Saturday, August 19, 2017


The next super-star to get the 1975 “In Action” treatment is “Charlie Hustle” Pete Rose, who was tearing up the league for a while before this card would have seen the light of day:

Rose already had a Rookie of the Year and MVP Award under his belt as well as three batting titles, and was just about to go on a lead the “Big Red Machine” to consecutive World Series wins in 1975 and 1976.
During the mid-70’s he was baseball royalty, on baseballs most vaunted team, a team that had future Hall of Fame members Johnny Bench, Joe Morgan, and Tony Perez.
Of course, he would go on to play another 11 years, retiring as baseball’s all-time hit king as well as the all-time leader in games played, plate appearances and at-bats over his 24-year career.
I'm not even going to get into that "other stuff" since for me, that has no basis on keeping him out of the Hall. Just my opinion, but if Rose isn't in the Hall of Fame representing the 1970's, the "Player of the Decade", then it's all a joke.


  1. Agree. Rose should be in the Hall.

  2. On the field as a player = Hall of Fame. As a manager and off the field, not so much...

  3. Pete Rose was the greatest player I ever saw in person and there is no valid hall of fame without him in

  4. If these '75 Topps In Action cards were real, I wonder how they would have been numbered. Would they have come immediately after the regular card, as in the '72 set, or would they have been lumped together sequentially, like the '75 MVP subset? My guess would be the latter. If I'm not mistaken that's what Topps did with its '72 football set -- and they were part of the last series.

    1. I'd put them in the set just like they did for the '72 set, just seems fitting.

  5. I've got mixed feelings on the HOF bit, but gambling is pretty much the Cardinal Sin of baseball, as a player, manager, or both.



Everything baseball: cards, events, history and more.