BBTV Posted April 18, 2010 Share Posted April 18, 2010 0 and 00 are illegal in the NHL.This is because the Compuware program for player statistics has a glitch and thinks that a player who wears #0 does not exist. This doesn't happen in legitimate sports leagues.Didn't Martin Biron wear 00 for the Sabers for a minute or two? Also, I thought there was a goalie for the Rangers in the '70s who wore 00 (for some reason I think he was "famous" enough that I should know who it was, but I don't.) "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 18, 2010 Share Posted April 18, 2010 Right, it was Martin Biron who daringly sported the double-zero until he was told that this made him fictitious. I think this was part of a spree of rule changes brought on by the 1990s Buffalo Sabres: no wearing 0 and 00 because of Biron, no taking off your clothes to fight people because of Rob Ray, no throwing your stick at things because of Hasek, and players can have their skates in the crease sans puck because of No Goal. I guess you could say they were Ruff on the rulebook. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJR Posted April 18, 2010 Share Posted April 18, 2010 I don't own the site anymore but that doesn't make it less useful...http://www.hockeysweaternumbers.com/numbers/00/Biron (in both the NHL and in juniors), John Davidson, and Ed Belfour in an All-Star Game. FantasyHockeySim.com || DetroitHockey.Net || DetroitHockey.Net FHL || cjr.dev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted April 18, 2010 Share Posted April 18, 2010 Davidson... that's who it was. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 The Columbus Chill had a player once wear the number 101 for a game or two. The player had a day job at CD101, a local (and fantastic) radio station in Columbus, and they were also big sponsors of the team. Gotta love the ECHL wackinessedit: found a picture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 The Columbus Chill had a player once wear the number 101 for a game or two. The player had a day job at CD101, a local (and fantastic) radio station in Columbus, and they were also big sponsors of the team. Gotta love the ECHL wackinessedit: found a pictureI haven't listened to any Earth bound radio since I got XM 7 years ago. Is CD 101 still worth listening to? I always liked that station because they did it their way and didn't follow the pack. Hard as it may be to believe, CD101 didn't sound like every other radio station. They were actually pretty good. All roads lead to Dollar General. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Posted April 19, 2010 Share Posted April 19, 2010 The Columbus Chill had a player once wear the number 101 for a game or two. The player had a day job at CD101, a local (and fantastic) radio station in Columbus, and they were also big sponsors of the team. Gotta love the ECHL wackinessedit: found a pictureI haven't listened to any Earth bound radio since I got XM 7 years ago. Is CD 101 still worth listening to? I always liked that station because they did it their way and didn't follow the pack. Hard as it may be to believe, CD101 didn't sound like every other radio station. They were actually pretty good.It's still worth listening to. They're still independently owned and they've managed to stick to their alt-rock format all these years. I listen online because they don't reach Athens. The only things I don't like are their sunday night island rhythms reggae block and that the DJs never seem to tell you what song they just played. Also, they play a lot of Beastie Boys and I've never understood their appeal...sorry people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis10 Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Funny, the NHL's computers did fine when Neil Sheehy wore #0 for Hartford in '87-'88. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 It's doubtful they were using the same systems in '87 as they were in '97.Of course, this is the NHL, so their record keeping is likely still done on a Commodore 64. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 Some intern was playing Oregon Trail on the NHL's central registry CPU during a thunderstorm and it wiped out Vancouver's entire 1999-2000 season. Good thing somebody in Toronto faxed them a longhand backup. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CS85 Posted April 20, 2010 Share Posted April 20, 2010 And Davone Bess said he's not gonna give up #15 for any price, so I could easily see Marshall taking Ginn's #19.What ever happened to wide receivers using #80-89? It's just weird seeing all these younger WRs wearing the same digits as quarterbacks and kickers.I hear that. I know a lot of WR's like to wear the teens now because if they wear the 80's they look bulky and boxy, depending on the font. I was watching something about it and someone on the Lions talked about Calvin Johnson looking like a fridge because of the size of the numerals. Quote "You are nothing more than a small cancer on this message board. You are not entertaining, you are a complete joke." twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewharrington Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 The real reason receivers love the low numbers is because they're lighter. Cut a '1' from tackle twill and it will inevitably contain much less fabric than an '8' (and therefore weigh less). I'm sure someone could formulate one of those Nike equations they throw at their college programs when trying out a new fabric.You know, the ones that go, "If the numerals weigh 1 oz. less, and the average player takes 700 steps during a game, that's 87.5 less pounds you're carrying around over four quarters. When all you need is a split second to change the game, that 87.5 pounds will be the extra step you need to outrun the safeties and catch the deep post to win the game.The '11' is so coveted because it is the league's fastest number.All sarcasm aside, no one has mentioned the fact that defensive ends also used to wear numbers in the 80s. I still don't have a website, but I have a dribbble now! http://dribbble.com/andyharry [The postings on this site are my own and do not necessarily represent the position, strategy or opinions of adidas and/or its brands.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hat Boy Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 The '11' is so coveted because it is the league's fastest number.I find your views fascinating, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.All sarcasm aside, no one has mentioned the fact that defensive ends also used to wear numbers in the 80s.With all the "Hunter" fans out there, it doesn't need to be mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 All sarcasm aside, no one has mentioned the fact that defensive ends also used to wear numbers in the 80s.And looked pretty cool doing so if you ask me. All roads lead to Dollar General. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 Well, I think that 80s used to be "ends", regardless of O or D.As for the receivers, all I can go on is when I was in high school, they all wanted the lowest numbers possible, and we didn't have twill numbers at that time, so that wasn't a factor. I honestly think it's a combination of two things:1. It's just considered a "cool" thing. 80s numbers are so.... well, 80s. (I don't agree with this, but what do I know.) Maybe they think it just looks faster, or makes them look slimmer, I don't know. Either way, I think it's a cool thing.2. All the records and accomplishments are owned by guys with 80s numbers. No receiver coming out will ever be able to "own" 80, 81, 82, etc. By picking a lower number, they have an opportunity to define it (within the context of receiving. Ain't no receiver going to "own" 12 for anything other than receiving.) "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 Well, I think that 80s used to be "ends", regardless of O or D.As for the receivers, all I can go on is when I was in high school, they all wanted the lowest numbers possible, and we didn't have twill numbers at that time, so that wasn't a factor. I honestly think it's a combination of two things:1. It's just considered a "cool" thing. 80s numbers are so.... well, 80s. (I don't agree with this, but what do I know.) Maybe they think it just looks faster, or makes them look slimmer, I don't know. Either way, I think it's a cool thing.2. All the records and accomplishments are owned by guys with 80s numbers. No receiver coming out will ever be able to "own" 80, 81, 82, etc. By picking a lower number, they have an opportunity to define it (within the context of receiving. Ain't no receiver going to "own" 12 for anything other than receiving.)I think he was joking about the number weight thing. That aside, the same theory would apply to screen printed numbers. 88 will use more ink and "weigh" more than 11 would on a jersey. All roads lead to Dollar General. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSky Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 A WR wearing 10-19 is nothing new. I'm surprised no one has mentioned Eagle great Harold Carmichael. He wore 17 during the 70's and early 80's. Good point, forgot about him. I don't remember thinking it odd at the time, either, it's just the way it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 Also, there was Jensen from the Dolphins in the late '80s who wore 11, but I think he was a converted QB or something. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sc49erfan15 Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 Also, there was Jensen from the Dolphins in the late '80s who wore 11, but I think he was a converted QB or something.He was, my manager at work is a huge Dolphins fan and always brings up "Crash" Jensen and how he thought Jensen was better than Steve Tasker, and how Tasker is always the first name people bring up when talking about Special Teams players.I always think of Jensen's 1991 Score football card, and how I always wondered why he was the "special" wide receiver that got to wear #11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted April 21, 2010 Share Posted April 21, 2010 A WR wearing 10-19 is nothing new. I'm surprised no one has mentioned Eagle great Harold Carmichael. He wore 17 during the 70's and early 80's. Good point, forgot about him. I don't remember thinking it odd at the time, either, it's just the way it was.There was also Charlie Joiner... All roads lead to Dollar General. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.