93JC

Members
  • Content Count

    48
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Prospect
  1. I believe it's #1-19 and #70-89 for receivers, #1-49 for running backs, #40-69 for O-line (You can have up to two O-line between #50-69 line up as eligible players, but you have to check in with a ref first. Lots of goal line plays have been throws to an eligible o-lineman who sneaks into the endzone untouched) QB's are #1-19 as well but have gone into the 20's sometime.I'm not sure if there's any specific rules on defence. DB's are usually #1-49, LB's are usually #1-59 and D-line is usually #40-99 but Charleston Hughes of the Stamps wears #39. Kickers and punters are usually the same as QB's but they have been higher into the 20's and 30's. The rule in the CFL is that ineligible receivers (offensive linemen) must wear 50-69, and any other player may wear whatever they want (including 0 and 00). And yes, there is a rule that up to two players wearing an ineligible receiver number may be declared eligible if they clear it with the refs before scrimmage. Rules in amateur Canadian football (CIS, CJFL) are similar: ineligible receivers must wear 40-69, and any other player can wear anything else (not including 0 and 00).
  2. Not this again. They're named after the Maple Leaf Regiment from the Second World War. As it is a proper noun, it is in fact spelled correctly. And the Canadian soldiers were widely respected and feared for their courage during both World Wars. Seems pretty intimidating to me. Maple Leaf regiment from the Second World War, eh? That's a hell of a feat considering WWII didn't start until 1939 and the St. Pats were renamed Maple Leafs in 1927. The apocryphal story about Conn Smythe's Maple Leaf regiment is hokum. There is no such regiment, never was. Chances are he named the team after the Toronto Maple Leafs baseball club, which won the IL championship in 1926.
  3. The Lakers borrowed purple and gold from the Kings, not the other way around. Prior to the 1967-68 season the Lakers wore (a couple different shades of) blue and white. Lakers owner Jack Kent Cooke also owned the Kings, and he chose the purple and yellow colours for the Kings because they are 'regal'. He changed the Lakers to match the Kings. According to the mothership Lakers started wearing gold and purple a season before the Kings started playing. The "mothership" is wrong, the Lakers switched to "gold" and "Forum blue" in 1967: the year they moved into the Forum.
  4. The Lakers borrowed purple and gold from the Kings, not the other way around. Prior to the 1967-68 season the Lakers wore (a couple different shades of) blue and white. Lakers owner Jack Kent Cooke also owned the Kings, and he chose the purple and yellow colours for the Kings because they are 'regal'. He changed the Lakers to match the Kings.
  5. Apparently this doesn't apply to baseball, 'cause Canada has been wearing the Baseball Canada logo on its cap all games.
  6. It should read GM/coach: Patrick coached the Blues for their first dozen or so games before stepping down and hiring Scotty Bowman to replace himself.
  7. Not aware of a 'system' in the CFL whatsover. *shrug*
  8. 93JC

    GBL expansion

    Supposedly it is significantly less expensive for the Vipers and Cracker-Cats (still can't get over how stupid that name is...) to travel to California, Arizona, Nevada and Utah rather than Indiana, Illinois and Kansas.
  9. The skating penguin has always been on a triangle, even when the colour scheme was predominantly blue. And oh how I pine for the days when teams had a white home, a dark away, and that was it.
  10. Musical notes, stripes and tie-dye can't upstage a cartoon duck in goalie garb leaping through a sheet of ice.
  11. Alternate uniforms. Any and all of them. Teams: pick a home, pick an away, and call it a day. You don't need five jerseys.
  12. I think Glenn Anderson and Shayne Corson both wore 9 playing for St. Louis in '95-'96...