BBTV

Maybe the other thread could get reopened? Otherwise this one will just become that one.

"The 2s played like #2 today"

Sounds like they're all over the place with this.

XFL and CFL teams could play an interleague championship game? And interleague games during their season? I would think the necessary schedule shift for one of the leagues would make the idea a non-starter, but at least some people are thinking about it. https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2021/04/12/xfl-cfl-champions-could-meet/

Yeah I know, but since they're redoing the numbers, there's no reason for them to still need 90-99. They're effectively saying that LBs and DLs get the exclusive use of 90-99, but QBs - the most important players - have to share with everyone else (including LBs.) I don't see why a LB should have more options than a QB, and have overlapping ones at that.

24 23 58 55 59 21 99 77 75 95 22 80 77 66 55 65 76 81 12 82 22 33 There's just something about this that makes me happy.

Back to the number rule change, why do LBs need 90-99 if they now have 1-59? And why shouldn't OLs be able to have 50-79 and 90-99 now? On one hand, they're doing away with the relatively arbitrary assignment of numbers to positions, but on the other hand, by leaving a few out there that now don't seem to make any sense. Also, what happens when a team's WRs, RBs, DBs, and LBs consume most of the 1-19s, and their new QB ends up wearing some trash number because the LBs have 7, 11, and 12 (and the other options are used by others? I do hope this leads to the end of players making their numbers part of their "brands", since there's not an increased likelihood of having to change numbers when traded or signed as a FA, since while usually 12 would be available for a traded QB, now it's very likely that the popular numbers will be in used by previously-unexpected players.

I think hockey numbers used to be used to designate which car a player slept in back in the sleeper train days, and the goalies would get the first (#1) and last (#30 something) ones, with the defense being next (single digits). Not sure exactly why. I also don't think it's always been the case that the defensemen were among the biggest guys.

Yeah from a "rules" standpoint, only 'eligible' vs 'ineligible' really matters. It's not like only players wearing 'end' numbers can line up on the end. I'm completely against the new proposal, but I'm not going to argue that it has anything to do with the rules. I think that it's great to look back at the history of the game and see that so many great QBs wore 12, or 7, or 14 (for Ken Anderson), and so many HOF receivers wore 80, 81, 82, etc. I just don't think anyone but a QB should have 12 - certainly not a linebacker. It's more about the aesthetics and tradition than the 'rules'.

but then it's no longer a novelty.

Why? 80s used to just mean "end", so TE, Split End, or Defensive End. Again - there are plenty of numbers. This is unnecessary and chips away at what a professional football game should look like (not that all the immature show-off "look at me" dudes with their silly socks and to-the-knees undershirts haven't already done that.) I'm far from a yell-at-clouds "gray facemasks and block fonts only!" guy, but some things are right and some are wrong. Number 12 being an iconic QB number is right. Some fat slob wearing it stretched over his untucked undershirt is wrong.

Even then, ticky-tack 15-yard penalties change games, and the defenders would just trip players that have them beat on balls longer than 15 yards. I'd rather the refs just be good, and not throw a flag when whatever the defender did didn't actually impact the play.

Honestly, that's so annoying that I wish there was some way to penalize it. I also wish that PI wasn't so subjective and over-called that it's worth it to them to beg for it every play.

You're not wrong - but players still have "primary" responsibilities, and I liked looking at an athletic-looking chap wearing 56 and just knowing that he was a LB, or a big white guy in the 80s and knowing he was a TE, or a guy wearing 12 and knowing he was a QB. Defense is totally a mess and there's tons of hybridity there, but on offense, while you have RBs spreading out, TEs (and sometimes WRs) occasionally in the backfield, and gimmicky crap, it's not that different a game from when the system was devised. Seeing some giant beast sacking the QB while wearing an iconic QB number like 12 will take a lot of time to get used to.

Nothing. 1) with the bigger covid rosters, teams that retired a lot of numbers had issues 2) young WRs don't want to wear "old guy" numbers in the 80s, even if they're available. Neither of those is the fault of the numbering system... which has already been expanded to give more options to WRs, TEs, and LBs.

Garbage.

yes, but there’s a troll on these forums that swoops in with silly generalizations and derails all these discussions.

Zach Ertz has been one of the most popular players on the team and biggest sellers for around 7 years give or take. I'd expect they'd have plenty of stock of 86 (though he's likely to get traded by the draft). Yeah that's most likely a photoshop, but it's still weird that would happen. I wonder if it's been that way forever.

Not sure if this is something or not, but the Eagles black jerseys are shown on their site without TV numbers. The green and white have them. https://store.philadelphiaeagles.com/mens-philadelphia-eagles-zach-ertz-nike-black-alternate-game-jersey/p-23326864913882+z-883-856968152?_ref=p-DLP:m-GRID:i-r10c1:po-31 EDIT: It's inconsistent - some black jerseys have them, others don't. Still, they don't need to photoshop these so I'm not sure how an error would be made.

gray can only be neutral if everyone uses it. When the first team switched from gray to color, the facemask ceased being just "equipment" and started being an intentional design choice. As is the case with everything, not just design, speaking in absolutes is stupid. Some teams look better with gray, others don't. IMO, gray is the wrong choice for the Cardinals while they're wearing this uniform. They lost the ability to use "tradition" as a crutch once they switched to the piped-and-paneled mess of a costume they've been wearing for the last decade. If/when they overcorrect and become the red version of the Jags, then they can go with a gray mask.

It also has a big red stripe down the middle, which ties in nicely with the facemask. A red mask wouldn't look right on the plain white helmet that the AZ Cardinals have. EDIT: referring to the Louisville Cardinals photo.

Well @Justpassingby seems like the reason you don't want anyone to "even bother asking" is because there's nothing happening... at least not within the "next 10 days." But thanks for sharing your inside knowledge.

Apparently, the Eagles have never had a QB wear #1.

Jalen Hurts switching from #2 to #1. Major upgrade. Joe Flacco will wear #7.

... and they've dealt with mismatched numbers for even longer. Those get sillier looking every year, which is a shame, because the rest of the uniform is solid - even if the sleeves are just a showcase for the swoosh.