This was mentioned in the thread discussing what Randy Moss' number will be. The following numbers are retired on the Pats: http://www.nfl.com/history/retired-numbers Bruce Armstrong 78 Gino Cappelletti 20 Mike Haynes 40 Steve Nelson 57 John Hannah 73 Jim Lee Hunt 79 Bob Dee 89 Am I the only one who doesn't like retiring numbers? It is a great honor for the player and recognizes great careers, but it really hamstrings teams in the future when assigning available numbers. In 50 years when Tom Brady, Richard Seymour, Troy Brown, Lawrence Maroney, Brandon Meriweather and James Laurinaitis' ( okay maybe a bit optomistic with a couple of these guys) all have their numbers retired, I guess the criteria will be the standard numbering scheme + 100...i.e. WRs can have numbers in the 80s or 180s. I don't want to see players with numbers in the 100s. There has to be a better way to honor players than to remove their numbers from further use.

Maroney gets his number retired? Meriweather gets his number retired? Cmon...one is a 1 year pro and the other is a rookie...

C'mon, I was just having a little fun there. The point is that retiring numbers is a sentimental gesture which causes longterm problem with finding available numbers. There has to be a better way to pay homage to players who had exceptional careers, there are only so many two-digit numbers.

I agree 100%. I don't think any football players should have their numbers retired. There is just not enough numbers to go around given the NFL's positional numbering system, which I am also very much in favor of. I know lots of people would like to see players wear any number they choose, but I think the numbering system helps the viewer to decifer alingments (especially defensive).

Its only a matter of time (hopefully a long time) before the league expands the roster # which will only add to the problem.

The league should allow numbers up to 199, and then add a rule that only veterans with one year of experience and first day draft picks can wear numbers under 100. That way nearly all the players on the field would have two digit numbers (or at least be eligible for one), but there would be none of the crowding that currently exists.

The Patriots have retired 7 numbers. Players may pick from 99 numbers in total. For Patriots players, that means there are 92 numbers left (91 since #56 is not issued). There are only 53 players on a team, which leaves 39 (38) numbers without an owner/retiree. Give me a break.

As pats1 just pointed out, it'd be that easy if it wasn't for the number restrictions. As of right now, Randy Moss has just 4 available numbers to choose from: 11, 14, 80 and 82. Obviously Brown's number will not be issued with the potential for him to return, so that leaves three. A lot of people might be disappointed to see Bledsoe's number go to Moss, so that's down to two now. Obviously there will be more options once we cut down to the 53 but it shouldn't have to be that way. We shouldn't retire numbers to the point that we have exactly the right amount for each player to have a number, then change it all up once the season starts.

According to Wikipedia the Patriots currently have 85 players on their roster. I can imagine us having more than that in the future (we've certainly had more exemptions in the past). This does not include Troy Brown or Junior Seau. This does not factor in positional restrictions on jersey numbers.

Will it really kill Larry Anam to have to share a number with someone? Will it really kill Randy Moss to have to wear #82? The whole thing's pretty ridiculous. A number is a number.

A number is not just a number. The number is an identity. The number is marketing. Number 12! Ocho Cinco! If a number were just a number, then teams would be free to assign them to players as they choose. Instead, if a traded player wishes to retain the number in which his brand is invested, that player must "purchase it" from the player who currently uses that same number. Players care. Fans care. The current system serves neither well.

This is what I wished Ma bell did instead of splitting area codes. Just add an eigth digit and suddenly you have 10 times the number of TN's available (preferably add the digit to the NPX or it would still be the same problem), but I digress.:bricks: