Retired Numbers

[Smidgeon]

So it seems that the Packers have historically retired one offensive and one defensive player's number from each championship era (once Favre gets his retired).

With the Packers being recent Super Bowl champs, who will end up on the wall from this championship era? Or does more of the story have to be written before that will be determined?

[Smidgeon]

I for one think the offensive player will be easy to choose, but the defensive player could be a lot more difficult simply because of all the candidates.

[red]

ours guys are so damn young that its almost impossible to know at this point

i think a-rod needs a nice long career at about the same level he's been playing at and he could go up on the wall. maybe dd? he's a great team leader and owns a lot of team records. maybe jennings breaks all those records? maybe finley becomes the greatest TE of all time?

on the other side of the ball woodson could be the guy, he's gonna be in the real hall of fame when its all said and done, and he'll be going in because of what he did as a packer. maybe tramon continues his amazing run? or collins? or i'd say it would be a safe bet to put money on mathews to have an incredible career and end up with the number retired

[HarveyWallbangers]

All of the retired numbers are for Pro Football Hall of Famers. Not just Hall of Famers, but legends. That rules out most guys--including Driver, Tramon, and Collins.

Offense: I think the only candidate is Rodgers. Who knows... maybe Jennings and Finley will be Hall of Famers when it's all said and done, but I have a hard time believing they'll be legends.

Defense: Two candidates - Woodson and Matthews.

If it happens, the odds are Rodgers and Woodson.

[Smidgeon]

All of the retired numbers are for Pro Football Hall of Famers. Not just Hall of Famers, but legends. That rules out most guys--including Driver, Tramon, and Collins.

Offense: I think the only candidate is Rodgers. Who knows... maybe Jennings and Finley will be Hall of Famers when it's all said and done, but I have a hard time believing they'll be legends.

Defense: Two candidates - Woodson and Matthews.

If it happens, the odds are Rodgers and Woodson.

That's what I was leaning towards too. And I also agree with Red. The team is mostly so young. The stories are still being written.

[KYPack]

I might be a voice in the wilderness, but I don't think 4 gets retired. At least not until the current regime leaves GB. That will probably happen within 4-5 years. So we might see a change, but as long as Ted is here, the retiring of a number between 3 and 5 will not happen.

There is enough bad blood from both sides to prevent any number retirement going on in that regard.

[Smidgeon]

I don't necessarily disagree. But I believe the number will be retired one day, even if it's after TT leaves. I think it's inevitable, regardless of the delay.

[woodbuck27]

All of the retired numbers are for Pro Football Hall of Famers. Not just Hall of Famers, but legends. That rules out most guys--including Driver, Tramon, and Collins.

Offense: I think the only candidate is Rodgers. Who knows... maybe Jennings and Finley will be Hall of Famers when it's all said and done, but I have a hard time believing they'll be legends.

Defense: Two candidates - Woodson and Matthews.

If it happens, the odds are Rodgers and Woodson.

Collins is making some inroads.

[woodbuck27]

I don't necessarily disagree. But I believe the number will be retired one day, even if it's after TT leaves. I think it's inevitable, regardless of the delay.

That's a certainty and sooner than a lot imagine.

[Smidgeon]

That's a certainty and sooner than a lot imagine.

That TT leaves? He just signed a 4 year extension. He's signed through 2015. How is that sooner than a lot imagine?

[KYPack]

So it seems that the Packers have historically retired one offensive and one defensive player's number from each championship era (once Favre gets his retired).

With the Packers being recent Super Bowl champs, who will end up on the wall from this championship era? Or does more of the story have to be written before that will be determined?

Thought we'd look at another angle to this question.

Here's the retired numbers:


1) 3 - Tony Canadeo
2) 14 - Don Hutson
3) 15 - Bart Starr
4) 66 - Ray Nitschke
5) 92 - Reggie White

There really haven't been an offensive and defensive player chosen to have their number retired from each of the championship eras. There's not really a defensive player from the Lambeau era. (of course, Hutson and Canadeo played both ways at times)

What was common from each candidate prior to Reggie was lifetime Packer who bled Green and gold. There was some opposition to Reggie when his number was proposed. He started with another team and finished the same. Reggie also manged to say a few rude things at the door before he left Green Bay. I think the next number that might be retired is #1. That was Curly Lambeau's playing number. Lambeau wasn't a Packer when he quit, but he was the founder and all that.

