SportsLogos.Net News

Tom Brady Dislikes NFL’s New Number Rule

Recommended Posts

I'd love to be a fly on the wall at the NFL office.

"Damn. We should have run this by him first."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally speaking; Protecting historical precedent>creating new precedent. Every change creates a ripple that will have an effect for years to come. The NBA is a great example of doing too much too fast and in the process they've made themselves look sloppy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, monkeypower said:

chandler-worthy.jpg

(Reciever)

I want Toronto to put their sleeve stripes back on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, El Scorcho said:

I think he has a point. I don't even really like WRs wearing numbers in the teens.

I’d rather have WRs wearing 10-19 with the possibility of 20-29

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DNAsports said:

I’d rather have WRs wearing 10-19 with the possibility of 20-29

 

I think star WRs wearing numbers in the 80s is basically lost to the game and that's pretty sad. The only superstar WR I can immediately think of who wears a number starting with 8 is Landry, and he'd be wearing 14 if it wasn't retired at the Browns. 

 

I know it's arbitrary and probably doesn't really make sense when you think about it compared with other positions, but it's something I grew up with and I liked it. 

 

This is probably the only discussion on this board where I am unnecessarily traditionalist. The 90s and early 2000s when modern WRs grew up were a golden era of legendary WRs and all bar Larry Fitzgerald wore numbers in the 80s. Does nobody wear a number because of their childhood favourite player anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, El Scorcho said:

This is probably the only discussion on this board where I am unnecessarily traditionalist. The 90s and early 2000s when modern WRs grew up were a golden era of legendary WRs and all bar Larry Fitzgerald wore numbers in the 80s. Does nobody wear a number because of their childhood favourite player anymore?

 

NY-BA484_SPRTS__G_20110626194657.jpg

GettyImages-497747.0.jpg

IKLUPTLDGRH2ZN44KRU2VALEXI.jpg

(Not that I'm trying to imply these guys are on the same level as Fitzgerald, but some notable guys who didn't wear numbers in the 80's)

 

And not many of these modern receivers grew up with the receivers of the early 2000's and definitely even less with the players of the 90's. A lot of these modern, younger, receivers grew up with Fitzgerald and Julio Jones wearing #11, Hopkins wearing #10 and even OBJ wearing #13.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boy, now the defenses are really going to get confused. Get ready for a lot of 76-68 games.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, monkeypower said:

 

NY-BA484_SPRTS__G_20110626194657.jpg

GettyImages-497747.0.jpg

IKLUPTLDGRH2ZN44KRU2VALEXI.jpg

(Not that I'm trying to imply these guys are on the same level as Fitzgerald, but some notable guys who didn't wear numbers in the 80's)

 

And not many of these modern receivers grew up with the receivers of the early 2000's and definitely even less with the players of the 90's. A lot of these modern, younger, receivers grew up with Fitzgerald and Julio Jones wearing #11, Hopkins wearing #10 and even OBJ wearing #13.

 

OBJ is exactly the sort of receiver I'm talking about. He was 12 when the number rule changed, and the best WRs in the league when he was high school age were guys like Moss, Harrison, Chad Johnson, Holt, Owens, and yes, Larry Fitzgerald. 

 

I'm just surprised and a bit sad there's been such a comprehensive shift to numbers in the teens. I wonder if eventually numbers in the 80s will seem cool again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, El Scorcho said:

I know it's arbitrary and probably doesn't really make sense when you think about it compared with other positions, but it's something I grew up with and I liked it. 

 

It's not that arbitrary.  The original designations for players on the line were centers = 50, Guards = 60, tackles = 70, ends (split or tight) 80.  So it looked like this:

80         70 66 58 67 77 87
                                 82

It's arbitrary that they picked 50 as the "middle of the line", but once they did that, 80 wasn't arbitrary.

 

There was just something cool about seeing someone in his "professional" number.  It was just another way of separating the professional game from the version where kids fake that they go to college.  With the other uniform-rule relaxings and stupid undershirts, there's practically no difference on the field anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/23/2021 at 9:53 AM, MJWalker45 said:

On top of his head maybe. I'm pretty sure if he gets sacked by another number 12 people won't assume he's sacked himself. 

Semi-related, I really wanna see Jacksonville’s Josh Allen sack Buffalo’s Josh Allen sometime. I was hoping the Jets would take the defender for that reason. I’d also like to see Lamar Jackson the QB picked off by Lamar Jackson the DB. To be clear, I have no problem with any of these players. I just think it would be hilarious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2021 at 11:12 AM, BBTV said:

 

It's not that arbitrary.  The original designations for players on the line were centers = 50, Guards = 60, tackles = 70, ends (split or tight) 80.  So it looked like this:


80         70 66 58 67 77 87
                                 82

It's arbitrary that they picked 50 as the "middle of the line", but once they did that, 80 wasn't arbitrary.

 

There was just something cool about seeing someone in his "professional" number.  It was just another way of separating the professional game from the version where kids fake that they go to college.  With the other uniform-rule relaxings and stupid undershirts, there's practically no difference on the field anymore.

 

Never thought of that. When was it the case though? Weren't there lots of weird numbers in the 50s etc?

