PDA

View Full Version : Wide recievers wearing numbers in the teens


J-Hype
05-24-2007, 09:07 PM
Who was the first player to do this? The first player i remember was Keyshwan Johnson 19.I dont really care to much for it besides eleven. I think Fitsgerald and Williams rock those jerseys pretty well.

Smooth Criminal
05-24-2007, 09:15 PM
I like Holmes with 10. I wasn't big on the number at first but its kinda unique. Not many with number 10.

MP123
05-24-2007, 09:15 PM
I would have to agree about Fitzgerald and Williams. I also think Edwards and Burress sport #17 well.

Auron
05-24-2007, 09:17 PM
Almost all of the Saints WRs wear numbers in the teens now.

Marques Colston - 12
Devery Henderson - 19
Robert Meachem - 17
Terrance Copper - 18
Rhema McKnight - 15


(the only Wide Receivers on our roster that don't wear a number in the teens are Michael Lewis, David Patten, and Jamal Jones.)

CC.SD
05-24-2007, 09:21 PM
Who was the first player to do this? The first player i remember was Keyshwan Johnson 19.I dont really care to much for it besides eleven. I think Fitsgerald and Williams rock those jerseys pretty well.

Keyshawn is really the first player you can remember?

I'll throw Lance Alworth's 19 out there for homer purposes.

marks01234
05-24-2007, 09:25 PM
There is about a million fringe level players wearing in the teens.

Personally, I dislike it. If you are going to be so strick with everybody else's #'s then you ought to be the same with WR. It's one thing if you are an undrafted rookie. But if you are the #1 overall pick, I think the team can find a number for you in the 80s.

draftguru151
05-24-2007, 09:34 PM
There is about a million fringe level players wearing in the teens.

Personally, I dislike it. If you are going to be so strick with everybody else's #'s then you ought to be the same with WR. It's one thing if you are an undrafted rookie. But if you are the #1 overall pick, I think the team can find a number for you in the 80s.

The players want those numbers, you think Fitzgerald and such just got a number in the teens and didn't want it?

Also receivers didn't have enough numbers in the 80s so they get to use the teens as well. All the other positions had a much wider range of numbers.

scar988
05-24-2007, 09:51 PM
with teams starting to carry 6 WR's and 3-4 TE's #'s in the 80's were starting ot not be aroudn once they added the IR guys and such... it was a needed thing and I like it.

MP123
05-24-2007, 09:56 PM
I think tight ends should be able to wear numbers in the teens as well.

GB12
05-24-2007, 09:58 PM
I think tight ends should be able to wear numbers in the teens as well.

TEs can wear 80s or 40s.

bored of education
05-24-2007, 10:00 PM
i madea stupid thread about this when i first got here, im an idiot

marks01234
05-24-2007, 10:12 PM
The players want those numbers, you think Fitzgerald and such just got a number in the teens and didn't want it?

Also receivers didn't have enough numbers in the 80s so they get to use the teens as well. All the other positions had a much wider range of numbers.

Yes I do understand this.

4 WRs and 3 TEs is only 7 numbers. Even if a team kept 5 WRs and 3 TEs (which would be almost impossible) that is still only 8. They managed to keep WRs in the 80s prior 96 with Keyshawn

255979119
05-24-2007, 10:15 PM
i madea stupid thread about this when i first got here, im an idiot

I know, lol. I thought this was your old thread before I seen who made it.

255979119
05-24-2007, 10:15 PM
Yes I do understand this.

4 WRs and 3 TEs is only 7 numbers. Even if a team kept 5 WRs and 3 TEs (which would be almost impossible) that is still only 8. They managed to keep WRs in the 80s prior 96 with Keyshawn

Retired numbers.

draftguru151
05-24-2007, 10:17 PM
Yes I do understand this.

