Giants fans are trying to change that omission with a grassroots online petition (Retire92.com) that as of Friday night had nearly 5,000 signatures since entering social media circulation May 1. Add former Giants star Brandon Jacobs to the list of supporters, too.
"The group I'm a part of, I'm sure everybody is on board," Jacobs told NJ Advance Media of the retired former players with whom he stays in contact. "I'm 100 percent on board with it. I think it's something that definitely should happen." |
Link - ( New Window )
I fully appreciate the fact that most people feel differently than I do on this, though. And if you're going to have retired numbers, especially based on some of the numbers the Giants do have retired, Strahan's 92 should be retired as well.
Kind of hope more become available. You can show how great and memorable a player was without retiring their number.
It will be a long time until 92 is used again. It is effectively retired. They probably won't use it again even if its not officially retired.
That's a very good idea.
I don't even think it needs to be that long. 25 years would be interesting because there could be some intrigue/excitement around seeing a number you associate with one of your former favorites come back into use. At 50-75 years, it basically covers entire generations (which also has merit).
I think there are fans that take uniform numbers way too seriously - like, for example, when the Yankees reissued #21 to LaTroy Hawkins and the fans threw a fit about it (despite the fact that it was not, and still is not, retired for Paul O'Neill). It doesn't have to be seen as a show of disrespect to the player who wore it previously, and it doesn't have to tarnish any of the memories that fans have of those players. But somehow, that's the perception.
I like it. Good idea.
The Ring of Honor was created because the Giants have already retired so many numbers that it can become an issue if they kept doing so.
I fully appreciate the fact that most people feel differently than I do on this, though. And if you're going to have retired numbers, especially based on some of the numbers the Giants do have retired, Strahan's 92 should be retired as well.
agree with this 100%
And maybe hold 3 numbers for your very best players that cant be worn during that players lifetime +5years (LT, possibly Eli when he's done)
I fully appreciate the fact that most people feel differently than I do on this, though. And if you're going to have retired numbers, especially based on some of the numbers the Giants do have retired, Strahan's 92 should be retired as well.
If the Giants had their own stadium they could have a nice Hall of Fame and museum for the fans at the park. But, well...
So, Yes! Absolutely!
It's not about running out of numbers; it's about running out of numbers that are tied to certain position groups. That said, to each their own.
And I personally think it will be hilarious if teams have to go triple digit numbers. Who says numbers have to be 2 digits? When we used to create players in video games 5wrw was a,ways that one class clown who had to pick #219 or something
007 etc will be pretty cool.
3 number jersey's might be interesting though.
It will be a long time until 92 is used again. It is effectively retired. They probably won't use it again even if its not officially retired.
Three digit numbers are stupid and weird.
We should assign imaginary numbers like a LB wearing 56i. Or irrational numbers, like a punter wearing pi or square root of 26.
Strahan deserves it more than Carson, just *slightly* more deserving, IMO (no disrespect to Harry).
Strahan:
-Career Giant (15 years, wow)
-HOF
-7 pro bowls
-4-time first-team all-pro (2-time 2nd team all-pro)
-22.5 sacks in a single season (record)
-All-time franchise leader in sacks (LT would be about tied if they had recorded sacks in 1981).
-6th on all-time NFL sack-list
-Equally great at defending the run
-Super bowl champion and the clear-cut captain/leader of the defense that brought down the 18-0 Pats
-Huge sack on that 3rd down play against the Pats in super bowl 42 to put them out of field goal position and force them to go for it on 4th down (which they failed). That was one of the key plays in that Giant victory and the biggest sack of his career at 36 years old!)
Seriously what's wrong with retiring one number every 25-30 years? I agree we should maybe un-retire numbers after about 50-75 years.
Someday we will have to retire #10. Other than that we don't have to worry about retired numbers for a long time, I think, unless Beckham sticks around and continues on his pace and also wins a super bowl here? Big IF. Oh and hopefully #26 ;)