You're the only person talking about. The only one bothered by it. The only one that cares.

 

You bringing it up every few months year isn't going to make people react to you any differently.

 

I don't bring it up every "few months", but theres that "tactic" again of needing to try to make your side of the argument look better. 

 

Besides, if you haven't noticed, My suggestion has some support within the thread. Obviously some fans agree with me. 

---

"worrying"? Its a simple fix. 

 

It isn't broken.   I was always taught, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."  So there you go.

 

Done. Easy. 

---

Jesus people, if you don't like the topics that TMD starts...stay out of them! Why does every post/thread he make quickly become about him and not the topic at hand??



And no, before someone's says it, he's not the one making it about himself either!

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

It isn't broken.   I was always taught, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."  So there you go.

 

Done. Easy. 

 

That its not broken is a matter of opinion. 

 

I see 4 numbers out of circulation, some over a decade's worth, and for players that 1. have already been honored with an induction into the Ring Of Honor, 2. whose play here did not culminate with even a SB appearance, let alone win, and 3. whose play wasn't good enough for HOF induction. 

 

I think I have presented a strong case as to why its time that those numbers be place back into circulation with the slight possible exception of Freddy's 28, which is only helped by precedent of the decade long hiatus of the others that have been OOC, not really a more distinguishing career than the others.

---

Have any rookies come in requesting these numbers?  Any free agents?  If you're good enough, you can wear what number you want I'm sure. 

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

Have any rookies come in requesting these numbers?  Any free agents?  If you're good enough, you can wear what number you want I'm sure. 

 

Thats a good question...not sure. 

 


 

 

---

Why is this important?

---

Why is this important?

 

Cause TMD says it is.. DUH!!

---

Why is this important?

 

Why does the notion of putting the numbers back into circulation seemingly bother more than a few of you, under the "guise" of making it appear as a trivial topic?

 

I don't think it is  - nor have I said declared it "important" - thats your word. Judging by the rather innocuous OP, not sure how you'd decipher that even the OP thought it was "important". The slightly venom filled responses by those that apparently disagreed are the ones, if any that raised the "importance" of the issue. To me, its just something that pretty much is overdue. It may be lower on the totem pole of Jags issues, but its not totally without merit. 

 

I'd like to see the 71, 8 and 82 worn again and some new memories/ history made with those numbers. Judging by some of the responses, I am not alone. 

---

I'm a fan of retiring numbers, and I'm of the opinion that 28, 71 and 82 should be retired at this point. That's it, and I don't see anyone else on the field right now who merits a retired number.

 

If you retire players that put up the statistics these guys put out, we will be out of numbers in 40 years.

---

That its not broken is a matter of opinion. 

 

As is the notion that is is broken.  

 

That's all this boils down to.  Differences of opinion.

---

I don't bring it up every "few months", but theres that "tactic" again of needing to try to make your side of the argument look better. 

 

Besides, if you haven't noticed, My suggestion has some support within the thread. Obviously some fans agree with me. 

 

I don't see "strong support" from either side other than from you. I see a great deal of indifference.

 

They don't issue the numbers now and most of us don't care.

 

If and when they do ever issue the numbers again, most of us will continue to not care.

 

I can honestly say I have never heard the topic mentioned at a game, in a fan forum, on a radio show, on Twitter or any other medium in which Jaguar-related items are discussed.

---

;

;

I don't think it is  - nor have I said declared it "important" - thats your word. Judging by the rather innocuous OP, not sure how you'd decipher that even the OP thought it was "important".

 

I have no dog in this hunt, no pun intended, but are you referring to the OP as a person, referring to yourself in the 3rd person, or both?

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Why does the notion of putting the numbers back into circulation seemingly bother more than a few of you, under the "guise" of making it appear as a trivial topic?


I don't think it is - nor have I said declared it "important" - thats your word. Judging by the rather innocuous OP, not sure how you'd decipher that even the OP thought it was "important". The slightly venom filled responses by those that apparently disagreed are the ones, if any that raised the "importance" of the issue. To me, its just something that pretty much is overdue. It may be lower on the totem pole of Jags issues, but its not totally without merit.


I'd like to see the 71, 8 and 82 worn again and some new memories/ history made with those numbers. Judging by some of the responses, I am not alone.

You seem a tad hyper-sensitive. Maybe you should cut back on the coffee. I asked what I thought was a logical question. Apparently you thought it was important enough for its own thread.

---

Don't know whats worse. Reading about "retired" numbers; or numbers of [BLEEP] posts

---

TMD,  I strongly believe that perception can make a substantial difference when it comes to the voters.   If the #'s 71 and # 28 are brought back into commission,  i'm convinced that some voters will perceive that the Jaguars don't view Tony Boselli and Fred Taylor as HOF caliber players. 

 

Here's the question that I have.   What is the downside to keeping the two numbers out of commission?

 

There isn't a downside.  This is a non-issue until a team starts to run out of 2 digit numbers to field a time.

 

#33

---

<p style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0px;">

Jesus people, if you don't like the topics that TMD starts...stay out of them! Why does every post/thread he make quickly become about him and not the topic at hand??



And no, before someone's says it, he's not the one making it about himself either!

OOOooo, Bunny and The Mad Dog sittin in a tree.... K i s s.... i n g.

 

Seriously, as to the topic. I would agree that if a rook or player requested either of those numbers there is no reason to not let them have it.

---

Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.

 

 

Marcus Mariota wears #8.

 

If the Jaguars drafted Mariota and he wanted to wear #8, I bet he would get #8.

---

;

;

Marcus Mariota wears #8.

 

If the Jaguars drafted Mariota and he wanted to wear #8, I bet he would get #8.

 

Thats got me thinking....over all this time, if any of the draft picks we brought in, wore 71, 8 or 82 in college and (obviously) switched once they got here.

---

Thats got me thinking....over all this time, if any of the draft picks we brought in, wore 71, 8 or 82 in college and (obviously) switched once they got here.

 

Brunell was traded in 2004. The only QB they have drafted is Gabbert and he wore 11 in college. Anger is the only punter picked and he wears 19, his college number.

 

Most college receivers don't wear numbers in the 80's, and we didn't draft many from 2005-2013.

---

;

;