Night Owl Cards

Here is a little multiple choice question for you. When I completed the 1982 Topps set a few days ago, my first thought was: A. I've completed all Topps flagship sets between 1974-86! B. I don't have to buy any more binders -- the family's storage crisis is over! C. Hockey sticks! Hockey sticks! Hockey sticks! D. I can update the mustache champion post! Those who answered "D" know me to a frightening degree. Back in November, when I tried to determine which set had the greatest percentage of players with mustaches , I had it narrowed down fairly well: sets from the 1970s and 1980s. But I had to confine it to only sets that I have completed, because searching online for cards I don't have for projects such as these gets time-consuming and messy. So all of the pertinent Topps sets between 1974 and 1989 were included, except one. That one was 1982 because I hadn't completed it yet. I went ahead and listed the top five mustache sets anyway ...

I'm not sure how this is going to go. Do collectors treat Score with the same reverence and devotion as Topps, Upper Deck and even Fleer? I guess I'll find out. Score does have one thing going for it. For an 11-year period, Score was the card set of the people. Kids could buy a rack pack with their allowance money. Even college students like me at the time -- who spent most of their money on textbooks they would never use again -- could throw some change at Score. It was cheap, it was plentiful, it was pleasing. Score was simple, often colorful, and included most of your favorite players. The backs were wordy, but packed with information. Best of all, you could land a bunch of cards in a single purchase. This wasn't Upper Deck or Pinnacle. Score never got the memo that cards were suddenly an investment. And thank goodness it didn't. However, there is a certain sameness to Score sets from year to year. In terms of appreciation for individual sets, is there r...