MERGED: Bush Jersey ruling (1 Viewer)

[Kleck]

I agree that Bush has displayed a sense of entitlement both in college and his very short NFL career, but I don't think I can side with the NFL on this issue.

Can someone give me a good reason that this rule exists?

It was done to make it easier for officials to distinguish between players of different positions. #5 just happened to go to the QB/K/P pool.

That makes sense, but I wonder what the refs would say. Do they think its necessary?

(NFL Rule 5, Section 1, Article 4)All players must wear numerals on their jerseys in accordance with Rule 5, Section 3, Article 3c (see NOTE 1), and such numerals must be by playing position as follows: quarterbacks, punters, and placekickers, 1-19 (and 10-19 for wide receivers if 80-89 are all otherwise assigned); running backs and defensive backs, 20-49; centers, 50-59 (60-79 if 50-59 unavailable); offensive guards and tackles, 60-79; wide receivers and tight ends, 80-89; defensive lineman, 60-79 (90-99 if 60-79 unavailable); and linebackers 50-59 (90-99 if 50-59 unavailable).

Yeah. We get that. Are you saying that the referees are responsible for the rules?If I had a group of NFL referees in front of me, what would they say. Somehow, I don't think they would mind if skill position players had a much larger range of numbers. I can understand the issue with players on the end of the O-line, but some of the others are just head scratchers.

 

[sjanson]

...

That makes sense, but I wonder what the refs would say. Do they think its necessary?

(NFL Rule 5, Section 1, Article 4)All players must wear numerals on their jerseys in accordance with Rule 5, Section 3, Article 3c (see NOTE 1), and such numerals must be by playing position as follows: quarterbacks, punters, and placekickers, 1-19 (and 10-19 for wide receivers if 80-89 are all otherwise assigned); running backs and defensive backs, 20-49; centers, 50-59 (60-79 if 50-59 unavailable); offensive guards and tackles, 60-79; wide receivers and tight ends, 80-89; defensive lineman, 60-79 (90-99 if 60-79 unavailable); and linebackers 50-59 (90-99 if 50-59 unavailable).

Yeah. We get that. Are you saying that the referees are responsible for the rules?If I had a group of NFL referees in front of me, what would they say. Somehow, I don't think they would mind if skill position players had a much larger range of numbers. I can understand the issue with players on the end of the O-line, but some of the others are just head scratchers.

What the refs say makes no difference. Bush petitioning the league to make the playing surface wider would make just as much sense. Constraints on both (jersey number) and playing surface (for example) are league rules. Do the ref measure the width of the field before the game? No....but they know what out of bounds means. They enforce the rules, they dont set them.

 

[Blackjacks]

I don't get it. Why is this a big deal? Why is it important that the number he wears has to be in a certain range?

Bush wants #5 because it will equal the number of TDs he gets this season.

recieving?

 

[LordBourbon]

Too bad. I would have bought a jersey and gladly supported the Katrina cause. Now, I won't be buying one. Bad move on the NFL's part in my opinion. Funny how they take such a firm stance on player numbers but they allow other crap to go on in the league. They have their priorities totally mixed up.

Very childish...Yeah, now you can just give that $119 to the American Red Cross directly, instead of having your donation filtered through the NFL, Saints and Bush.

Give me a break, don't bring the Katrina charity argument into a player's request to have his college number in the NFL.

I don't begrudge Bush the right to ask (after all, that Subway commercial had that cool white 5 jersey...now they won't be able to use that graphic), but I certainly don't begrudge the NFL denying the request.

 

[Black Box]

If I had a group of NFL referees in front of me, what would they say. Somehow, I don't think they would mind if skill position players had a much larger range of numbers. I can understand the issue with players on the end of the O-line, but some of the others are just head scratchers.

Just to throw this out there, but does having numbering constraints help with other formation-type penalties besides O-line ones? Or is that the only real area of concern?I ask because I never played football growing up, and what is and what is not allowed formation-wise has largely escaped me without this experience.