The Packers could quite possibly close the books on retiring another number or wait 20 years or so before doing so.

I think that 4 guy allowed to much purple blood to flow into his veins to ever get his number retired by the Pack.

[Tarlam!]

It would be no surprise to me if they didn't retire #4 at all, but he's already been given the offer once, right. How do you take that back? I think it would be a mistake to do it too soon anyway. If they do it until a lot of water flows under every bridge in WI, I'd say he'd get more boos than cheers at the ceremony. Personally, I would boycott the ceremony and head off into the vendors area. But hey, I feel very passionately about. Maybe that will subside in say, 20-30 years.

[Guiness]

I might be a voice in the wilderness, but I don't think 4 gets retired. At least not until the current regime leaves GB. That will probably happen within 4-5 years. So we might see a change, but as long as Ted is here, the retiring of a number between 3 and 5 will not happen.

There is enough bad blood from both sides to prevent any number retirement going on in that regard.

I'm pretty sure someone found reference (on the Packer's website) to BF's number being retired a couple of seasons ago, but that seems to be gone now.

[KYPack]

OK, I'll make this my last post on the subject, and then consider myself herded into the "thread that will not die".

The Packers said this in '08 & '09 (from Wiki, but referenced pretty good)

Quote on

After Brett Favre stated his intent to retire in May 2008, the Packers announced that his #4 would be retired in a ceremony during the team's 2008 opening game against the Minnesota Vikings.[48] The ceremony was cancelled following Favre's subsequent decision to return to the game, and he was traded to the New York Jets. In March 2009, the Packers indicated that the team still intends to retire Favre's number, but due to the circumstances surrounding his departure from the team, no timeline had been set.

Quote off.

I can't imagine any member of the Exec Council bringing this deal up for a good spell of time.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I don't see Woodson's number getting retired. As Harv said, you have to be a legend, not just a hall of famer. I don't think Woodson is at legenary status. The only players I could see is if Matthews continues his current play for the next 10 years and Rodgers conitnues his current play for another 7-10 years. They would both probably need to add another 1-2 championships as well. Favre will get retired one day.

[Patler]

I don't see Woodson's number getting retired. As Harv said, you have to be a legend, not just a hall of famer. I don't think Woodson is at legenary status. The only players I could see is if Matthews continues his current play for the next 10 years and Rodgers conitnues his current play for another 7-10 years. They would both probably need to add another 1-2 championships as well. Favre will get retired one day.

Why would Matthews and Rodgers "probably need to add another 1-2 championships" while you assume (I think correctly) that #4 will be retired and #92 already has been?

Personally, I was against retiring White's #. I'm not discounting the impact he had on the franchise by signing with the Packers, but after all, they did offer the most money. I don't think the name "Reggie White" immediately evokes thoughts of the Packers for most NFL followers, after all he really was a Packer for barely 1/3 of a career that took him to four professional teams. The bulk of his stats were as an Eagle, when his play was at its best and where he played the longest. I don't think of White as a "Packer" anymore than as an "Eagle".

The Packers are quite conservative in retiring #s, and I just didn't see that White's career required the retirement of "92".

[Pugger]

Thought we'd look at another angle to this question.

Here's the retired numbers:


1) 3 - Tony Canadeo
2) 14 - Don Hutson
3) 15 - Bart Starr
4) 66 - Ray Nitschke
5) 92 - Reggie White

There really haven't been an offensive and defensive player chosen to have their number retired from each of the championship eras. There's not really a defensive player from the Lambeau era. (of course, Hutson and Canadeo played both ways at times)

What was common from each candidate prior to Reggie was lifetime Packer who bled Green and gold. There was some opposition to Reggie when his number was proposed. He started with another team and finished the same. Reggie also manged to say a few rude things at the door before he left Green Bay. I think the next number that might be retired is #1. That was Curly Lambeau's playing number. Lambeau wasn't a Packer when he quit, but he was the founder and all that.

The Packers could quite possibly close the books on retiring another number or wait 20 years or so before doing so.

I think that 4 guy allowed to much purple blood to flow into his veins to ever get his number retired by the Pack.

