for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

I know this is trivial but are any old timers bothered by

Ivan15 : 10/20/2020 10:57 pm
Defensive players, especially Giant LBs, wearing numbers in the 40s? Some of my all-time Favorite offensive players wore numbers in the 40s.

40, 42, 44, 45. Also DBs 48, 49.
How old do you have to be...  
GMen72 : 10/20/2020 11:00 pm : link
to be an oldtimer?
I don’t  
Big Al : 10/20/2020 11:05 pm : link
care. Now get off my grass.
I guess I qualify as an 'old timer,' and no -  
Del Shofner : 10/20/2020 11:05 pm : link
it doesn't bother me. I think LBs and safeties in the 40s is cool. As are offensive players with those numbers. Same with the 50s - OL can wear those.
I don't mind it  
Des51 : 10/20/2020 11:10 pm : link
and we liked it.
That's the way it was and we liked it - ( New Window )
if it was good enough for Spider Lockhart...  
Del Shofner : 10/20/2020 11:24 pm : link
and I had no problem with Brad Van Pelt wearing #10, although  
Del Shofner : 10/20/2020 11:28 pm : link
I've read that the Giants only swung that because Van Pelt was such an all-around athlete that he qualified as the backup kicker.

Fan since 1970, so I guess I qualify as an old-timer.  
81_Great_Dane : 10/21/2020 12:37 am : link
This doesn't bother me. In fact, I don't really care about uniform numbers — I oppose retiring jersey numbers.

I hated the V-neck 80s uniforms with the GIANTS helmet. I love the NY logo and the retro unis. I'm weird I guess. I'd even like to see a really old-timey throwback uniform, like the 1936 uniform, but I don't think that's ever gonna happen.

This reminds me of Rozelle telling Brian Bosworth he couldnt wear 44  
sb from NYT Forum : 10/21/2020 12:48 am : link
Bosworth even tried to claim he was actually a defensive back. Hence the Monster DB poster (I know this because my college roommate idolized Bosworth).

Bos was Simmons before Simmons  
Tuckrule : 10/21/2020 5:36 am : link
.
No, I don't mind the  
section125 : 10/21/2020 6:59 am : link
allowance for LBs wearing 40s numbers. In a way it helps on punt and kick teams as LBs often man the "end" positions on the line and therefore do not need to report as eligible.

It was kind of a neat idea to assign groups of numbers to certain positions. 50s were Centers and LBs. 60s and 70s as other lineman. IIRC 90s used to be eligible numbers and I think it was in the 1990s they changed that.
RE: Fan since 1970, so I guess I qualify as an old-timer.  
LakeGeorgeGiant : 10/21/2020 7:34 am : link
In comment 15016644 81_Great_Dane said:
Quote:
This doesn't bother me. In fact, I don't really care about uniform numbers — I oppose retiring jersey numbers.

I hated the V-neck 80s uniforms with the GIANTS helmet. I love the NY logo and the retro unis. I'm weird I guess. I'd even like to see a really old-timey throwback uniform, like the 1936 uniform, but I don't think that's ever gonna happen.


Thank you

Most around here are in love with the 80s look. The NY retrospective are superior in every way imv.
It's weird to me,  
truebluelarry : 10/21/2020 7:44 am : link
but not was weird as WRs with numbers in the 10s. I'm still not used to that.
RE: It's weird to me,  
Spider56 : 10/21/2020 7:59 am : link
In comment 15016684 truebluelarry said:
Quote:
but not was weird as WRs with numbers in the 10s. I'm still not used to that.


I was thinking the same thing about the WRs but then remembered Frank Gifford wore #16 ... watching the old tapes of Charlie Connelly wearing #42 at QB still freaks me out.
I qualify as an old timer I think now.....  
Dinger : 10/21/2020 8:03 am : link
And I don't like LB's with numbers in the 40's. I am used to them being DB's as mentioned above as well as RB's and FB's. Maurice Carthon I think is why. Him and Terry Kindard (sp). Back in the day I hated the GIANTS logo and uni's of the 70's-80's and longed for the old ny. Now I see those and I'm not sure if its nostalgia or just changing tastes but they look pretty sweet and I think they should be our throwbacks or 3rd jersey. Lastly, Van Pelt wearing number 10 was so cool......
RE: It's weird to me,  
BlueVinnie : 10/21/2020 8:12 am : link
In comment 15016684 truebluelarry said:
Quote:
but not was weird as WRs with numbers in the 10s. I'm still not used to that.