 

[Red Apples]

I don't get it. Why is this a big deal? Why is it important that the number he wears has to be in a certain range?

Hi David,In my opinion, this has nothing to do with numbers. It's about rules in place and having the ability to get those rules changed in your favor.

Bush wanted the rules changed to suit him. That's the issue in my opinion.

It's very similar to the Eli Manning issue in that regard.

J

thats crap.bush went through the proper channels and asked if the number could be changed.

eli, just grandstanded and said there was no way he would play for the chargers.

bush did what the edge did, he did what keyshawn did.

saying he is like eli is simply inacurate.

 

[Kleck]

What the refs say makes no difference. Bush petitioning the league to make the playing surface wider would make just as much sense. Constraints on both (jersey number) and playing surface (for example) are league rules. Do the ref measure the width of the field before the game? No....but they know what out of bounds means. They enforce the rules, they dont set them.

Is it just beyond you to question a rule that doesn't make sense? Are all rules good rules and beyond question?

 

[Tom Servo]

I agree that Bush has displayed a sense of entitlement both in college and his very short NFL career, but I don't think I can side with the NFL on this issue.

Can someone give me a good reason that this rule exists?

The refs had a hard enough time giving the super bowl to the Steelers, now you want them to figure out if single didgets means QB or RB?

You lost the bet; get over it already.

 

[Borat]

Forget the refs; I, as a fan, appreciate the numbering system. I like the fact that you can tell what position a guy plays just by looking at him. I support the NFL in his decision.

Some of you seem to be of the opinion "It's just a number; what's the big deal?" Well, if it's "just a number," why not keep things systematic?

 

[sjanson]

What the refs say makes no difference. Bush petitioning the league to make the playing surface wider would make just as much sense. Constraints on both (jersey number) and playing surface (for example) are league rules. Do the ref measure the width of the field before the game? No....but they know what out of bounds means. They enforce the rules, they dont set them.

Is it just beyond you to question a rule that doesn't make sense? Are all rules good rules and beyond question?

Dont get me wrong...I agree that rules should be questioned. But I think its childish and selfish for any single player to ask for an exemption from a rule like this. You are in the NFL. You are a multi-millionaire (or soon will be). Stop b!thcing about your freaking jersey number. Wear 23 because 2+3 = 5...whatever...but get over it. And to tie it to charitible donations is just plain petty.

 

[Kleck]

If I had a group of NFL referees in front of me, what would they say. Somehow, I don't think they would mind if skill position players had a much larger range of numbers. I can understand the issue with players on the end of the O-line, but some of the others are just head scratchers.

Just to throw this out there, but does having numbering constraints help with other formation-type penalties besides O-line ones? Or is that the only real area of concern?I ask because I never played football growing up, and what is and what is not allowed formation-wise has largely escaped me without this experience.

Other than some formation rules on the end of the O-line I can't think of any solid reason for the rule.Teams meet with officiating crews before every game are encouraged to let the officials know of any particularly bizarre formations or trick plays they may attempt. Pittsburgh tries bizarre stuff all season long and they're noted for making sure officials are aware of anything new they may see.

 

[Borat]

But I think its childish and selfish for any single player to ask for an exemption from a rule like this.

I don't mind that he asked. But he shouldn't mind that he was denied.

 

[Bad_Mo]

Too bad. I would have bought a jersey and gladly supported the Katrina cause. Now, I won't be buying one. Bad move on the NFL's part in my opinion. Funny how they take such a firm stance on player numbers but they allow other crap to go on in the league. They have their priorities totally mixed up.

So...because of this ruling, you won't buy a jersey to support the Katrina relief effort?What is stopping you from contributing regardless of the jersey issue?

 

[Kleck]

What the refs say makes no difference.  Bush petitioning the league to make the playing surface wider would make just as much sense.  Constraints on both (jersey number) and playing surface (for example) are league rules.  Do the ref measure the width of the field before the game?  No....but they know what out of bounds means.  They enforce the rules, they dont set them.