I thought I heard at the time of the proposal to retire Reggie's number that the NFL was frowning on this activity and discouraging teams from doing this, so will teams no longer honor players in this manner? :cnf: But I agree with KYPack - Lambeau's number should be retired long before #4 if teams can still retire numbers/jerseys.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I was reading an article on Herb Adderley on packers.com today. It got me to thinking. If the Packers were to retire more numbers, which one or two players do you think are most deserving the honor (excluding Brett because he'll have his number retired shortly)?

The guys I can think of off the top of my head are Adderley, Willie Davis, Forrest Gregg, Paul Hornung, and Willie Wood. For me personally, I think James Lofton is the best player I've watched in my 30+ years of following the Packers. Other than Brett and Reggie--excluding Aaron because of longevity. I know most probably wouldn't consider Lofton next in line. I think Hornung might have been slightly overrated. That leaves Adderley, Davis, Gregg, and Wood. For me it would Gregg (9x All-Pro, 6x champion), Adderley, and Wood as the next three legends in line. Is there anybody on this forum that watched Adderley and Wood? If so, who do you think is more deserving of those two.

[sheepshead]

I was reading an article on Herb Adderley on packers.com today. It got me to thinking. If the Packers were to retire more numbers, which one or two players do you think are most deserving the honor (excluding Brett because he'll have his number retired shortly)?

The guys I can think of off the top of my head are Adderley, Willie Davis, Forrest Gregg, Paul Hornung, and Willie Wood. For me personally, I think James Lofton is the best player I've watched in my 30+ years of following the Packers. Other than Brett and Reggie--excluding Aaron because of longevity. I know most probably wouldn't consider Lofton next in line. I think Hornung might have been slightly overrated. That leaves Adderley, Davis, Gregg, and Wood. For me it would Gregg (9x All-Pro, 6x champion), Adderley, and Wood as the next three legends in line. Is there anybody on this forum that watched Adderley and Wood? If so, who do you think is more deserving of those two.


Its a true honor to be retired as packer and it should remain so. The white sox retired harold baines' number a few years back, what a joke. Reinsdorf is an idiot anyway. I also brought it up to Hornung once at an autograph session. It is not a good subject for him. I heard that the equipment guys have never given 5 out out of respect. I always thought that was an indication of what an honor it was. No one will wear 4 again. I see no one else getting retired in the near future.

[pbmax]

The Packers are quite conservative in retiring #s, and I just didn't see that White's career required the retirement of "92".

White was the face and number (more than Favre until his departure) of the Return to Competence. The over celebration of which has elevated Harlan, Wolf, Holmgren and Favre (temporarily, as it turned out) to a mythical status. But I am not sure how you avoid it given the crushing disappointment of the prior 20 years.

[woodbuck27]

That TT leaves? He just signed a 4 year extension. He's signed through 2015. How is that sooner than a lot imagine?

OK please get this straight. Brett favre has ZERO difficulty with anything Green bay and certainly not any problem withn Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy. I do my best to keep up with it and Brett Favre is cool.

Given that what does it say if we are considering the question of retiring Favre`s Number Four ...`only`after Ted Thompson is gone as the Packer GM and that tenure may go on for over another decade.

If that`s the case and I don`t believe it will prove to be. Yet if it was that. It would be obvious to me that the problem or baggage issue lies with Ted Thompson.

It`s not with Brett Favre. Brett Favre is long over that nonsence.

On the question of any other Packer on the existing team having his number retired. The ònly existing player that we might make an argument for in terms of that question is CB Charles Woodson. Who really made his career in Green Bay in the six seasons since Ted Thompson went out and signed him. Charles Woodson may even make the NFL HOF. Is that essential before getting you number retired in Green Bay; yet ... just a part of the questionÉ

Will the Green Bay Packers suffer egg on the organizations face over retiring Brett Favre`s numberÉ

I don`t think so. Retire Brett Favre`s number ASAP.

[pbmax]

And logic loses another argument.

[Upnorth]

IMO only those who spend the vast majority of their career and leave the organization on the best of terms desreves to have the number retired. Further they should make a lasting mark on the organization in a very positive way, and be a person all fans can be proud of. Finally #'s should not be retired for a minimum 15 years so the players true impact can be remembered. That being said I don't think Woodson should have his # retired. Half his career has been with the raiders. I don't think Favre's should be retired yet as half of the fan base despises his last few years in the league and last few offseasons with the pack. Of the current roster I can think of 6 players in the running, but have a lot of career left to play. Time will tell.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Its a true honor to be retired as packer and it should remain so. The white sox retired harold baines' number a few years back, what a joke. Reinsdorf is an idiot anyway. I also brought it up to Hornung once at an autograph session. It is not a good subject for him. I heard that the equipment guys have never given 5 out out of respect. I always thought that was an indication of what an honor it was. No one will wear 4 again. I see no one else getting retired in the near future.

