beekay414 6,093 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 If DL can't rock single digits, I want no part of this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Uncle Buck 3,638 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 I couldn't care less. Let the players wear whatever number they want. What's the big deal? Fewer regulations is almost always a good thing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KingOfNewYork 3,411 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 9 hours ago, Uncle Buck said: I couldn't care less. Let the players wear whatever number they want. What's the big deal? Fewer regulations is almost always a good thing. Personnel packages could be impacted to an extent. It'll be slightly harder for opposing teams to determine which package you're sending out there. Not impossible but just slightly harder. I can see Belichick taking advantage of this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LinebackerGod 299 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 9 hours ago, Uncle Buck said: I couldn't care less. Let the players wear whatever number they want. What's the big deal? Fewer regulations is almost always a good thing. OL should be limited just because of eligibility/ineligibility issues. But that’s it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tk3 2,352 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 Let them wear whatever number they want What would be wrong with a QB #47 or a DT #14 if they wanted to? If the number is free on the team, let them wear it Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Coffee & Contemplation 162 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 I like the current system. I helps me more easily identify players. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
malibuspeedrace 1,234 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 20 hours ago, MWil23 said: Forget Wearing 21! I love the punter single bar facemask!!! #scottPlayerfan4lyfe Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MWil23 15,047 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 7 hours ago, Tk3 said: Let them wear whatever number they want What would be wrong with a QB #47 or a DT #14 if they wanted to? If the number is free on the team, let them wear it I’m all in favor of this, except for OL still having to wear a designated ineligible number between 50-79. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
D82 2,919 Posted April 3 Share Posted April 3 I already hate that LBers can wear numbers in the 40s. This is awful for me. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trojan 541 Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 (edited) On 4/2/2021 at 4:09 PM, August4th said: A RB/FB wearing numbers 80-89 and WR wearing 20-49 looks gross to me. Cliff Branch, a Raider great that won three Superbowls, wore #21 and was a WR. Edited April 4 by Trojan 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TENINCH 2,332 Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 I hate it. Go away Chiefs with your dumb ideas. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
scar988 893 Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 QB's: 0-19 RB's/FB's: 1-49 WR's: 1-19, 80-89 TE's: 1-49, 80-89 OL: 50-79 DL: 40-99 EDGE: 40-99 LB: 40-99 DB: 1-49 That's what I would do. A lot more freedom. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shady Slim 1,470 Posted April 4 Share Posted April 4 weirdly hate this and think it's incredibly bad and wrong tbh single digits are for the Positions That You Play If You're White and Weedy and nobody else if you ask me, it just doesn't hit the same lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Johnny Nix 1,225 Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 I’m becoming the grumpy old man telling little Kids that 40 isn’t a WR number 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Uncle Buck 3,638 Posted April 6 Share Posted April 6 On 4/3/2021 at 9:38 AM, LinebackerGod said: OL should be limited just because of eligibility/ineligibility issues. But that’s it. Yeah, I guess that's fair. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.