Is it just beyond you to question a rule that doesn't make sense? Are all rules good rules and beyond question?

Dont get me wrong...I agree that rules should be questioned. But I think its childish and selfish for any single player to ask for an exemption from a rule like this. You are in the NFL. You are a multi-millionaire (or soon will be). Stop b!thcing about your freaking jersey number. Wear 23 because 2+3 = 5...whatever...but get over it. And to tie it to charitible donations is just plain petty.

We're going to just have to agree that we disagree. I think you're grasping at straws. This isn't about one player being selfish. Its about an unreasonable rule. We should look past the player involved and focus on the rule alone.

The rule is lame.

 

[Borat]

We're going to just have to agree that we disagree.

I think you're grasping at straws. This isn't about one player being selfish. Its about an unreasonable rule. We should look past the player involved and focus on the rule alone.

The rule is lame.

Forget the refs; I, as a fan, appreciate the numbering system.  I like the fact that you can tell what position a guy plays just by looking at him.  I support the NFL in his decision.

Some of you seem to be of the opinion "It's just a number; what's the big deal?"  Well, if it's "just a number," why not keep things systematic?

 

[sjanson]

What the refs say makes no difference. Bush petitioning the league to make the playing surface wider would make just as much sense. Constraints on both (jersey number) and playing surface (for example) are league rules. Do the ref measure the width of the field before the game? No....but they know what out of bounds means. They enforce the rules, they dont set them.

Is it just beyond you to question a rule that doesn't make sense? Are all rules good rules and beyond question?

Dont get me wrong...I agree that rules should be questioned. But I think its childish and selfish for any single player to ask for an exemption from a rule like this. You are in the NFL. You are a multi-millionaire (or soon will be). Stop b!thcing about your freaking jersey number. Wear 23 because 2+3 = 5...whatever...but get over it. And to tie it to charitible donations is just plain petty.

We're going to just have to agree that we disagree. I think you're grasping at straws. This isn't about one player being selfish. Its about an unreasonable rule. We should look past the player involved and focus on the rule alone.

The rule is lame.

Fair enough. I guess my point boils down to, yeah the rule is lame, but IMHO, thinking you (as a player) are bigger than the rule is lame too.

 

[NEUPJ]

I think you're grasping at straws. This isn't about one player being selfish.

This is exactly what it's about. It became this way when Bush said he'd donate to Katrina if they gave him that # and implied that if they didn't he wouldn't. Other players have requested # changes and it's never really an issue like this. It's a major issue because he attempted to use charity to get the rule changed.

 

[sjanson]

I think you're grasping at straws. This isn't about one player being selfish.

This is exactly what it's about. It became this way when Bush said he'd donate to Katrina if they gave him that # and implied that if they didn't he wouldn't. Other players have requested # changes and it's never really an issue like this. It's a major issue because he attempted to use charity to get the rule changed.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The rule is lame.

Possibly, but my understanding is that Bush wasn't petitioning for a rule change. He was petitioning for a special exemption from a rule that would otherwise still apply to everyone else.I believe rule changes have to be voted on at owners' meetings. They're not something the Commissioner can do on his own.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't get it. Why is this a big deal? Why is it important that the number he wears has to be in a certain range?

Hi David,In my opinion, this has nothing to do with numbers. It's about rules in place and having the ability to get those rules changed in your favor.

Bush wanted the rules changed to suit him. That's the issue in my opinion.

It's very similar to the Eli Manning issue in that regard.

J

thats crap.bush went through the proper channels and asked if the number could be changed.

eli, just grandstanded and said there was no way he would play for the chargers.

bush did what the edge did, he did what keyshawn did.

saying he is like eli is simply inacurate.

Sorry if you disagree. I think they're very similar. Both wanted something different than the normal "take what you get". I don't have a problem with either. at grandstanding. They were furious it ever went public like it did.

