The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Remember all the guff Spurrier went through last year about handing out jersey numbers that hadn't been used for years out of respect for certain players who did incredible things while wearing those numbers ? Well, Gibbs is back. He says that he's got twelve numbers that aren't "retired" ( just 'unused'), and it's becoming a problem. See the link for Joe's solution.
All I can say is, there is only one #81 Washington Redskin for me. I would not like to see this number go into circulation again.
http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=1240

tcwest10 is there not a redskin hall of fame??#81 needs to be only seen on one person art himself!!!!!thats the only # that should not be handed out.REDSKINZ4EVER!!!!

Nobody can take #28 either. I'd get so unbelievably pissed if I saw anyone other than Darrell wearing 28.

we had this conversation on the board about six months ago.... i'll see if i can find the thread.
but i don't believe in retiring numbers. who gives a rats . honor the player, not the number. i think people get way too sentimental over a bunch of BS like this....just play football. i didn't even mind the fact that shane matthews wanted number 9. he wore it his whole career, but because "this other great redskins QB" wore it, he wasn't allowed to. whatever. i'll see if i can find that thread now.

here it is.
http://www.thehogs.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1700&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0i made a boo boo in here somewhere on some info.....see if you can find it.

Easy fix folks - just add a friggin digit. Hell, most of the OL & DL can easily fit those numbers on their backs/fronts.

"Who made that great block - I think it was #162 - Stablansky" Piece of Cake.

Just don't touch #43 - actually Portis can have it if he does it justice.

I like Gibbs attitude about this, I mean with respect if a retired player is called by a new player, I cannot see them saying no! I just love Gibbs take on everything better then Spurrier's. Spurrier would be saying "Umm I don't know what we are gonna do!"

My assertion is, and will remain, that we can afford to retire a few numbers for the sake of permanently honoring the player that made that number memorable. I'm sure there are those who feel the same about, say, James Jenkins (#88) and feel that his nine or ten year tenure as a TE in our system demands his number be retired.
Still, a case for retiring the number of Monk, Green, Riggo,etc. can be made. I can do it, too. Try me.
T-6, we've gone down this road before, and you made me think hard the last time. No such luck, this time around. I firmly believe that Monk should have his number remain only his for good. It's enough that the HOF is dissing him. This "reissue" would be, IMHO, the final insult. Sometimes, there's more to the game than just what goes on in the field. You have to honor your heavies; These are the standard-setters.
Retiring their numbers would be a good way to do it.

tc, we'll just have to agree to disagree again. i could see hanging the "greats" jersey's at redskins park, but i still don't see the significance in taking a number out of circulation.

some of the players in question have stated that they not only didn't mind seeing their numbers worn - they would want to see someone lighting it up in their old number - I think it is a heritage thing - pass it along to a worthy heir so to speak.

I agree with T-6 here - we need to hang their shirts with pride in vaccuum packed cases with the names properly emblazoned... and then make sure who is getting their number on the field and that they are going to carry that number in pride...

In fact - use it like Notre Dame uses the golden helmets - do an investiture like knights with older swords from fallen knights... "Wear this in pride, do not fail its long standing lineage"

Talk about playing up to an image

SFR, agreed.
Hey newbie, don't let us down!!!!! thats greens #28 you're wearing!!!

Yeah, I've never been a bif fan of retiring numbers...

Maybe in baseball where numbers have nothing to do with position, but in football you can't retire a WR's number, there's only 10 to begin with!

can you imagine a solemn ceremony in which the lineage was read for a particular jersey... and then the player is given it?

Can you imagine the pride on the field when they light the game up?

Who would want to sully Art Monk's #? Who would want to let Larry Brown down? or Jacoby, Grant, Butz, Green, Jurgensen...?

It might start as a silly tradition now, but it could very easily become a rite of passage that would become very important to players in later classes as time wore on. Make sure that you only allow the best of the best to wear a particular jersey # - make them WANT to work so hard to attain that #. Hold that number up at the beginning of every camp and tell them that this is what they are striving to become - the man who is WORTHY of wearing that number... show film of the people who have worn it. Make it the biggest honor, the best parking place, lockers together in a position of honor... etc.

