This site is being maintained solely for my own reference, I am no longer trading.
Grading System
With changing technology, etc. I've revamped my own personal grading system. As a result grades have shifted downward. However, whereas a 7 on 1-10 scale previously meant I thought it was crap, a 7 can now still be a solid quality older game based on the new scale.
Re-grading is a slow process, but as I view new games, or convert games over to DVD, I will be creating hyperlinks to 'game pages' with details on the game, networks, announcers, format (DVD or VHS, as well as tape speed, or disk count), additional coverage that may be included, notes on why a game might have the grade it does if it needs explanation about the grade, etc.
Hopefully this will better reflect what you might expect when trading for a certain game.
10 = Is it live? Or is it a recording? This means you would mistake it for being a live showing with excellent reception. Generally flawless digital recordings (DVD masters), or near perfect VHS recordings.... Again, the whole point is these should be as good as the actual live showing or splitting hairs close.
9.5 = Just a step below a 10. It could be 'live' with less than perfect reception. Likely a Master with a minor flaw, maybe very minimal satellite pixelization. Often this is dictated by the quality of the original broadcast. Typically an SP Master that's been converted to DVD without quality loss. Or an SP Master. Some near perfect 1st generation games can also qualify for this.
9.0 = Often an SLP Master, or has some noticable satellite pixelization. Obviously, its not 'live'. A very high quality game, that just isn't near perfect. Most really good 1st generation copies would rate as a "9". Basically as good as I'd realistically hope for in trades.
8.5 = A game that has some quite noticable pixelization. Or a combination of minor flaws. Very watchable. No real issues with it. A quality I'm quite happy with. ... If an older game with older technology can rate an 8.5 then it's about as good as you can hope for for something that's 15-25 years old, in my opinion. ... Some Masters with heavy satellite pixelization may drop its grade down to an 8.5.
8.0 = Very solid, usually a real nice 1st gen., or very high grade 2nd gen., copy. Under my new grading system this isn't a putdown of the quality. For older games, this is a real nice grade. The type that I figure I might be able to upgrade by getting a copy of a "remastered" Master. ... This is a grade that probably equates with what a lot of people consider EX-.
7.5 = A nice solid copy of an older game. Lacks some sharpness, without being blurry. Maybe very sharp, with a little color bleed or ghosting around graphics. Could be limited by the original Master source, especially on older games. ... This is good for an older game. For a recent game, well, its probably less than I'd like. ... Probably listed as EX- on some liberal grading systems. More likely a VG+ on what I'd say was a more accurate grading scale.
7.0 = Disappointing quality for anything from the last 10-15 years. For older games, this may be acceptable. Lacking some sharpness on most shots generally. Faces starting to wash out. Can still be very watchable for older games. ... But maybe there's better quality around, so you may want to search further for a better version of the game.
6.5 = For older games, this has some very noticable flaws. In need of an upgrade... For something recent? Why bother? It's well below standards and badly needs UPGRADING. On some liberal grading scales this may be listed as VG or VG-.
6.0 or below = That sound you heard was me grumbling about the quality of this game. And I'd advise against trading for this game because you should want better than this quality. Generally the only point of having this game, for me, is that it was an older game that I really wanted. ... If its a recent game, then I'd say it was a waste of media. This is something that some would describe as VG-.
Naturally, grading is subjective. So there may be some disagreement on grades I give games. And please don't take offense if I grade a game I get from you, lower than you might. That doesn't mean I'm displeased with the quality. (If I was I'd say something.)
Other factors besides pixelization, sharpness, color, sound, etc can affect grades as well, such as sloppy editing, missing plays, coming out of a commercial edit on 3rd down, etc.
Many grades are lowered because of the 'dropped frame/slowing' effect that occurs when disks are burned in Flex Mode. This is an effect that makes players appear to hesitate briefly before resuming normal speed, and frequently appears 2-3 times per minute.
With the except of older ('70s) or rare games, I basically toss games with this effect in the trash as they have the same effect of a dull toothache after any period of watching... it may not be horribly painful, but it will not go away and gradually wears on the nerves until you want to yank out the tooth... in this case the DVD, which thankfully can be done, and dropped in the garbage.... In short DVDs burned in Flex Mode (as opposed to captured to a hard drive in Flex Mode) are generally worthless junk, and only being a very old or very rare game can make it worth hanging onto... '80s and '90s games with this effect are completely unacceptable IMO.
NFL '05
NFL '04
NFL '03
NFL '02
NFL '01
NFL '00
NFL '99
NFL '98
NFL '97
NFL Regular Season 1970-'96
NFL Post-Season
College '09
College '08
College '07
College '06
College '05
College '04
College '03
College '02
College '01
College '00
College '99
College '98
College '97
College Football 1968-'96
High School Football
Other Pro Football
Baseball
Hockey
Auto Racing
NBA Games
Misc. Non-Game Programs