BBTV

One day to go...

The new number rule proposal is terrible. At that point, just get rid of all number rules except for eligible / not-eligible. And even that isn't really required since the referees count who's lined up where. The league already looks like a bullshirt high school or college league, what with it's relaxed sock rules, no pants-length rule, and players wearing oversized undershirts that hang down to their knees. Just go all the way and let them wear whatever number they want. Part of me wonders why I care what number a player wears, and maybe it's just because I'm so used to knowing what position someone was by just looking at their number and even though formations are pretty chaotic, I could at least make sense of it that way. Once you get rid of the number rules, it's just 22 seemingly-random guys on a field wearing t-shirts, biker shorts, and messed-up socks.

You're pulling examples from teams that were created way before marketing and merchandising were anything like where they are now. I'm not sure any rebrand comparisons from before maybe the late 90s would be relevant. That being said, I don't think there should be an issue if they were the Washington Wolves. The Minnesota Timberwolves brand isn't nearly large enough to be infringed on by a team in another sport with different colors using a derivative of their nickname. Washington Lakers would be an issue though.

I don't care about whether there's an "official" nickname or not, but as others have mentioned, the technology currently doesn't support it (at least in North American sports) since there's so much automation that just pulls from the "nickname" field and give you "Eagles vs Football Team", when it would look better as "Eagles vs Washington". Not an insurmountable hurdle, but there's going to be some awkward times (like there already are.) How does it work for the MLS teams that have non-North-American-traditional names?

It also makes it easier for him to sell the team. I'm not sure there's much more driving into the ground that he can do with 80% that he can't do with what he already has..

They retired it (pretty soon after he retired), which is very strange because they never retired Ron Jaworski's, who while not as good, reached the same ceiling. They retired Brian Dawkins in 2012, and I think the owner didn't want to hurt McNabb's fragile feelings so they did him in 2013. Also weird is that they've held Randall Cunningham's 12 out of circulation since he left after '95, but it's not retired and there's no plans to retire it.

Wonder if Joe Flacco thinks he's still big-time enough to ask Donovan McNabb to unretire #5 for him. Hoping he's not a big of enough dick to even ask.

He's stepping down as CEO and becoming "executive chairman". He'll still be involved, but maybe the change makes him compliant with NFL rules?

What's "dated" about them? They'd fit in fine with the rest of the NFL uniforms if they were on the Nike template and shown with smaller shoulder pads.

I'd say the Bucs are an exception to that 'rule' (at least with their pre-Nike pewter pants that didn't appear nearly black.)

Just looked up his stats on Baseball Reference and noticed that he wasn't a first-ballot HOF guy (only 71% on first ballot). That's insane. He was a player that was way better than just whatever his stats showed. Similar in some ways to Dale Murphy, who IMO should also have been a 1st-ballot HOFer.

Wentz can still run, even after his knee injury (some of these highlights are post ACL). Check out 1:49. There was a time that he looked like a sure-fire HOF player (unfortunately, a pretty short time.) (have to watch on YouTube - won't play embedded, thanks NFL!)

I mean in general, not specific to his team. Yeah a couple of those are off limits with the colts.

I don't think he's an awkward looking guy at all - I think he looks like your prototypical QB, and should be wearing 7, 11, 12, 14, 14, 16, 17, or 18. Maybe even 9 or 8. Just not 2.

Depends on the font for 6. Standard block isn't too bad. It's definitely not one of my favorite QB numbers, but it's not in 2 territory. 2 is just an awkward number in any font. I don't even care that mostly lousy QBs have worn 2, I just think it's an ugly-ass QB number. Save it for the kicker.

I still contend that 2 is the worst-looking number for a quarterback to wear, and it looks really bad on a guy that looks/plays like Wentz.

As a former stadium employee, the idea sucks - both for event-staff management and personnel. I guess if you're traveling, going to have to book until Tuesday unless you know you're going to a total crap game that can't be moved.

Why would a guy with no testicles need even one jockstrap, let alone two?

I don't know anything about fabric, but I doubt it starts out crisp white, so wouldn't there be dye in either case? I know you're being funny, but it made me think.

Unretiring a number is like the honoree giving back a trophy, or withdrawing from the team's HOF or something. I get the honored players not wanting to look like the bad guy, but once a team reissues a retired number, then the honor should be officially rescinded and the player be removed from wherever the numbers are displayed. It is literally an award, and unretiring it is the same as giving back the award. It's not "retired" unless it's "retired", and if I'm a team owner that put together a big event to honor a player that mean a lot to the team, I'd feel disrespected if that player eventually was like "nah, it's cool - you can have my number back." I'm not saying Jerry Rice or Manning are buttholes or anything, but it shouldn't have even been an option for them. If Joe Montana can wear 19, then Peyton Manning could have too. At the end of the day, fewer numbers should be retired - lots of teams need higher standards. Exceptions for family and real-close relations.

Or Duane Haskins thinking he deserved Joe Theisman's number, Peyton Manning taking 18 in Denver, JJ Watt taking some dead guy's number in Arizona, Jerry Rice and Steve Largent, etc.

Wait what? He disappeared to me when he went to the Angels so I'm not sure, but wouldn't be be better known as an Expo? I absolutely dreaded when the Phillies played the Expos because he was so good there for (what felt like) so long.

Maybe the majority, but not the one that mattered:

And any player that asks a guy who’s received that honor if he can wear his number should go to hell. Since they don’t care about taking awards away from old timers, why not just ask the guy if he can send you his MVP trophies and championship rings too?

I always wondered that too, and that was one of the reasons why I came to the conclusion that if you need two pair of the same color pants to make your uniform work, you designed it wrong. Maybe they had some thought of having orange pants with navy panels to wear with the white jerseys and therefore needed the navy panel to exist? Either way, it was a poor decision. I vividly recall when they were unveiled, as I was in college at the time and despite being a big uni-nerd at the time that regularly designed concepts that used elements like piping and panels, which were at the time unheard of in football, I wanted to vomit when I saw them. Elway looked like a complete fool in the get up. It doesn't help that hundreds of college and high school programs grifted the template and have since moved on, which by no fault of their own, makes the Broncos look like the last ones to get the memo that it's not cool anymore. The uniforms clearly look better to me with navy tops - the orange has never looked right. It's well past time for a change.