Born on today's date, Cal McLish.
The only card he would never sign; for some reason.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- Contrary Guy
- Seasoned Midwesterner who's interests include baseball, collectibles, Detroit Tigers, heavy music including gothic and symphonic metal, history and offering unsolicited social and political commentary. Corecontrarian@gmail Twitter.com/corecontrarian
Subscribe Now: standard
My Blog List
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Thanks for the ride2 years ago
-
2022 Rockies Want List2 years ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Quick Update6 years ago
-
-
Shutting Her Down, BUT WAIT!7 years ago
-
-
I’ll Buy That for a Dollar!8 years ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2 comments:
Not exactly a flattering shot. You have to wonder why they would use that one, unless it was the only shot they had.
These "disaster" type shots in the early 60's appear to be more common than you would think.
Was film that expensive that they limited their photographers to one shot?
Well now that I think about it in the days before extensive airbrushing, I think every player got at least one hatless shot in case of a trade so I think they took at least two photos.
Could you imagine asking Willie Mays in the 1960's for a hatless shot?
"Just in case of a trade, Willie!"
Post a Comment