J

 

[MrPack]

I don't get it. Why is this a big deal? Why is it important that the number he wears has to be in a certain range?

 

[Osaurus]

I don't really have an issue with Bush wanting #5. I do have an issue with players asking for all sorts of things before they play a down in the NFL just to suit them. Absurd!!!

 

[Joe Bryant]

I don't get it. Why is this a big deal? Why is it important that the number he wears has to be in a certain range?

Hi David,In my opinion, this has nothing to do with numbers. It's about rules in place and having the ability to get those rules changed in your favor.

Bush wanted the rules changed to suit him. That's the issue in my opinion.

It's very similar to the Eli Manning issue in that regard.

J

Okay. I get that, but my question is this... Why is it important that players wear a number in a certain range?If the only reason for the rule to stand is that its a rule, well, that's not a good reason. If the only reason is because its always been done that way, well, that's not a good reason either.

Why?

For what its worth, I see huge problems with Reggie Bush as a teammate because he's displayed an attitude of entitlement in college and as a pro, but just because I think he's a punk doesn't mean he isn't right in this case.

Hi David,I'm sure there's an official answer but my feel on it is just one more thing the league wants to control. It's an order vs chaos thing. Socks pulled up, jerseys tucked in, no 619 eye black etc. Positions fitting exactly into number ranges sort of fits with how the league does things.

One can easily make an argument against it I guess. But I think it does seem consistent.

On the college angle, are there any rules there? Could lineman wear #32? and WRs #53? I don't know the rule there. Is it the same type rule as the NFL but just with a broader range of numbers?

J

 

[Joe Bryant]

Thanks for citing the rule, MT.

How does one get classified exactly at a position? Could he line up as QB for a couple of preseason games and become a QB / RB?

J

 

[Kleck]

On the college angle, are there any rules there?  Could lineman wear #32? and WRs #53? I don't know the rule there. Is it the same type rule as the NFL but just with a broader range of numbers?

I have no clue if the NCAA (or specific conferences) have numbering rules. I would bet there is something in place.It seems that the logical thing to do would be for the NFL rules committee to address the rule and put it under the microscope. There are obviously some changes that could be made, but they could still place some barriers for logistical purposes. That way it would be more about having solid reasoning behind the rule instead of it being about perceived selfish players demanding change for the sake of their ego.

 

[surferskin]

the NFL wouldn't let Edge wear #5, why should they let bush?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

How does one get classified exactly at a position? Could he line up as QB for a couple of preseason games and become a QB / RB?

This is not addressed in the rules. "Quarterback," "running back," etc., are not terms defined by the rules.I think common sense is relied on.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I don't get it. Why is this a big deal? Why is it important that the number he wears has to be in a certain range?

Hi David,In my opinion, this has nothing to do with numbers. It's about rules in place and having the ability to get those rules changed in your favor.

Bush wanted the rules changed to suit him. That's the issue in my opinion.

It's very similar to the Eli Manning issue in that regard.

J

Okay. I get that, but my question is this... Why is it important that players wear a number in a certain range?If the only reason for the rule to stand is that its a rule, well, that's not a good reason. If the only reason is because its always been done that way, well, that's not a good reason either.

Why?

For what its worth, I see huge problems with Reggie Bush as a teammate because he's displayed an attitude of entitlement in college and as a pro, but just because I think he's a punk doesn't mean he isn't right in this case.

Hi Shick!,The reason they have to be in certain ranges is for the receiver eligibility. The old "ineligible number playing an eligible position" rule still exists for OTs playing TE in goal line formations.

It is most important for the D to identify eligible receivers and for officials to ID illegal linemen downfield.

Other than that, there's not much reason. Linemen are supposed to be 60-79 and 90-99. IIRC 50's are reserved for LBs, and all the other numbers can be used by eligible receivers in some way, shape or form.

The issue back with Brian Bosworth was he was "44" in college and wanted to keep it. DBs and RBs get 20-49, so he didn't get it.