4 WRs and 3 TEs is only 7 numbers. Even if a team kept 5 WRs and 3 TEs (which would be almost impossible) that is still only 8. They managed to keep WRs in the 80s prior 96 with Keyshawn

What about retired numbers? And the fact that team have a lot more than 8 receivers in camp. It just didn't make since to have one position only have 10 while all the others have at least 19.

CC.SD
05-24-2007, 10:19 PM
What about retired numbers? And the fact that team have a lot more than 8 receivers in camp. It just didn't make since to have one position only have 10 while all the others have at least 19.

Number restrictions are pointless anyway, IMO.

Hurricane Ditka
05-24-2007, 10:34 PM
Do the people complaining out keeping things like they were realize that there used to be no number restrictions.

XxXdragonXxX
05-24-2007, 10:40 PM
Yes I do understand this.

4 WRs and 3 TEs is only 7 numbers. Even if a team kept 5 WRs and 3 TEs (which would be almost impossible) that is still only 8. They managed to keep WRs in the 80s prior 96 with Keyshawn


What?

The Seahawks keep atleast 5 receivers and 3 TE's almost every year. I can only remember them keeping fewer than that once in the last 10 years or so. 6 WR's and 3 TE's is a very real possibility this year.

Far from being "almost impossible."

steelersfan43
05-24-2007, 10:46 PM
I like the current number system, I dont want to see fatty linemen wearing Numbers in the twentys, It would be annoying.

CC.SD
05-24-2007, 10:54 PM
I like the current number system, I dont want to see fatty linemen wearing Numbers in the twentys, It would be annoying.


Yeah but you know you want to see a wide receiver finally wearing number 1.

scar988
05-24-2007, 11:00 PM
Yes I do understand this.

4 WRs and 3 TEs is only 7 numbers. Even if a team kept 5 WRs and 3 TEs (which would be almost impossible) that is still only 8. They managed to keep WRs in the 80s prior 96 with Keyshawn
almost impossible? Atlanta didn't have much of a passign game and had 5 WR's and 3 TE's last year o nthe roster...

DaBears9654
05-24-2007, 11:01 PM
OK, this is the thread to discuss my idea for a numbering rule. It combines the all-inclusiveness of the NFL's rule with the broadness of the NCAA's (linebackers & o-line are tied for the fewest ranges allowed with 3).

Offensive skill: 1-49, 80-99
Offensive line: 50-79
Defensive line: 50-99
Linebackers: 30-59
Secondary: 1-49*
Kicking specialists: 1-39

* - No college DB's, to my knowledge, use 50+ anyway.

Under this rule, Brian Urlacher, for example, would be allowed to play linebacker and use his college # (44).

scar988
05-24-2007, 11:01 PM
Yeah but you know you want to see a wide receiver finally wearing number 1.

or a RB wearing #5... I would prefer to keep the # system but allow WR's and RB's wear #'s in the teens and singles

HoopsDemon12
05-24-2007, 11:02 PM
personally i dont like it... dont know why... just looks wrong

scar988
05-24-2007, 11:04 PM
OK, this is the thread to discuss my idea for a numbering rule. It combines the all-inclusiveness of the NFL's rule with the broadness of the NCAA's (linebackers & o-line are tied for the fewest ranges allowed with 3).

Offensive skill: 1-49, 80-99
Offensive line: 50-79
Defensive line: 50-99
Linebackers: 30-59
Secondary: 1-49*
Kicking specialists: 1-39

* - No college DB's, to my knowledge, use 50+ anyway.

Under this rule, Brian Urlacher, for example, would be allowed to play linebacker and use his college # (44).

not bad but I'd wanna see it broken down better:

QB - 1-19
RB - 1-49
FB - 1-49
WR - 1-19, 80-89
TE - 40-49, 80-89
OL - 50-79
DL - 60-79, 90-99
LB - 40-59
DB - 10-49
K/P - 1-19
LS - 00

steelersfan43
05-24-2007, 11:18 PM
not bad but I'd wanna see it broken down better:

QB - 1-19
RB - 1-49
FB - 1-49
WR - 1-19, 80-89
TE - 40-49, 80-89
OL - 50-79
DL - 60-79, 90-99
LB - 40-59
DB - 10-49
K/P - 1-19
LS - 00


I like that breakdown.

