Welcome Guest! You can login or register.
Login or Register.
PACKERSHOME
»
Lambeau Field
»
Green Bay Packers Talk
»
No. 5 goes to Sinkfield; could he to walk into minefield?
#1
Posted
:
Saturday, June 15, 2013 8:48:25 PM(UTC)
Joined: 12/11/2012(UTC)
Applause Received: 158
LombardiAve said: What were the Green Bay Packers thinking by issuing the number 5 to wide receiver Terrell Sinkfield? Don't they know what happened the last time they did that? Remember the flak that Don Majkowski — and the Packers — received when they issued the number to him back in 1987? It was significant and strong [...]
#2
Posted
:
Sunday, June 16, 2013 10:39:57 AM(UTC)
Joined: 10/5/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 891
Applause Received: 1,188
Which roster numbers going to 90 in the offseason retired numbers are starting to become a small problem.
I figure one of these days the NFL is ether going to say numbers can't be retired any more and all numbers are in play.
Or the more likely that numbers can be twice as long as one guy is on offense and the other is on defense (like I've seen in training camps in the past) and people see in college football.
#3
Posted
:
Sunday, June 16, 2013 11:06:12 AM(UTC)
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI
Applause Given: 2,803
Applause Received: 4,986
There shouldn't be ANY retired numbers. To honor the player, take it out of circulation for a decade and then re-enter it. It serves more honor in the number being used than not. You see that number, it conjures memories ... think about it.
#4
Posted
:
Sunday, June 16, 2013 11:20:25 AM(UTC)
Joined: 3/4/2013(UTC)
Location: Texas
Applause Given: 670
Applause Received: 489
Zero2Cool said: 
There shouldn't be ANY retired numbers. To honor the player, take it out of circulation for a decade and then re-enter it. It serves more honor in the number being used than not. You see that number, it conjures memories ... think about it.
I tend to agree, this would be a good compromise. The problem, particularly with the Packers, is there are just SO MANY numbers that could and arguably should be retired - based on what they did for the team in their time. Until this or some other acceptable policy is adopted, they could go with something like the colleges do - duplicate numbers in camp and preseason, one O and one D.
#5
Posted
:
Sunday, June 16, 2013 11:33:54 AM(UTC)
Joined: 10/5/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 891
Applause Received: 1,188
Zero2Cool said: 
There shouldn't be ANY retired numbers. To honor the player, take it out of circulation for a decade and then re-enter it.
Great idea.
#6
Posted
:
Sunday, June 16, 2013 3:42:35 PM(UTC)
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 356
Applause Received: 628
In Europe with soccer you don't really see retired numbers but certain numbers for certain teams hold special significance. Usually, those numbers are reserved for players who have established themselves and earned the right to carry on the tradition associated with that number. Granted, for the longest time, numbers were assigned to positions, not individual players (probably explains why it has evolved differently today where you don't see retired numbers).
Still, I think something like that could work. Where a player could establish themselves after few years and then, if they wanted, they could switch to that reserved number. For instance, I look at the number 36 and remember elite safety play, having grown up watching Leroy Butler and later Nick Collins hold that number for much of my lifetime. You could take that number and only give it to safeties (or maybe more broadly defensive backs) that have established themselves as great players. That way, you honor the player(s) that have established a great history with that number, but it is still available for use going forward.
#7
Posted
:
Sunday, June 16, 2013 4:38:13 PM(UTC)
Joined: 9/15/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 6
Applause Received: 154
The issuance of the number is only temporary.
If he makes the team it will change
If he doesn't make the team the controversy is ended.
A WR cannot wear 21 or 36.
While 5 is controversial, wearing 80 might currently be more controversial.
For the first time in years there are no duplicate numbers on the large offseason roster.
#8
Posted
:
Sunday, June 16, 2013 5:09:51 PM(UTC)
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: Ishpeming Michigan
Applause Given: 2,190
Applause Received: 889
Doesn't matter Packers fans will remember the "Golden Boy" till the end of time.
Nobody will remember Sinkfield after August.
#9
Posted
:
Sunday, June 16, 2013 8:25:41 PM(UTC)
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)
Applause Given: 7,638
Applause Received: 1,604
yooperfan said: 
Doesn't matter Packers fans will remember the "Golden Boy" till the end of time.
Nobody will remember Sinkfield after August.
Kid has a chance. He's got Sam Shields measurables and iirc Edgar Bennett coaching him up.
There's gonna be competition there though, that's for sure.
It's just a camp number. Soon as players start getting cut, they'll change it.
Users browsing this topic
PACKERSHOME
»
Lambeau Field
»
Green Bay Packers Talk
»
No. 5 goes to Sinkfield; could he to walk into minefield?
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.