1-19 are for QBs and Ks, and now recently WRs have been allowed to keep that since Keyshawn took 19. It doesn't seem like much of a reach for RBs to be allowed that number range.

 

[Eraser]

I think this was the right decision by the NFL. Once the door was opened for Bush anther other RB's etc...... many players would change their numbers. This would have a huge impact on jersey's that have already been sold.

Would have been a horrible move by the NFL to allow this.

E

 

[Borat]

1-19 are for QBs and Ks, and now recently WRs have been allowed to keep that since Keyshawn took 19. It doesn't seem like much of a reach for RBs to be allowed that number range.

WRs were just granted this privelage last season, I believe (possibly the year before, I don't recall). And they are only allowed in the 10-19 range, not single digits.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

1-19 are for QBs and Ks, and now recently WRs have been allowed to keep that since Keyshawn took 19. It doesn't seem like much of a reach for RBs to be allowed that number range.

WRs were just granted this privelage last season, I believe (possibly the year before, I don't recall). And they are only allowed in the 10-19 range, not single digits.

My rulebook is from 2001, and it grants WRs the license to wear 10-19 if all the numbers from 80-89 are already taken. (And teams always go into training camp with more than ten total WRs/TEs, so that condition is not much of an obstacle.) So the priviledge has been around for a while.Does anyone remember Ken Burroughs from the Houston Oilers? He was a WR who wore jersey #00. How did that happen?

 

[Borat]

My rulebook is from 2001, and it grants WRs the license to wear 10-19 if all the numbers from 80-89 are already taken. (And teams always go into training camp with more than ten total WRs/TEs, so that condition is not much of an obstacle.) So the priviledge has been around for a while.

Does anyone remember Ken Burroughs from the Houston Oilers? He was a WR who wore jersey #00. How did that happen?

That's the key right there. Now, it doesn't matter if all the numbers in the 80s have been taken.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

My rulebook is from 2001, and it grants WRs the license to wear 10-19 if all the numbers from 80-89 are already taken. (And teams always go into training camp with more than ten total WRs/TEs, so that condition is not much of an obstacle.) So the priviledge has been around for a while.

Does anyone remember Ken Burroughs from the Houston Oilers? He was a WR who wore jersey #00. How did that happen?

That's the key right there. Now, it doesn't matter if all the numbers in the 80s have been taken.

I believe that Key got 19 because the Jets were full up in the 80s in preseason, and somehow he got to keep it. Then it stuck.Floodgates for WRs open.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

1-19 are for QBs and Ks, and now recently WRs have been allowed to keep that since Keyshawn took 19. It doesn't seem like much of a reach for RBs to be allowed that number range.

WRs were just granted this privelage last season, I believe (possibly the year before, I don't recall). And they are only allowed in the 10-19 range, not single digits.

My rulebook is from 2001, and it grants WRs the license to wear 10-19 if all the numbers from 80-89 are already taken. (And teams always go into training camp with more than ten total WRs/TEs, so that condition is not much of an obstacle.) So the priviledge has been around for a while.Does anyone remember Ken Burroughs from the Houston Oilers? He was a WR who wore jersey #00. How did that happen?

Numerical standardization by position came sometime in the early '80s, IIRC.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

My rulebook is from 2001, and it grants WRs the license to wear 10-19 if all the numbers from 80-89 are already taken. (And teams always go into training camp with more than ten total WRs/TEs, so that condition is not much of an obstacle.) So the priviledge has been around for a while.

Does anyone remember Ken Burroughs from the Houston Oilers? He was a WR who wore jersey #00. How did that happen?

That's the key right there. Now, it doesn't matter if all the numbers in the 80s have been taken.

I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.

 

[tommyGunZ]

League players receive 6 percent from the wholesale value of their jersey sales.

Wow - I wasn't aware of this. Mike Vick makes a lot more money than I imagined.

 

[Borat]

Link

"In March 2004, the NFL -- faced with escalating retired numbers, an increasing emphasis on passing, and with it, more wideouts and tight ends -- allowed wide receivers to start wearing numbers 11-19, even if numbers in the 80s were available."