See what I mean? It gives ya goosebumps.

I remember a coach talking about fining players who made millions 5 bucks or giving the best player pizza and watching them perform even better because of those little intangibles. Think this isn't a much bigger thing?

Just ask a player who they idolized as a football player growing up - who did LA model himself after since he was a little kid?

Skinsfan55 wrote:Yeah, I've never been a bif fan of retiring numbers...

Maybe in baseball where numbers have nothing to do with position, but in football you can't retire a WR's number, there's only 10 to begin with!

Whether it's Baseball or Football it's getting really annoying! The Yankees have probably more retired #'s then anyone in any sport. When 1-10 is pretty much gone (Jeter is going to be added), plus a bunch of others, it just gets played out. A # (and Jersey) can be hung in anyones honor, at the same time someone can wear it. I don't think anyone would confuse Babe Ruth or forget about him because a rookie wears his # now.

The only # that shouldn't be handed out is 28, not only is Green a legend, but he wore it for 20 years. He's what the Redskins are all about. He's 1 of the reason why I became a fan. My #1 reason(s) is that whether you are a Redskins fan or not, you know who Green is, you know what he's about, you know what he means to the game and you know he came from the greatest team in the world!

Why not, if they are so confident that Taylor will succeed so well give him Darrell's #?

Let him write the next great chapter in the lineage so that when it gets given to the next kid after Taylor, the # means more... and so on. After a while it'll be like being given a Notre Dame helmet... the pride is huge.

Why not engender that pride on the team? Remember how most of us HATE, LOATHE, DESPISE the butt smacking, hand shaking, trading laughs on the field that has been going on the last decade and some on our field? Players trading pleasantries on the field with the opposition?

Shouldn't they be brooding, proud and mean on the field, looking to not only win but to plow that opponent into the turf? Shouldn't they see the hallowed past and want to assume the mantle with the pride of the ages?

I would hand someone a still beating heart of my opponent in order to wear a jersey worn by my idols... say Ken Harvey's since I am an ex linebacker.

Make it mean more than the other team's friendship - make it a huge tradition. Wanna watch them make it all business and mean, bad business? Trust me - it would work.

Nope, not me. I have a hard place that won't budge on this issue. Monk deserves to have his number retired. No one will have to worry about "sullying" anything if the opportunity isn't there. Same with Riggo. There's a poll out on the WashPost site right now addressing this very issue. Theismann is behind a little, but over two thirds of the people surveyed say that Monk's number ought to be retired.
I don't want goosebumps. I want that number to be put away, for good.
I will agree to disagree, but I cannot (will not) play Devil's advocate here. It's too soft a spot for me.
I feel like they're waiting to see if he ever gets in to Canton before they make a move. Hey, who isn't waiting ? Still, leave the number be. Put #7 back into circulation. I couldn't care less what Mr. Cathy Lee "Look At Me !") Crosby has to say about it.
Many other franchises honor their greats in this manner.
Really, people. You don't necessarily have to go the heroic route as Tillman did to have your team retire your number; sometimes, playing great football is enough.

i still don't think numbers are that big of a deal. i agree monk should be in canton, but not his number. if monk makes canton, what does his number mean at that point? they are honoring "art monk" not "#81" redskins....... after all, he didn't spend his ENTIRE career with us.... not his fault, but still......

Many other franchises honor their greats in this manner.

i think they are living in the past too. i'm not talking about the skins alone here.

My thoughts on some of the unused numbers:

7 - put it back in circulation - 4 or 5 good years does not a retired number make!
9 - retire it! Sonny was the man
27 - unsure - Brad Edwards already wore this one and he wasn't Ken Houston by any means
28 - retire it - 20 years with one team is more than enough reason, let alone it being Darrell
33 - officially retired, and well done.
42 - retire it - 13 years and the hall of fame qualifies
43 - put it back in circulation - Larry Brown was a great football player for a few years, but by 1974 (his 6th year and my first year watching football) he was done
44 - retire it - Riggo had 5 great years, 2 other good ones, other years he was misused, and his TD run in SB XVII remains my favorite Redskin moment.
65(is this on the list?) - retire it - many many great years by Butz
81 - retire it - Art should be in the HOF but he didn't live for the pub, but he really should be in there.

