- Joined
- Mar 27, 2008
- Messages
- 30,865
- Reaction score
- 29,555
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.
I don’t think they’ve issued numbers to any of the rookies, just Vets.
Here are the more notable ones, including guys who are switching numbers:
Harmon - 21
JMAC - 30
Shelton -71
Matthews - 80
Niklas - 86
Britt - 88
Clayborne - 94
Price said Harmon is #22. It’s weird he would change his number after all of these years.
Very generous of him!Price said Harmon is #22. It’s weird he would change his number after all of these years.
Kiss of death from the roster for Mccarron.Besides the new vets getting their numbers, looks like a few guys from last year's team switched jersey numbers.
Britt from 85 to 88
Harmon from 30 to 21
King from 72 to 65
Ferentz from 64 to 66
Davis from 42 to 58
McCarron from 84 to 17.
Teams shouldn’t retire too many jersey #’s, it lessens the value of having your own number retired.(rant on)
Here's one thing I don't get... why doesn't the NFL go to three-digit jersey numbers?
It would allow a lot more teams to retire jerseys. And you can't make the argument that 3 digits won't fit on the shirt...
...when you can fit a 12-letter name on there.
(rant off... carry on)
Besides the new vets getting their numbers, looks like a few guys from last year's team switched jersey numbers.
Britt from 85 to 88
Harmon from 30 to 21
King from 72 to 65
Ferentz from 64 to 66
Davis from 42 to 58
McCarron from 84 to 17.
Teams shouldn’t retire too many jersey #’s, it lessens the value of having your own number retired.
Number retirements should only be for the best of the best, IMO. No team should have more than 10 retired numbers.
Davis from 42 to 58?
I have Jomal Wiltz as #42 and Keionta Davis as #51.
Teams shouldn’t retire too many jersey #’s, it lessens the value of having your own number retired.
Number retirements should only be for the best of the best, IMO. No team should have more than 10 retired numbers.
That’s the thing: whose #’s do you unretire? Bob Dee would make sense, but that would really get the 1960 mob riled up.I think it's funny how many numbers the Patriots retired before they even won a Super Bowl. I have to assume some (not all, especially Hannah/Armstrong) of those players aren't as good as some guys who played in more modern times and won't get their numbers retired.
That’s the thing: whose #’s do you unretire? Bob Dee would make sense, but that would really get the 1960 mob riled up.
IMO, the only numbers that should get retired are the greatest of the greats.I think all you can say is it's a cautionary tale for new franchises not to lower their standards just to look storied and historic.
IMO, the only numbers that should get retired are the greatest of the greats.
Waiting for what number Sony Michel gets. I want to get his jersey or Wynn.