That wasn't the point of my questions. I didn't ask if you think we should retire more numbers. If they were to retire another number or two, which number(s) do you think should be retired?

[Deputy Nutz]

Favre will get his number retired, I don't agree with Woodbuck, Favre doesn't want to get a phone call from Thompson or McCarthy. He is still bitter. Thompson truly doesn't care one way or another, if Murphy told him he had to call Favre and work out a ceremony he would. He would think it is a waste of time, because anything outside of a film room is a waste of time in Ted Thompson's world.

Anyways Woodson is going to the Hall of Fame because of what he has done as a Packer, not a Raider. If he makes it to the Hall then he has a decent shot at the Packers retiring his number.

[Smeefers]

Things changed after they offered to retire Favres number. It'll probably happen, but it's not a given any more. I'd go 85% that it gets retired. Woodson had nowhere near the impact on this franchise that Reggie did. Oh sure, his words will probably be put up somewhere permenantly (on team, one heart, one trophy - or whatever he said), but Reggie had a huge hand in turning the organization around. He brought a ton of talent to GB. Woodson was just good here. If we're retireing numbers for just being really good, then Cliffy is next. Reggie turned the franchise around, Favre kept the town in the national spotlight for a decade and a half. Rodgers is going to have to do a hell of a lot more to get his name on the ring. Everyone here assumes he's going to continue on the road he's been on, but he could break his leg next year and be out of football forever. If he does stay on the road he's on (being a top 3 QB year after year) then he's a shoe in to get his name on the wall.

[TravisWilliams23]

. That leaves Adderley, Davis, Gregg, and Wood. For me it would Gregg (9x All-Pro, 6x champion), Adderley, and Wood as the next three legends in line. Is there anybody on this forum that watched Adderley and Wood? If so, who do you think is more deserving of those two.
Tough to pick between these two but I'd go with Adderley. He was so good that many games the opposition wouldn't throw the ball anywhere near his side. He had so much talent that he was originally drafted as a half back but with Hornung, Moore and Pitts ahead of him on the depth chart his abilities as a football player were being wasted. Thankfully Lombardi switched him to defense and the rest is history. My best memory of him is his interception returned for a TD in Super Bowl II.
The other story I love about Herb is that although he won a Super Bowl with the Cowboys, he refuses to wear the ring because he considers himself a Packer first and foremost. You gotta love that attitude if you're a Packer fan.

[Upnorth]

Tough to pick between these two but I'd go with Adderley. He was so good that many games the opposition wouldn't throw the ball anywhere near his side. He had so much talent that he was originally drafted as a half back but with Hornung, Moore and Pitts ahead of him on the depth chart his abilities as a football player were being wasted. Thankfully Lombardi switched him to defense and the rest is history. My best memory of him is his interception returned for a TD in Super Bowl II.
The other story I love about Herb is that although he won a Super Bowl with the Cowboys, he refuses to wear the ring because he considers himself a Packer first and foremost. You gotta love that attitude if you're a Packer fan.

That is the kind of thing that gets my vote to retire his number!

[sheepshead]

That wasn't the point of my questions. I didn't ask if you think we should retire more numbers. If they were to retire another number or two, which number(s) do you think should be retired?
favre

[King Friday]

Favre is the only Packer who currently earned a retired number, but he's going to have to wait awhile after acting like a complete jackass on his way out. I could also see a situation where #4 is never "officially" retired but is just never worn again. Personally, I couldn't extend the honor of retiring a number to a guy who forced his way out and went to play for one of our biggest rivals to "stick it to us". That is a slap in the face to guys who were nothing but class and won multiple championships but don't have their numbers retired.

I don't see Woodson having his number retired...we have TONS of guys in Canton who haven't had their numbers retired by the organization. Typically, it will be difficult for a free agent guy to earn that kind of honor. White was in a unique situation where he chose to come here when most others thought he would go somewhere else. Woodson has admitted he did not really want to come here in the first place. That shouldn't necessarily count against Woodson...it just shows why White earned the honor.