 

Personally, I liked the 80s and 90s with simple numbering - and base offenses and defenses with less frequent substitution packages! Also liked interesting exceptions like Rod Bernstine.  WRs in the teens was a necessary evil though - not enough #s to go around.

 

Anyway if it's good enough for college we'll get used to it...but it will soon become harder for fans to follow - at least the demographic that knows xs and os but not current rosters!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chakfu said:

When was it the case though? Weren't there lots of weird numbers in the 50s etc?

 

It's been the case for as long as I've been alive (>40 yrs).   I'm not sure what a "weird number in the 50s" is - there's only 10 of them and none are weird (though 52 is kinda weird in some fonts.)  At some point they stopped being strict about someone being a designated "center" vs a "guard" or "tackle", and it just kinda became "OL = 50-79", though anecdotally when I was in middle school the coaches were very strict about the number rules, so even though I was a LB I had to wear 62 instead of my desired 58 because my offensive position (that I never actually played) was guard and not center.  I was like "you're never actually going to put me at guard so why does it matter?" 

 

1 hour ago, chakfu said:

Anyway if it's good enough for college we'll get used to it...

 

I don't watch college football so it will be harder to get used to.  There's certain "legacy numbers" like 7 and 12 (among others) that only QBs should ever wear, and already there's some douchebag idiot position players taking them.  I pray any non QB, K, or P wearing a single digit tears his Achilles or ACL or something of equal consequence.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2021 at 6:57 PM, DEAD! said:

I just want three digit numbers.

No GIF

NO.  They'll look stupid.  Buffalo Bull and Buffalo Bell's(mascots of ORIX Buffaloes) numbers are both three digit numbers(Bull's 111, Bell's 222) and they look ridiculous.

 

spacer.png

I had no idea why they even picked a each three digit numbers for their mascots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, BBTV said:

 

It's been the case for as long as I've been alive (>40 yrs).   I'm not sure what a "weird number in the 50s" is - there's only 10 of them and none are weird (though 52 is kinda weird in some fonts.)  

 

Meant 1950s. My point was Paul Hornung #5 , Sammy Baugh #33. Maybe vestiges of when QB/RB overlapped .   But 70s Rams had Deacon Jones 75, Lamar Lundy 85. Jim Otto 0.

 

So when was the golden age of jersey number rules enforcement? The 80s?  I'm curious about the history of the rule.  That's when I grew up and the number system seems "right" to me too, I'll miss the organized system of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, chakfu said:

 

Meant 1950s. My point was Paul Hornung #5 , Sammy Baugh #33. Maybe vestiges of when QB/RB overlapped .   But 70s Rams had Deacon Jones 75, Lamar Lundy 85. Jim Otto 0.

 

So when was the golden age of jersey number rules enforcement? The 80s?  I'm curious about the history of the rule.  That's when I grew up and the number system seems "right" to me too, I'll miss the organized system of it.

For Hornung, that might be the case. Wasn't Baugh technically a halfback, remember he played in the single wing where the QB was more of a blocker and the halfback or tailback was the passer. The numbers on defense back then weren't as strict and that's most likely leftover from when almost everyone played both sides of the ball. 1973 was the season the NFL got strict with numbers, but they didn't make anyone with an existing number out of whack change it, that's why someone like Alan Page wore 88 into the 80's.

 

Also when you see old Cleveland Browns footage with Otto Graham a QB wearing 60, Marion Motley a FB wearing 76 and Lou Groza an OT wearing 46, that was from their time in the AAFC which had a its own numbering system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2021 at 11:33 AM, MCM0313 said:

Semi-related, I really wanna see Jacksonville’s Josh Allen sack Buffalo’s Josh Allen sometime. I was hoping the Jets would take the defender for that reason. I’d also like to see Lamar Jackson the QB picked off by Lamar Jackson the DB. To be clear, I have no problem with any of these players. I just think it would be hilarious. 

 

September 11, 2005. 

Seattle Seahawks at Jacksonville Jaguars. 

 

1 15:00     JAX 30 Josh Scobee kicks off 64 yards, returned by Josh Scobey for 31 yards (tackle by Alvin Pearman).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jc... said:

 

September 11, 2005. 

Seattle Seahawks at Jacksonville Jaguars. 

 

1 15:00     JAX 30 Josh Scobee kicks off 64 yards, returned by Josh Scobey for 31 yards (tackle by Alvin Pearman).

Nice. We need more of this kind of thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2021 at 1:52 AM, Eastport76 said:

spacer.png

I had no idea why they even picked a each three digit numbers for their mascots.

Probably so they can avoid an issue similar to Mr. Met wearing 00 and a player wanting to wear number 00. 

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/30952640/new-york-mets-taijuan-walker-picks-number-99-mr-met-holds-preferred-00#:~:text=Met wears preferred 00,-Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

Probably so they can avoid an issue similar to Mr. Met wearing 00 and a player wanting to wear number 00. 

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/30952640/new-york-mets-taijuan-walker-picks-number-99-mr-met-holds-preferred-00#:~:text=Met wears preferred 00,-Facebook

 

They actually do issue 3 digit numbers in Japan. 

spacer.png

 

As much as I enjoy Japanese baseball, I'm okay if this trend never makes it across the Pacific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.