Posts: 141
Threads: 141
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation:
0
I have been reading all the threads about the greatest Viking to wear a specific number, and looked up which numbers have been retired. First thought was, if you make the Ring of Honor is your number not retired? Obviously not.
As I was reading about todays number 44 - It made me wonder why his number is not retired - which IMO I think it should be. Currently we have only six numbers retired - all very worthy. I think Chuck's 44 is iconic in Vikings Lore and should not be worn by anyone anymore.
So, with that said, Do you have any numbers you think should be retired for the Vikings? Along with Chuck's 44, these others also come to mind for me as potentials numbers to retire. These five stand out as guys who were amazing players, and have retired many many moons ago and at least 10 years of service. (I know - Chuck did not play here for 10 years min. but come on - ITS CHUCK FOREMAN!!!!)
#81 - Carl Eller - REALLY???? Does this even need to be argued????
#93 - John Randle
#22 - Paul Krause
#64 - Randle McDaniel
I dont like the practice of retiring numbers, pretty soon you have a limited number of jerseys available for your current players to use and you end up with a bunch of out of the norm numbers.
The only number I would retire is 77, he died in that number.... everybody else was just renting theirs IMO.
Quote: @"JimmyinSD" said:
I dont like the practice of retiring numbers, pretty soon you have a limited number of jerseys available for your current players to use and you end up with a bunch of out of the norm numbers.
The only number I would retire is 77, he died in that number.... everybody else was just renting theirs IMO.
Totally agree Jimmy. Never understood the whole retire the number thing.
I understand it, but I think the ring of honor is a much better way. If you retire Moss #84, then what about the mankato HOF Aundre Allison? Or CP? Well, you get the idea, the number has been worn by many. 81 was worn by two pretty darn good players.
I think retiring numbers is a very honorable idea, but, sometimes I wonder if eliminating a number kind of leads to eliminating memories.
84 and 93 are numbers that remind me of the men who wore them in the past every time I see them. They carry on that honor and legacy, and like C Patt, they can go down their own path with the number.
I wonder how much more we might talk about Cris Carter or Fran Tarkenton if those numbers were issued and we saw the 80 out there, or the 10.
I wonder if the greats of yesterday could get more respect and recognition if people had some top of mind awareness by simply seeing the number out there on a gameday. As retired numbers, they are distant memories that become more and more obscure as the days go by.
I think a great player of yesterday will command attention through a current player wearing the same number. As it is now, the numbers are hung and forgotten about until someone runs a special or a stadium presentation is scheduled that game day.
Im just saying, with the honor that comes with a retired number, perhaps keeping numbers active would create more of a spotlight on these guys accomplishments and keep the respect free flowing.
Quote: @"greediron" said:
I understand it, but I think the ring of honor is a much better way. If you retire Moss #84, then what about the mankato HOF Aundre Allison? Or CP? Well, you get the idea, the number has been worn by many. 81 was worn by two pretty darn good players.
Agreed, at this point retiring a number like 84 is way too late, and 81 was worn by 2 greats, how do you retire it now? I say more names to the Ring of Honor though
Cats out of the bag regarding retiring #'s...
84 is next and not in honor of Patterson lol!
I realize that There are varying opinions of retiring of numbers. Personally I don't have a problem with it, and actually like it - as long as its not given out like candy. But see what your saying.
I know that the Cowboys and Raiders have never retired a number for the same reasons you stated above. Al Davis liked seeing the old numbers on the field because it would bring back memories of the old players.
But for the sake of argument - IF you were to retire some other numbers, what would they be?
Quote: @"purplefaithful" said:
Cats out of the bag regarding retiring #'s...
84 is next and not in honor of Patterson lol!
I thought it was just the ring of honor, not retirement.
Quote: @"greediron" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Cats out of the bag regarding retiring #'s...
84 is next and not in honor of Patterson lol!
I thought it was just the ring of honor, not retirement.
Thats correct....My post was an opinion, typed as a statement of fact 
|