What are other out of ciruclation numbers?

davef wrote:My thoughts on some of the unused numbers:

7 - put it back in circulation - 4 or 5 good years does not a retired number make!
9 - retire it! Sonny was the man
27 - unsure - Brad Edwards already wore this one and he wasn't Ken Houston by any means
28 - retire it - 20 years with one team is more than enough reason, let alone it being Darrell
33 - officially retired, and well done.
42 - retire it - 13 years and the hall of fame qualifies
43 - put it back in circulation - Larry Brown was a great football player for a few years, but by 1974 (his 6th year and my first year watching football) he was done
44 - retire it - Riggo had 5 great years, 2 other good ones, other years he was misused, and his TD run in SB XVII remains my favorite Redskin moment.
65(is this on the list?) - retire it - many many great years by Butz
81 - retire it - Art should be in the HOF but he didn't live for the pub, but he really should be in there.

What are other out of ciruclation numbers?

I agree with all but 43... Larry Brown's number should be retired along with 81,28,9,44, if that is the policy. But Isay if there is a shortage of numbers then we should issue them..I know the people here won't for get Brown or Monk,Green,Sonny,& Riggins We will always honor them and be thankful for the memories....the key is the player that wear these numbers MOST feel the same about them as we do

davef,

If you only saw Larry Brown in his final year (after Allen ran him in the ground), then that is really a shame.

The man obviously made an impression on me and other posters. Never saw a runner give it up on every play like LB, he never took a play off even when he literally was picked up and carried back to the huddle by his teammates.

I don't have to have his number retired for him to be in my Hall of Fame, but it sure would be nice for him and his family.

NC, it is indeed a shame I never saw Brown at his peak. I got the distinct feeling he had been overused, and without seeing them live, I think it's a fair statement that the early to mid '70s Redskins O-lines did not serve him true justice... doesn't change my feeling on that number, but I totally respect your opinion.

Theismann, on the other hand, played with the Redskins for 12 years and had 4 very good years as a QB IMO (1979,1982, 1983, and 1984). 1980 and 1981 were OK too, but I think Kilmer had as many good years.. and nobody is clamoring to retire 17.

I think it is simple. Retire only a few numbers, mostly former Skins, who played the majority of their careers in DC and have been admitted to the HOF (or are shoe-ins for the HOF, like Green). Then Snyder can grant ownership of that number to the player. So, if Sean Taylor wants #28, he can go ask Darrell in person. If Darrell wants him to wear it, its his number to give away. Like Tatum Bell who was just drafted by the Broncos asked for #7. Shanahan said, thats John Elways number, you have to ask him. John Elway said, sure, go out, run for 2,000 yards and score 25 TD's this season and #7 is all yours! That's how it should be! IMHO

There's clearly a place for retired numbers for every pro team. The reason why it gets discussed is that teams go jump the gun and retire numbers before it's really clear that said player deserves the honor. Look at the Celtics. They're going to have to start issuing decimals at the rate they're retiring numbers. Cornbread Maxwell? Get real.

In addition to 33, the Redskins should retire 9, 42 and 44, with 28 and 81 the next in line.

7, 43, 49 and 65 are tough calls -- but don't quite reach the same level of achievement.

hailskins666 wrote:we had this conversation on the board about six months ago.... i'll see if i can find the thread.
but i don't believe in retiring numbers. who gives a rats . honor the player, not the number. i think people get way too sentimental over a bunch of BS like this....just play football. i didn't even mind the fact that shane matthews wanted number 9. he wore it his whole career, but because "this other great redskins QB" wore it, he wasn't allowed to. whatever. i'll see if i can find that thread now.

i'm with you brother