 

[NoFBinLA]

Could someone link the ruling - pro or con - to Bush wearing #5?

I looked on ESPN.com and it doesn't say one way or the other.

Just curious....

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I don't get it. Why is this a big deal? Why is it important that the number he wears has to be in a certain range?

Excepting O-Linemen having to wear 60-79, it makes no difference whatsoever what number anyone wears.

Illegal man downfield.

 

[Gold Plated Nails]

I don't get it. Why is this a big deal? Why is it important that the number he wears has to be in a certain range?

Hi David,In my opinion, this has nothing to do with numbers. It's about rules in place and having the ability to get those rules changed in your favor.

Bush wanted the rules changed to suit him. That's the issue in my opinion.

It's very similar to the Eli Manning issue in that regard.

J

thats crap.bush went through the proper channels and asked if the number could be changed.

eli, just grandstanded and said there was no way he would play for the chargers.

bush did what the edge did, he did what keyshawn did.

saying he is like eli is simply inacurate.

Sorry if you disagree. I think they're very similar. Both wanted something different than the normal "take what you get". I don't have a problem with either. at grandstanding. They were furious it ever went public like it did.

J

Joe, I think your comparison is pretty off base. 1 guy wants to wear a different number. If he gets what he wants, nothing changes in the greater scheme of things. In Eli's case, if every player did what he did, then the NFL would be like MLB. It is apples and oranges.

 

[Memphis Foundry]

I think Burrough and other players in the early 70s like Harold Carmichael were allowed to wear odd jersey numbers because they were grandfathered in. Apparently if you wore a jersey number in 1972 you were allowed to keep it for the rest of your career as the jersey numbering rule apparently went into effect in 1973.

The link below isn't official by any means but it describes the rule as I remembered it:

The ranges, as established on April 5, 1973, are as follows: 1-19 for quarterbacks and specialists (punters and placekickers), 20-49 for running backs and defensive backs, 50 through 59 for centers and linebackers, 60-79 for interior offensive linemen (except centers) and defensive linemen, 80-89 for wide receivers and tight ends, and 90-99 for defensive linemen. The NFL allowed players to keep an old number if they used that number during the 1972 season. Beginning with the 2004 NFL season, wide receivers will be allowed to wear numbers in the range 10-19; in recent years, wide receivers were only allowed to wear numbers in this range if a team had exhausted all of its 80s.

LinkEDIT: Better, more official Link.

 

[Gold Plated Nails]

League players receive 6 percent from the wholesale value of their jersey sales.

Wow - I wasn't aware of this. Mike Vick makes a lot more money than I imagined.

$2 Mill last year off of sales.

 

[fatness]

Whether the rule is changed or not, at least Reggie Bush is saying the right things at this early point in his career.

Link #1

``Obviously I'd love to be able to wear No. 5, but if I don't, I understand,'' Bush said. ``I know there's been a rule for years before I've gotten here, so it's something that I'd like to happen, but if it doesn't, no worries.''

Link #2

"I told my agent I want to be in here in camp on time ... whatever it takes, I want to be in camp on time," he said Saturday at the team's minicamp. "I think it is important to start off on a good foot and a good note, not only with the team but the city."

 

[CowboyFan]

Rule 5, Section 1, Article 4:

All players must wear numerals on their jerseys in accordance with Rule 5, Section 3, Article 3(c ) [specifying allowable colors and font-sizes], and such numerals must be by playing position as follows: Quarterbacks, punters and place kickers, 1-19 (and 10-19 for wide receivers if 80-89 are all otherwise assigned), running backs and defensive backs 20-49; centers, 50-59 (60-79 if 50-59 unavailable; offensive guards and tackles, 60-79; wide receivers and tight ends, 80-89; defensive lineman 60-79 (90-99 if 60-79 unavailable); and linebackers,50-59 (90-99 if 50-59 unavailable).