+1
Not really.  
LBH15 : 10/21/2020 8:18 am : link
More bothered by the linebacker play in those jerseys.
What bothers me is  
winoguy : 10/21/2020 8:35 am : link
seeing # 53 still active...
Ah yes .... a Googs by any other name is still a  
Spider56 : 10/21/2020 8:54 am : link
Googs.
There are just so many other things to be bothered by  
WillieYoung : 10/21/2020 9:30 am : link
I can't sweat the small stuff
I'm fine  
Producer : 10/21/2020 9:35 am : link
with it, but your music sucks.
had to look it up but...HOF Front 7  
Doug in MA : 10/21/2020 10:04 am : link
Les Richter, LB #48
Bill Willis, NG #45
Arnie Weinmeister, DT #44
Leo Nomellini, DT #42


Those are "old timer" players so don't think anyone should give a shit.
Is this a serious question?  
redwhiteandbigblue : 10/21/2020 10:27 am : link
There have always been linebackers with numbers in the 30's and 40's. Is the exception? Of course. How about Phil Viilapiano? He was #41 for the Raiders. How about Mike Curtis? He was #32 for the Colts (I know, it's not in the 40's). There have always been jersey number exception throughout NFL history. What about QB John Hadl? He was #21.Yes, you can tell by the players I chose to use that I am an Old Timer.
RE: RE: It's weird to me,  
Gatorade Dunk : 10/21/2020 12:21 pm : link
In comment 15016689 Spider56 said:
Quote:
In comment 15016684 truebluelarry said:


Quote:


but not was weird as WRs with numbers in the 10s. I'm still not used to that.



I was thinking the same thing about the WRs but then remembered Frank Gifford wore #16 ... watching the old tapes of Charlie Connelly wearing #42 at QB still freaks me out.

Charlie who?
No, not at all.  
Red Dog : 10/21/2020 12:32 pm : link
As a certified old timer (I remember when Ben Agajanian was the kicker and when Sam Huff was a rookie) I am a lot more bothered by piss poor players wearing those numbers than the fact that they are wearing numbers in the forties.
RE: RE: RE: It's weird to me,  
Spider56 : 10/21/2020 12:39 pm : link
In comment 15016969 Gatorade Dunk said:
Quote:
In comment 15016689 Spider56 said:


Quote:


In comment 15016684 truebluelarry said:

Quote:

but not was weird as WRs with numbers in the 10s. I'm still not used to that.

I was thinking the same thing about the WRs but then remembered Frank Gifford wore #16 ... watching the old tapes of Charlie Connelly wearing #42 at QB still freaks me out.

Charlie who?


My bad ... we both know it’s Conerly
Brad Van Pelt  
Giant4Life : 10/21/2020 4:37 pm : link
Now that takes me back. He was one of my favorite Giants. What a great athlete. He played QB, LB, S, kicker, and was a great basketball player judging from this Wikipedia quote from a sports reporter who watched him play in high school:

"He was like a man among boys. He was about 6-5, 220. One night, his coach from Owosso called in and said he got 32 rebounds in a game. I didn't put that in the paper. I didn't believe that. So, the next game I went out when they played Davison and I just counted his rebounds and he got (42). He was just so dominant."
To Del Shafner, Van Pelt wore # 10 because Giants originally played  
plato : 10/21/2020 9:18 pm : link
him as a safety which he wasn’t very good at. He then became an OLB and excelled. I am not sure whether the rule was in place that you could keep a number that you had at another position then and that’s how he kept 10 or it was just you could keep whatever number you wished.

I am an old timer as at first game i ever saw Arnie Weinmeister played RDE against the skins. There should be a special place for those 75 or 70 and over can post as a special privilege, or maybe not.
Back to the Corner