America
05-24-2007, 11:43 PM
I like the way college works it. They should just make the pro's like that. Dlineman in the 80s, one of the best players usually wear #1, RBs 1-49. LBs in the 30s, and best of all...kickers with 99.

OzTitan
05-25-2007, 02:09 AM
not bad but I'd wanna see it broken down better:

QB - 1-19
RB - 1-49
FB - 1-49
WR - 1-19, 80-89
TE - 40-49, 80-89
OL - 50-79
DL - 60-79, 90-99
LB - 40-59
DB - 10-49
K/P - 1-19
LS - 00

That would be a great system IMO. Not quite a free for all but still some flexibility for players to keep a number from HS to the pros.

T-RICH49
05-25-2007, 07:59 AM
Samie Parker wears No. 18

LitoSheppard
05-25-2007, 08:07 AM
Almost all of the Saints WRs wear numbers in the teens now.

Marques Colston - 12
Devery Henderson - 19
Robert Meachem - 17
Terrance Copper - 18
Rhema McKnight - 15


(the only Wide Receivers on our roster that don't wear a number in the teens are Michael Lewis, David Patten, and Jamal Jones.)

Colston with 12 is def differnt

Splat
05-25-2007, 09:08 AM
I don't like it myself I'm glad D-Bo got #82.

BigDawg819
05-25-2007, 02:07 PM
not bad but I'd wanna see it broken down better:

QB - 1-19
RB - 1-49
FB - 1-49
WR - 1-19, 80-89
TE - 40-49, 80-89
OL - 50-79
DL - 60-79, 90-99
LB - 40-59
DB - 10-49
K/P - 1-19
LS - 00

I don't like the long snapper wearing 00, Matt Katula is awesome with the number 70 jersey.

Smooth Criminal
05-25-2007, 02:08 PM
Yes I do understand this.

4 WRs and 3 TEs is only 7 numbers. Even if a team kept 5 WRs and 3 TEs (which would be almost impossible) that is still only 8. They managed to keep WRs in the 80s prior 96 with Keyshawn

The Steelers carry 5 recievers and 3TEs almost every year. Last year we had Ward/Holmes/Washington/Wilson/Morey and Miller/Tuman/Davis.

QB's can wear from 1-19
RB's can wear 20-49

Why shoudl the recievers and TEs be limited to 10 numbers? There are always more recievers that QBs on a team.

Go_Eagles77
05-25-2007, 02:32 PM
I like it just the way they have it, I personally wouldn't like to see recievers/ runningbacks with single digit numbers, either.

draftguru151
05-25-2007, 03:30 PM
not bad but I'd wanna see it broken down better:

QB - 1-19
RB - 1-49
FB - 1-49
WR - 1-19, 80-89
TE - 40-49, 80-89
OL - 50-79
DL - 60-79, 90-99
LB - 40-59
DB - 10-49
K/P - 1-19
LS - 00

The only thing I would change is the DL and LBs. They should both probably be 40-79, 90-99, or at least something so LBs could wear 90s and DL could wear 50s.

derza222
05-25-2007, 03:31 PM
not bad but I'd wanna see it broken down better:

QB - 1-19
RB - 1-49
FB - 1-49
WR - 1-19, 80-89
TE - 40-49, 80-89
OL - 50-79
DL - 60-79, 90-99
LB - 40-59
DB - 10-49
K/P - 1-19
LS - 00

I like it, although there are a couple of things I would change. I'd let DB's have single digits, LB's be in the 30's and the 90's, and WR's in the 30's. I wouldn't mind TE's in the teens or single digits either, but that is fine.

