So what's the deal with the retired numbers?

[Joey007]

I think the only numbers that should ever be retired are players who were among the greatest of the greatest. Very few deserve the distinction.

IMO, the only numbers should be 73, and 12. Possibly 87 if Gronk's career continues.

 

[neuronet]

Nobody is going to wear #12 for a very, very, very long time.

Garrappalo next year.

 

[RayClay]

Regarding retired numbers...Numbers do not tell the whole story. Anybody who really wants to consider themself a fan of the team will learn and appreciate why each of those guys had their number retired, and not make deceiving statistical comparisons between eras. At this point, retiring 12, and only 12, makes sense.

As for the Hall, Super Bowl participation shouldn't be a significant factor; if so then you'd need to include the '76 team. To close out this decade, the just thing will be to induct the rest of those glaring omissions from the 70's. Ideally, worthy players from the 80's and 90's will make it and then we can move on to Seymour, Vrabel, Welker, etc.

No, Jim Lee Hunt having his number retired while Houston Antwine had to wait until death to get into HOF never made any sense. There were two starting DTs on the all AFL team in the PF HOF. Antwine was one, Hunt wasn't considered far as I know. All four linemen were great, but Hunt wasn't the standout.

 

[bormio]

Garrappalo next year.

Is #12 open on the Browns?

 

[Biffins]

Until they start allowing uniform numbers in triple digits, retiring any more numbers is pretty unworkable. Here you have a sport with 53 players (90 for training camp) and a finite set of 99 (minus the retired ones) to distribute among them. In camp, they're already doubling up players on the same number between offense and defense. What happens when only 52 numbers are left? You stop retiring and start un-retiring? We already have Halls of Fame to honor the best. Why do we need to retire numbers too? I can see doing it in basketball, but not a sport with so many players requiring numbers.

So you're saying 12 shouldn't be retired?

 

[Biffins]

If Steve Nelson's number is unretired I may have to change my screen name.

Can you explain to me why Nelson's number was retired but not Tippett's?

 

[Biffins]

I don't think the Patriots officially retire numbers.

This is the list of our retired numbers. So yes we do.

Gino Cappelletti 20 New England Patriots 1960—70
Mike Haynes 40 New England Patriots 1976—82
Steve Nelson 57 New England Patriots 1974—87
John Hannah 73 New England Patriots 1973—85
Bruce Armstrong 78 New England Patriots 1987—2000
Jim Lee Hunt 79 New England Patriots 1960—70
Bob Dee 89 New England Patriots 1960—67

 

[Biffins]

I think they need to un-retire some if not all of the numbers as those numbers should be in use. Being inducted into the Patriots HOF is the new equivalent of getting a retired number. The only retired number should really be #12.

Then why did they retire Armstrong's number in 2000 AFTER Pats HoF was already formed in 1991 and active. All other numbers were retired before they formed Pats HoF.

There seems to be no consistency.

 

[Biffins]

Boy, you guys are really going out on a limb saying Brady's number will be retired. Bold take.

Brady is easy.

My question was whether Gronkowski, Wilfork, Mankins, Seymour, Law and others will have their #s retired and if not how come we have so many retired numbers of players inferior to this lot, like Bob Dee and Jim Lee Hunt etc.

 

[jah]

Brady is easy.

My question was whether Gronkowski, Wilfork, Mankins, Seymour, Law and others will have their #s retired and if not how come we have so many retired numbers of players inferior to this lot, like Bob Dee and Jim Lee Hunt etc.

Wilfork, Mankins, Seymour, and Law's ships have all sailed, with their numbers having been reassigned almost immediately after their departures.

I think the answer to the bold part of your post is that the standard for legendary Patriots players has apparently skyrocketed. Although when you look at recent history, that sounds about right. Yes, I am well aware this wasn't a joke franchise prior to 2001, but it sure wasn't a perennial powerhouse.

 

[Biffins]

Wilfork, Mankins, Seymour, and Law's ships have all sailed, with their numbers having been reassigned almost immediately after their departures.

I think the answer to the bold part of your post is that the standard for legendary Patriots players has apparently skyrocketed. Although when you look at recent history, that sounds about right. Yes, I am well aware this wasn't a joke franchise prior to 2001, but it sure wasn't a perennial powerhouse.

Do you think they'll un-retire some numbers or is that too problematic?

The last retired number was Armstrong and that happened in 2000.

Do you think they are any players, besides Brady, who are superior to Armstrong that have played for Pats since Armstrong retired?