I would love it if Rodgers wins another title or two and gets his number retired...while Favre gets passed over. That would be a world class example of karma in action.

[King Friday]

I think the next number that might be retired is #1. That was Curly Lambeau's playing number. Lambeau wasn't a Packer when he quit, but he was the founder and all that.

So naming the most hallowed stadium in the league after him isn't enough? What other NFL player/coach has a stadium named after them? I think that is plenty of honor enough.

Now, if the naming rights are ever sold for some moronic reason...then I'm fine with honoring Lambeau with a retired number.

[Pugger]

The best solution to this question is to stop retiring numbers all together.

[HarveyWallbangers]

favre

Here was the question again. :)


If the Packers were to retire more numbers, which one or two players do you think are most deserving the honor (excluding Brett because he'll have his number retired shortly)?

[Tony Oday]

Samkon Gado should be next...

[sheepshead]

Here was the question again. :)
None. I thought I made that clear in my post.

[sheepshead]

Samkon Gado should be next...


Mike Wahle.

[hoosier]

Forrest Gregg.

[Zool]

favre

Math is hard

[Tony Oday]

Oh I wouldnt mind seeing Taco Wallace number retired...dude his name is TACO! How big was his dad? "MMM Im a name you Taco cause Tacos are goooooooddddd!!!!"

[RashanGary]

I think of Woodson as a Raider, White as an Eagle and Favre as a Packer.


Just how I picture them.

[RashanGary]

I think of Woodson as a Raider, White as an Eagle and Favre as a Packer.

I don't think Reggie's number should be retired either. It would be nice to retire them all, but you have to be selective. 5 or 6 years isn't enough for me. It's gotta be darn near a full career of top level play.

[RashanGary]

To me, Rodgers is top candidate.

Jennings has long odds, but the start (numbers-wise) to a near HOF career. Matthews has a shot. After that, who knows what kind of career guys like Sitton and Bulaga will have. GB is high profile now. They could be 9 time probowlers.

To actually retire a number. . . . I'd guess at AR and AR only.

[Smidgeon]

To me, Rodgers is top candidate.

Jennings has long odds, but the start (numbers-wise) to a near HOF career. Matthews has a shot. After that, who knows what kind of career guys like Sitton and Bulaga will have. GB is high profile now. They could be 9 time probowlers.

To actually retire a number. . . . I'd guess at AR and AR only.

I'm not sure AR will get retired--not yet. Not unless he pulls in another Super Bowl (or two) and two or three more MVPs. It seems to me that the Packers retire the legends of the legends. Maybe I'm putting my personal spin on it, but that's the slice I see. Bart Starr had five championships and legendary moments; Favre has the longevity and high performance as well as legendary moments; I don't see that for Rodgers yet. He could get there, but it seems incredibly premature to say "retired number". In this passing age, he's got to be amazing over several years.

[Patler]

Woodson might very well play more games as a Packer than as a Raider. He should exceed his Raider's total this year, the football gods of good health willing.

[Joemailman]

I don't think Reggie's number should be retired either. It would be nice to retire them all, but you have to be selective. 5 or 6 years isn't enough for me. It's gotta be darn near a full career of top level play.

Yeah, people need to realize you can't retire the number of every Hall Of Fame player. Well, maybe if you're the Lions you can. But the Packers can't.

[Deputy Nutz]

I look at the impact the player brought to Green Bay and it would be hard to find a player making a bigger impact in Green Bay than Reggie White. When a player brings greatness to a franchise it is hard to over look that player because he played on another team before his arrival to Green Bay.

Is Woodson Great? He was dominant in Green Bay, and was at one point elite at his position in Green Bay, but I wouldn't say he brought greatness or that he made a bigger impact on the Packers than White, but then again very few have.

[Patler]

I look at the impact the player brought to Green Bay and it would be hard to find a player making a bigger impact in Green Bay than Reggie White. When a player brings greatness to a franchise it is hard to over look that player because he played on another team before his arrival to Green Bay.

Is Woodson Great? He was dominant in Green Bay, and was at one point elite at his position in Green Bay, but I wouldn't say he brought greatness or that he made a bigger impact on the Packers than White, but then again very few have.