Watchman
05-25-2007, 03:33 PM
I think players should be able to us a combo of numbers and greek letter. Sigma 2, Theta 3, etc.

neko4
05-25-2007, 03:39 PM
not bad but I'd wanna see it broken down better:

QB - 1-19
RB - 1-49
FB - 1-49
WR - 1-19, 80-89
TE - 40-49, 80-89
OL - 50-79
DL - 60-79, 90-99
LB - 40-59
DB - 10-49
K/P - 1-19
LS - 00

you cant give an LS 00, because many play defense/offense too

http://www.profootballhof.com/assets/story_image/week9_maynardpose.jpg
Maynard

and

http://images.packers.com/images/action/hutson_don_a.jpg
Hutson

Also WR's shouldnt wear 89

draftguru151
05-25-2007, 03:57 PM
Why shouldn't they wear 89?

duckseason
05-25-2007, 04:08 PM
Why shouldn't they wear 89?

Because some people think that WR's should only wear "cool" numbers, and 89 is like, so yesterday.

neko4
05-25-2007, 04:14 PM
Because some people think that WR's should only wear "cool" numbers, and 89 is like, so yesterday.

Tottally!
But i really dont know what I have against 89, it really does look ugly to me

SubNoize
05-25-2007, 05:10 PM
some LBs are in the 90's, most of them are on 3-4's and play some end also, but Grant Irons played LB as well as Brayton for the Raiders and both sported 90's #s.

draftguru151
05-25-2007, 05:33 PM
Tottally!
But i really dont know what I have against 89, it really does look ugly to me

http://www.santanamoss.org/images/contact.jpg

Moss looks pretty sick in 89. Not sure of any other players who wear it.

niel89
05-25-2007, 05:37 PM
Tottally!
But i really dont know what I have against 89, it really does look ugly to me

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad::D

duckseason
05-25-2007, 05:43 PM
http://www.santanamoss.org/images/contact.jpg

Moss looks pretty sick in 89. Not sure of any other players who wear it.
uh.....
http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/254/stevesmithcelebration1gi4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Musta been a brain fart

niel89
05-25-2007, 05:49 PM
http://www.santanamoss.org/images/contact.jpg

Moss looks pretty sick in 89. Not sure of any other players who wear it.
Mark Clayton does also

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a316/bootlegbob28/MarkClayton01.jpg

draftguru151
05-25-2007, 05:50 PM
Yea, I didn't think really hard. :p Plus I've been playing a madden franchise with the Redskins so I remembered Moss.

Damn Ginn should wear 89. Maybe he'll turn out better. lol.

neko4
05-25-2007, 07:56 PM
Moss and Steve SMith look good but...
http://espn-att.starwave.com/media/nfl/2004/1219/photo/a_ferguson_il.jpg
I still hurt inside from that game

marks01234
05-25-2007, 08:35 PM
What about retired numbers? And the fact that team have a lot more than 8 receivers in camp. It just didn't make since to have one position only have 10 while all the others have at least 19.

How many teams have more than one guy in the 80s with a number retired?

And I have no problem with teams using the teens when they run out of room in the 80s. However, Fitzgerald and Keyshawn could have easily gotten a # in the 80s.

Just irks me that the NFL lets some positions have more flexibility that others. The whole C allowed to wear #'s in the 50s is the same.

scar988
05-25-2007, 08:40 PM
I don't like the long snapper wearing 00, Matt Katula is awesome with the number 70 jersey.

lol. I definately put that in just kidding... but yeah.. .falcons with teen jerseys at WR:
11 - Vincent Marshall
12 - Michael Jenkins
14 - Eric Weems
15 - Derrick Hamilton
16 - Dan Sheldon
17 - Eric Newman
18 - Jamin Elliott
19 - Laurent Robinson

only Robinson and Jenkins will probably make the team of these guys.

Go_Eagles77
05-25-2007, 09:57 PM
All of the eagles recievers who are going to/ have a chance to make the team are

Reggie Brown - 86
Kevin Curtis - 80
Hank Baskett - 84
Jason Avant - 81
Greg Lewis - 83
Jeremy Bloom - 11

Only 1 has a non-80s jersey, and he's more of a kick returner than reciever.

