enter the HoF, then the players fall under the license agreement with SDS has with the MLB HoF itself. You can see the image of these associations in the beginning off the game that shows they have agreements with the different associations. The time in between MLBPA and MLB HoF, the players are not represented by an association that is licensed by SDS. So again, the short way of saying this is that it is SDS and MLB policy they are not in the game after they retire!
There is no agreement with the hall of fame and the Hall has no authority to make such a deal. There's over 100 hall of famers not in the game and the HOF is nothing more than a Museum.
If SDS did not have an agreement with the MLB HoF, they would not be able to use their logo (among other things) in their game. So you are definitely wrong by saying they do not have an agreement with MLB HoF!
Agreement for the logo? Sure. The HOF has literally as much say on who gets put in the game as we do though. 11 Hall of famers have been removed from the game since legends were added to DD. Wouldn't happen if the HOF had anything to do with rights. Not to mention at minimum we would have at almost every hall of famer and negro league legend if the hall had a say
You are trying to play me as BooBoo the Fool if you think I'll believe that SDS just paid to flash a logo for the beginning of their game! Their is a lot more that comes with that agreement than a few second flash of that logo!
Could be, but it's not any players, I can tell you that with absolute certainty.
Rights to former Major League Baseball players provided by the Major League Alumni Association and the National Baseball Hall of Fame.
Seems like the HOF does have some say.
-
@virusts_XBL said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
A. Mauer's been on the cover (twice!) so he has a prior working relationship directly with SDS.
B. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. It's a whole lot easier to build up demand for a legend if they go away for awhile.
That makes sense. I was just using Mauer as an example since he just came back and we just lost Posey. But your reasoning makes perfect sense. The way people talk about losing players after they retire for several years makes it sound like a policy. Like they are ineligible for 5 years like the HOF.
The loss of players is a policy since the players are no longer a member of the MLBPA and would no longer be licensed for the game through the MLB Players, Inc (. SDS loses the rights to use their name, image, likeness, numbers, nicknames, signatures, playing records, and biographical data (all of that is known as "publicity rights") unless they work it with the former player's agent directly. When they enter the HoF, then the players fall under the license agreement with SDS has with the MLB HoF itself. You can see the image of these associations in the beginning off the game that shows they have agreements with the different associations. The time in between MLBPA and MLB HoF, the players are not represented by an association that is licensed by SDS. So again, the short way of saying this is that it is SDS and MLB policy they are not in the game after they retire!
There is no agreement with the hall of fame and the Hall has no authority to make such a deal. There's over 100 hall of famers not in the game and the HOF is nothing more than a Museum.
If SDS did not have an agreement with the MLB HoF, they would not be able to use their logo (among other things) in their game. So you are definitely wrong by saying they do not have an agreement with MLB HoF!
Agreement for the logo? Sure. The HOF has literally as much say on who gets put in the game as we do though. 11 Hall of famers have been removed from the game since legends were added to DD. Wouldn't happen if the HOF had anything to do with rights. Not to mention at minimum we would have at almost every hall of famer and negro league legend if the hall had a say
You are trying to play me as BooBoo the Fool if you think I'll believe that SDS just paid to flash a logo for the beginning of their game! Their is a lot more that comes with that agreement than a few second flash of that logo!
Could be, but it's not any players, I can tell you that with absolute certainty.
Rights to former Major League Baseball players provided by the Major League Alumni Association and the National Baseball Hall of Fame.
Seems like the HOF does have some say.
I don't think what you get what I'm saying. If there was a blanket deal with anyone besides the MLBPA, each and every member of those organizations would be in the game without question. The fact that that alone is true means the alumni organization and HOF do not cut a deal with SDS for players rights, which the player themself has to sign off of even if they are a part of the alumni association and the HOF. These are not rights holding groups.
-
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@virusts_XBL said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@the_dragon1912 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@dap1234567890 said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@Ericulous1_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
@SaveFarris_PSN said in Is this the last Pujols card we see for a few years?:
A. Mauer's been on the cover (twice!) so he has a prior working relationship directly with SDS.
B. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. It's a whole lot easier to build up demand for a legend if they go away for awhile.
That makes sense. I was just using Mauer as an example since he just came back and we just lost Posey. But your reasoning makes perfect sense. The way people talk about losing players after they retire for several years makes it sound like a policy. Like they are ineligible for 5 years like the HOF.
The loss of players is a policy since the players are no longer a member of the MLBPA and would no longer be licensed for the game through the MLB Players, Inc (. SDS loses the rights to use their name, image, likeness, numbers, nicknames, signatures, playing records, and biographical data (all of that is known as "publicity rights") unless they work it with the former player's agent directly. When they enter the HoF, then the players fall under the license agreement with SDS has with the MLB HoF itself. You can see the image of these associations in the beginning off the game that shows they have agreements with the different associations. The time in between MLBPA and MLB HoF, the players are not represented by an association that is licensed by SDS. So again, the short way of saying this is that it is SDS and MLB policy they are not in the game after they retire!
There is no agreement with the hall of fame and the Hall has no authority to make such a deal. There's over 100 hall of famers not in the game and the HOF is nothing more than a Museum.
If SDS did not have an agreement with the MLB HoF, they would not be able to use their logo (among other things) in their game. So you are definitely wrong by saying they do not have an agreement with MLB HoF!
Agreement for the logo? Sure. The HOF has literally as much say on who gets put in the game as we do though. 11 Hall of famers have been removed from the game since legends were added to DD. Wouldn't happen if the HOF had anything to do with rights. Not to mention at minimum we would have at almost every hall of famer and negro league legend if the hall had a say
You are trying to play me as BooBoo the Fool if you think I'll believe that SDS just paid to flash a logo for the beginning of their game! Their is a lot more that comes with that agreement than a few second flash of that logo!
Could be, but it's not any players, I can tell you that with absolute certainty.
Rights to former Major League Baseball players provided by the Major League Alumni Association and the National Baseball Hall of Fame.
Seems like the HOF does have some say.
I don't think what you get what I'm saying. If there was a blanket deal with anyone besides the MLBPA, each and every member of those organizations would be in the game without question. The fact that that alone is true means the alumni organization and HOF do not cut a deal with SDS for players rights, which the player themself has to sign off of even if they are a part of the alumni association and the HOF. These are not rights holding groups.
You can have licensing rights outside of MLBPA and choose not to use every member. I doubt that every time someone wants to use a player’s likeness they have to get approval. If the player joined the licensing side of things they are allowing their likeness to be used.
-
A admin locked this topic on
