A Rookie Card by Any Other Name

 If you casually follow the hobby, you have a general idea of what a rookie card is.  My guess is that it generally follows these rules:

First major set release card of the player

At least that's how it started.  We all generally agreed that minor league cards don't count, and same with weird sets like Donruss The Rookies.  Traded/Update cards complicated things, and at some point we let them through.  Then Bowman came and just decided it was going to have all the rookies and we tired of that.  We made rules and had an awkward few years where we had RCs and (RC)s, and Bowman played nice and moved prospects to subsets.  

Still difficult though.  I mean I pulled a Wander Franco Bowman Prospect card last year, and was super ecstatic, but really its his 3rd Prospect card after 2019 and 2020.  If you want his RC, you'll have to wait until 2022 even though he played in 2021...unless chaos arrives.

Wouldn't you know, but Bowman is the instigator again.  In their 2021 Bowman's Best set, Wander and all the prospects were part of the base set instead of an insert set.  This set off all sorts of chaos and skyrocketing eBay prices.  All because Wander's card number was 51 instead of  BP1.  

I don't fault Beckett for establishing their RC rules and following them here, but obviously we have some weird problem when this sets off a cascade of issues in the future that no one will like, such as:

No Wander Franco rookies in 2022

No Spencer Torkelson and others RCs whenever they arrive

A super spike of cost for one set (2021 Bowman's Best)

The prevailing comment online has been, "Collect what you want", but its not that simple.  One of the most important jobs of the leaders in the hobby (including Topps and Beckett) is to protect the small guys and often that means simplifying things. I'm at a card show and I pull a Josh Willingham rookie card and get excited, only to find out his "Rookie Card" was 3 years early.  Ebay is loaded with goofy listings of "Rookie Cards" that are from subsets that say rookie, but really aren't.  The pros can avoid the scams but those who don't have the time to research everything get burned.  

Let's exam Derek Jeter quickly.  Beckett lists (and the general consensus) is that his 1993 Topps is his rookie card. However...

1992 Upper Deck Minors (or 1992 Classic Draft Picks) were his actual first cards...

1995 was his first MLB at bats, so maybe 1995 Topps...

1996 he was a rookie and won Rookie of the Year, so maybe 1996 Topps?

So, what is is that we want?  I can't  speak for others, but I disliked the idea of one prospecting set (Bowman) just taking all the rookie cards and making us work to find this new rookies card from 4 years ago.  I think the RC on the card rules worked, and I think my simple solution is for Beckett to follow that standard.  I'm not worried about the market, because the market always takes care of itself, usually at the expense of the little guy.  Collect what you want, but please make it simple for us to keep doing so.