Hurricane Ditka
05-25-2007, 10:01 PM
http://www.santanamoss.org/images/contact.jpg

Moss looks pretty sick in 89. Not sure of any other players who wear it.
http://www.prosportsmemorabilia.com/Images/Product/33-38/33-38444-F.jpg

255979119
05-25-2007, 10:05 PM
I like the WR's who chose the teen numbers at first, because it was different. But now it has grown into such a large fad that it is starting to make me a trifle bit disgruntled.

TheChampIsHere
05-29-2007, 12:36 AM
how does a thread get made and then go on for 3 pages about WRs with #s in the teens? Does anyone actually care about this? And what is there to talk about?

M.O.T.H.
05-29-2007, 01:50 AM
Almost all of the Saints WRs wear numbers in the teens now.

Marques Colston - 12
Devery Henderson - 19
Robert Meachem - 17
Terrance Copper - 18
Rhema McKnight - 15


(the only Wide Receivers on our roster that don't wear a number in the teens are Michael Lewis, David Patten, and Jamal Jones.)


I miss Copper... he's such an underrated player.

Flyboy
05-29-2007, 01:54 AM
Colston really makes the #12 work for him.

Bills2083
05-29-2007, 08:40 AM
Roscoe Parrish has #11
George Wilson has #15
Jemalle Cornelius has #18
Aaron Brown has #17
Scott Mayle has #19
Donovan Morgan hass #13

jkpigskin
05-29-2007, 09:42 AM
if i was a reciever, i would want a # in the 80's... maybe b/c im so used to it

in Madden, i get pissed if my rookie reciever picks a teen number... haha i dont know why

Go_Eagles77
05-29-2007, 02:20 PM
if i was a reciever, i would want a # in the 80's... maybe b/c im so used to it

in Madden, i get pissed if my rookie reciever picks a teen number... haha i dont know why

This year you could fix that. :D

litlharsh
05-29-2007, 02:21 PM
how does a thread get made and then go on for 3 pages about WRs with #s in the teens? Does anyone actually care about this? And what is there to talk about?

Hooray for the offseason!

remix 6
05-29-2007, 02:22 PM
Patriots
10 - Gaffney
13 - Childress
15 - Washington
17 - Jackson
18 - Stallworth

Moss still has to pick a #

Addict
05-29-2007, 02:29 PM
Patriots
10 - Gaffney
13 - Childress
15 - Washington
17 - Jackson
18 - Stallworth

Moss still has to pick a #

if 18's unavailable (which looked good on Moss by the way) he'd probably get his old Vikes number back, so that'd be 84.

remix 6
05-29-2007, 02:38 PM
if 18's unavailable (which looked good on Moss by the way) he'd probably get his old Vikes number back, so that'd be 84.

Ben Watson said hes not married to #84 so if Moss wants it, he can talk to him about it

other possibities for Moss are: 19,81,82
i hope he gets 81

jkpigskin
05-29-2007, 04:08 PM
Ben Watson said hes not married to #84 so if Moss wants it, he can talk to him about it

other possibities for Moss are: 19,81,82
i hope he gets 81

didnt moss where number 88 or 89 in college?

remix 6
05-29-2007, 04:10 PM
didnt moss where number 88 or 89 in college?

he wore 88 but kyle brady took it

mcdlaxbonz13
05-29-2007, 04:15 PM
i remember K2 wearing the number 11 during preseason and i thought that looked really sweet

DaBears9654
05-31-2007, 09:56 AM
Since none of the Bears fans have posted it yes, Bears WR's with 10s numbers:

15 - Drisan James
16 - Mark Bradley
19 - David Ball

Only 3? Wow!

Now for 80s.

80 - Bernard Berrian
81 - Rashied Davis
83 - Mike Haas
87 - Mushin Muhammad