Friday, May 27, 2016

Autographs: 1969 vs. 2016

Inspired by a comment on yesterday's post, I thought I'd compare the autographs of the 1969 Cubs with the 2016 team.

I don't want this to come off as a crotchety old man yelling "you kids get off my lawn" post, but...

You can probably guess how this will turn out.

I'm using the 1971 cards for the '69 Cubs since the cards from 1969 didn't include autographs.  Heritage 2016 gives us a look a the current Cubs signatures.












The autographs from 40 years ago have the players writing out each letter, legibly.

The current players are mostly a big sloppy capital letter and then a squiggly line.

The 1969 team is good signatures with a bad finish to the season.

The 2016 is the opposite with the signatures...and hopefully will finish the season opposite, too!


  1. Just to play devil's advocate... Penmanship is nowhere near the priority of schools that it was when the 1969 Cubs were growing up. I would also think that current players sign their names a lot more, between card manufacturers, shows, and people who show up at a game with a stack of 10 items to sign.

    At any rate, my own signature is largely illegible so I certainly can't throw stones at these guys.

  2. Yeah, but you'd think that when "autographing" a card for mass publication, they could spare the few extra seconds.

    Like I said in the previous post: a lazy, scribbled mess.

  3. Great Post, Great Observation, I believe the devil's advocate is correct, from a sociological standpoint, I believe this would make a great case study of the evolving human nature. No one writes out anything anymore, we type it out on the computer.