 

[RobertWeathers]

Do you think they'll un-retire some numbers or is that too problematic?

The last retired number was Armstrong and that happened in 2000.

Do you think they are any players, besides Brady, who are superior to Armstrong that have played for Pats since Armstrong retired?

I can think of 10 easy and I love what #78 did in a NEP uniform. To play at a high level for ****ty teams 80% of his games demands respect.

It is what it is.

 

[jmt57]

Can you explain to me why Nelson's number was retired but not Tippett's?

You would have to ask Bob Kraft that question.


But if you saw Steve Nelson play and leadership it is highly doubtful you would implicitly disparage him.


For right now it is not an issue. As mentioned in the original post, the retiring of numbers was probably a well intentioned but poorly planned concept that was made obsolete with the creation of the Patriots Hall of Fame. The end result is, as previously noted in multiple examples, oddities and hypocrisies in regards to which numbers are (and are not) retired.

Duplicate numbers in training camp is mandatory throughout the NFL due to 90-man rosters. If and when it becomes a problem with 53-man rosters the team can make decisions then.

 

[jah]

Do you think they'll un-retire some numbers or is that too problematic?

The last retired number was Armstrong and that happened in 2000.

Do you think they are any players, besides Brady, who are superior to Armstrong that have played for Pats since Armstrong retired?

I've never heard of an NFL team unretiring numbers, although other posters in this thread say it has happened.

I do not think retiring numbers is just a matter of how good a player was. I'd imagine loyalty, length of team tenure, relationship with fanbase, and place in team history are all just as important.

 

[jah]

Can you explain to me why Nelson's number was retired but not Tippett's?

You would have to ask Bob Kraft that question.


But if you saw Steve Nelson play it is highly doubtful you would implicitly disparage him.

Just FYI, Tippett's number IS retired. When was the last time we saw #56 on the Pats?

 

[aluminum seats]

Brady is easy.

My question was whether Gronkowski, Wilfork, Mankins, Seymour, Law and others will have their #s retired and if not how come we have so many retired numbers of players inferior to this lot, like Bob Dee and Jim Lee Hunt etc.

I know, I was joking with some of the other posters talking about number 12, not your original post.

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

No, Jim Lee Hunt having his number retired while Houston Antwine had to wait until death to get into HOF never made any sense. There were two starting DTs on the all AFL team in the PF HOF. Antwine was one, Hunt wasn't considered far as I know. All four linemen were great, but Hunt wasn't the standout.

Lee and Hunt were not chopped liver.

Bottom line: the whole thing - like accepting Orthwein's insulting makeover, and accepting Goodell's insane ruling in '07 - makes no sense at all.

Examples of what a stand-up, hands-on owner could have done or said:

1993: "Wreck the best logo and uniforms in sports? Over my dead body."

2007: "Coach Belichick is being diplomatic and deferring to authority. I have no such restrictions. This whole thing is 100% bullsh*t. That's the fact."

2008: "This whole system of election is flawed. I am hereby exercising my authority as owner to see Jon Morris, Houston Antwine, Jim Nance, Sam Cunningham and Julius Adams inducted into the team's Hall of Fame in 2009."

 

[TheFlyingWedge]

The Pittsburgh Steelers have twenty retired numbers. For right now it is not an issue.

List of National Football League retired numbers - Wikipedia
On Wikipedia, it says the Steelers only have 2 and that the Bears have the most with 14. Also, someone mentioned that Tippett's number is retired. While it looks like the number has been out of circulation for a long time, it's not mentioned as being "officially" retired. Quite puzzling...

 

[jmt57]

List of National Football League retired numbers - Wikipedia
On Wikipedia, it says the Steelers only have 2 and that the Bears have the most with 14. Also, someone mentioned that Tippett's number is retired. While it looks like the number has been out of circulation for a long time, it's not mentioned as being "officially" retired. Quite puzzling...

My bad, I was looking at something else.

Regardless, the point stands. Although there are what appear to be hypocrisies in regards to which numbers are (and are not) retired, I fail to see this as being a critical issue. Unretiring a number would be a far more questionable decision than 'why is X retired but Y is not'.

There are still plenty of uniform numbers available to field a 53-man roster, and the Hall in Foxboro is available to honor any and all worthy Patriot players going forward.

 

[brdmaverick]

Whether official or not, no one will ever wear #12.

After all, even if wasn't officially retired would anyone in their right mind want to be the next guy to wear it?