If White had been younger and came to GB in 2006, after a decade of the team being one of the leagues most successful, would he have had the same impact?

If Woodson had been older, and had come to GB in 1993, would his impact have been greater?

White was a unique personality, and he loved the spotlight of media attention. Woodson does not search it out in the same way. How effective each is in the locker room, we can only guess at.

As a player on the field, White's best years were in Philadelphia. I would argue that Woodson's best have been in GB, when he learned and was used to have impact far beyond the top notch cover corner he had been in GB.

There is a lot of "good story" hype surrounding White's time in GB, starting with God telling him to come to GB, when he probably would have preferred less money from someone else. Unlike the typical FA, he flew in the face of common sense, and signed the contract with the most money involved. How often do you see a free agent do that? :roll:

[Smeefers]

Sure, if the circumstances were different, we'd view them differently, but they're not. They're as they are and that's all you can go off of. Wood had a great career here, but he wasn't considered the best CB in the league while he was here. He was always a top tier guy, but Revis or Asumgazuntites always had the top spot. Woodson hasn't brought anyone in. Woodson hasn't changed the attitude of the entire city. I'm not even sure Woodson is a first ballot HOFer. He probably is, but I'm not positive on that. Great guy, great player, but not worthy of a spot on the ring.

[sharpe1027]

Interesting discussion. Do you only consider the their games as a Packer, or can their whole career be looked at? Is it fair to give Woodson less credit because he came to Green Bay when they were not at the bottom of the barrel? Is White entitled to more consideration for his off-the-field impact?

If you look only at one the field performance while playing as a packer, Woodson stacks up well against White. White has more additional considerations. Personally, I think you look at the whole package. Advantage White.

[woodbuck27]

The best solution to this question is to stop retiring numbers all together.

If their NOT going to retire Favre's number 4. I agree with you. :grin:

[woodbuck27]

Favre will get his number retired, I don't agree with Woodbuck, Favre doesn't want to get a phone call from Thompson or McCarthy. He is still bitter. Thompson truly doesn't care one way or another, if Murphy told him he had to call Favre and work out a ceremony he would. He would think it is a waste of time, because anything outside of a film room is a waste of time in Ted Thompson's world.

Anyways Woodson is going to the Hall of Fame because of what he has done as a Packer, not a Raider. If he makes it to the Hall then he has a decent shot at the Packers retiring his number.

"I don't agree with Woodbuck, Favre doesn't want to get a phone call from Thompson or McCarthy. He is still bitter." Deputy Nutz

No. Read the Brett Favre interview following the last game of the season (2008) Jets and Dolphins. Brett Favre clearly sets his position straight on this argument. I'm not giving this away.

Find it ... read it ...absorb it.

It's just become silly to me the way posters here propogate the lie. The ability to use denial to support BS.

GO PACKERS !

[Gunakor]

Read the Brett Favre interview following the last game of the season (2008) Jets and Dolphins. Brett Favre clearly sets his position straight on this argument. I'm not giving this away.

Find it ... read it ...absorb it.

It's just become silly to me the way posters here propogate the lie. The ability to use denial to support BS.


It's been documented that Favre has a tendency to lie on occasion as well. Different people call it different things - changing his mind, coming to his senses, etc. - whatever they call it, a lie is a lie is a lie. So it's tough to take anything he says as being 100% truth. Truth in Favre's heart changes with the weather. What he said in any given interview, this one or that one, must be taken with a grain of salt. And for most of us, disregarded altogether.

[Upnorth]

If Favre can work with the organization and speak great things about the Packers organization then maybe you could retire his number. Right now he does not seem to be reaching out to the organization. This organization is bigger than any one player, any one person, and I think Favre forgets that. There is no singular owner of the packers, no singular representative of the packers. Lambea, Lombardi, Starr, Hutson, Canadeo. These are people who had sustained the organization from 1919 to 1992. That is 73 years. Then the next wave of greatness began, the question is how will there shine look in 20 years? Will people get that tone in their voice that they get when talking of watching Starr play? Will people tear up when they see a documentary about them like Lombardi does? If they can generate that level of feeling, then they might be worthy of retirement. Right now I don't see any players who generate that unfortunalty, but time will tell, and I do see potential in some to do that.


As an aside, lump me in with the stop retiring numbers crowd, instead just honour them.