If a players changes his position during his playing career in the NFL and such change moves him out of a catagory stated above, he must be issued an appropiate new jersey number.

Any request for a numeral for a special position not specified above (e.g. H.back) must be made to the Commissioner.

During the preseason when playing rosters are larger, the League the will allow duplications and other temporary deviations from the numbering scheme specified above, but the rule must be adhered to for all players during the regular season and postseason. Clubs must make numerals available to adhere to the rule, even if it requires putting back into circulation a numeral that has been retired or withheld for other reasons. See 7-2-3 for reporting change of position.

So why doesn't Bush wear no. 5 in the preseason, sell those jerseys with profits going to Katrina charities, then switch to a legal # when the season starts?win-win? (except maybe a whining primadonna)..

 

[GregR_2]

I'm surprised no one brought this section up:

Clubs must make numerals available to adhere to therule, even if it requires putting back into circulation a numeral that has beenretired or withheld for other reasons.

I know MT said his rulebook is 2001. If that is still in the wording of the rule today, I think it amounts to the NFL crapping on its own history.

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

This may have been covered, but if the Saints really wanted to pander to Bush, all they have to do is get him to throw the ball, say he has promise, designate him as a QB, use him for a few snaps in preseason, problem solved. Even call him the emergency QB and hope to never to have to put it into practice.

Think of the chaos it would cause to fantasy drafts.

 

[Black Box]

I'm surprised no one brought this section up:

Clubs must make numerals available to adhere to the

rule, even if it requires putting back into circulation a numeral that has been

retired or withheld for other reasons.

I know MT said his rulebook is 2001. If that is still in the wording of the rule today, I think it amounts to the NFL crapping on its own history.

Well, no matter what numbers you allow, as time goes on, more and more numbers will be retired. You have to put numbers back into circulation sometime...It essentially amounts to teams only retiring a handful of numbers, which IMHO, is how it should be.

 

[UnknownCoach]

I think it has to do with refs having to identify individual players, not just know when to throw a flag.

For example if someone goes in illegal motion, not only does the ref have to throw the flag, but they also have to call out the player's number who drew the penalty.

It would seem to me it would be much easier to do so if the numbers of the various positions were kept seperate, as they currently are (with the exception of 10-19 which is shared between QB/K/P and WRs). The ref is paying attention to the position. Penalties are frequently called on the wrong player but they are almost always called on the right number range of the player who did commit the penalty with the exception of special teams. If you allow all skill positions to wear the same numbers, you might as well stop asking refs to provide the number of the player who committed a penalty IMO. Which would only lead to more confusion for coaches, commentators, and fans as to what happened on the play.

 

[3nOut]

1. I don't think Bush meant for the league to allow only him to wear #5. I believe he wanted a rule change not an exemption solely for him. Him asking for a rule change does not make him selfish.

2. Someone mentioned that if the league changes the rule then many players would want to change as well. Well, what does that tell you? To me, it says that many players think the rule is stupid and support him.

3. In a number of years, this rule will change. Be it because of the limited numbers available to teams (because of retiring of numbers, etc.) or whatever reason, it will happen. Why not just change it now?

4. I haven't read anywhere that he would be angry (be a baby about it) if they didn;t allow him to wear #5.

 

[GregR_2]

I'm surprised no one brought this section up:

Clubs must make numerals available to adhere to the

rule, even if it requires putting back into circulation a numeral that has been

retired or withheld for other reasons.

I know MT said his rulebook is 2001. If that is still in the wording of the rule today, I think it amounts to the NFL crapping on its own history.

Well, no matter what numbers you allow, as time goes on, more and more numbers will be retired. You have to put numbers back into circulation sometime...It essentially amounts to teams only retiring a handful of numbers, which IMHO, is how it should be.

They only need about 55 numbers in the regular season, so there are 45 that could be retired before they would HAVE to put numbers back in play. What are we, a century or two away from having to worry about that?Stupid rule.