Thread: 84

**SKOL** · 03-04-2005, 05:57 PM

I don't understand the whole number-retirement-thing. It just opens up a big can of worms. Who do you retire and who do you not? There's a lot of players that should be honored but won't because their "numbers won't be retired". Honor the person, put him in a ring of honor, but don't retire the number. Bud Grants in the hall of fame, and the Vikings ring of honor. He didn't have to have a number retired for us to remember him long after he's gone. That should be enough for players too.

**ultravikingfan** · 03-04-2005, 06:03 PM

"SKOL" wrote:

I don't understand the whole number-retirement-thing. It just opens up a big can of worms. Who do you retire and who do you not? There's a lot of players that should be honored but won't be because their "numbers won't be retired". Honor the person, put him in a ring of honor, but don't retire the number. Bud Grants in the hall of fame, and the Vikings ring of honor. He didn't have to have a number retired for us to remember him long after he's gone. That should be enough for players too.

Good post. I guess retiring a number is just an additional way to honor a player by saying he was so good and faithful for us, we do not want anybody to wear that number ever again.

**jberg987** · 03-04-2005, 06:13 PM

Well, you can only retire so many numbers, or we'll start to see triple digit numbers on peoples backs

**ultravikingfan** · 03-04-2005, 06:15 PM

"jberg987" wrote:

Well, you can only retire so many numbers, or we'll start to see triple digit numbers on peoples backs

That's why it is such an honor. At least #80 is retired!!!

**jberg987** · 03-04-2005, 06:20 PM

Oh, Im not trying to imply that I don't think numbers should be retired, but i just don't agree with having 84 be retired. It is just way too early to say it should be,