Future Retired Packers Numbers

[Packer Brother]

Besides AR, who is a candidate to get their # retired in the future. Clay? Jordie? Woodson?

 

[NJPackfan..]

# 5

 

[Poppa San]

Clay? Jordie? Woodson?

Clay? why?
Jordie is not really that much more special than any other Packer WR ever. Lofton first maybe.
If Chuck had played his entire career in GB and put up the numbers he did, probably, but he wasn't here long enough.

You almost need to be first ballot Canton eligible to even consider getting your number retired in Green Bay. No participation trophies when there are almost 100 years of players to outshine.

 

[PackAttack12]

Aaron Rodgers is the only player that's played for the Packers recently that deserves his number retired.

 

[Dantés]

I think Clay would need to have a couple rejuiceinated seasons to cap off his career if he was going to warrant that kind of treatment.

I guess he's kind of the midst of one right now.

 

[Poppa San]

I think Clay would need to have a couple rejuiceinated seasons to cap off his career if he was going to warrant that kind of treatment.

I guess he's kind of the midst of one right now.

Clay would need several seasons averaging close to a sack per game plus a few other TFLs/game to warrant that honor. On top of what he's already done. I hope he does because that would be awesome for the next 3-5 years.

 

[gonzozab]

None.

This is not a very talented team, and hasn't been for quite a few years. Rogers just covers up the smell so well. We're a 4 or 5 win team without him. The Vikings and Lions have better talent than us, they just don't have an Aaron Rodgers at quarterback.

 

[Mondio]

Clay would need several seasons averaging close to a sack per game plus a few other TFLs/game to warrant that honor. On top of what he's already done. I hope he does because that would be awesome for the next 3-5 years.

I'd be for that too

 

[J.A.]

First, #5. Not sure what the delay is. It's basically been retired all of these years, so make it official before it's too late.

As far as #12, we need at least one more Super Bowl win before that even becomes a serious discussion. I made the trip to Canton last year and broke my own stupid rule of not wearing another man's name on my back for #4, and I'll make the same trip if there's at least one more Super Bowl win (or not, it all depends on how I feel 10 years or so from now) with #12 at the helm. Either way, it's too soon to say whether it should be retired or not.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

First, #5. Not sure what the delay is. It's basically been retired all of these years, so make it official before it's too late.

As far as #12, we need at least one more Super Bowl win before that even becomes a serious discussion. I made the trip to Canton last year and broke my own stupid rule of not wearing another man's name on my back for #4, and I'll make the same trip if there's at least one more Super Bowl win (or not, it all depends on how I feel 10 years or so from now) with #12 at the helm. Either way, it's too soon to say whether it should be retired or not.

Favre only one won a single Super Bowl with the Packers as well. There's no doubt Rodgers deserves his number to be retired once he decides to hang up his cleats.

 

[Dantés]

Clay would need several seasons averaging close to a sack per game plus a few other TFLs/game to warrant that honor. On top of what he's already done. I hope he does because that would be awesome for the next 3-5 years.

Several? That might be a little extreme. He's already the team leader in sacks all time.

 

[J.A.]

Favre only one won a single Super Bowl with the Packers as well. There's no doubt Rodgers deserves his number to be retired once he decides to hang up his cleats.

Yes, but Favre did a few other things along the way (almost single-handedly bringing the team back to glory, owning every meaningful QB record when he retired, etc.). If the same or similar can be said of Rodgers when he's done, his one Super Bowl win will be sufficient. Hopefully, he'll win a couple more and it will be a moot point. Just my opinion.

 

[Munch]

Curly Lambeau #1

 

[906Fan]

Only way I think Clay can make it is if he made Superbowl MVP, and had a few more productive years.

 

[lambeaulambo]

I heard somewhere that the NFL would eventually have to actually do away with doing this other than honorably. Pittsburgh ran out of numbers.
Who should be honored in the ring? 5, 80, 12, 84. If Terrell Davis is in the hall, then Sterling Sharpe should be too.

 

[Mike McCarthy]

Clay? Thanks for the laugh.

 

[Mike McCarthy]

If u r seriously considering Clay the doors wide open at that point, Tim Harris, KGB, Vonnie Holliday, Randy Wright, where do we draw the line. This conversation is absurd.

 

[Mike McCarthy]

I have no doubts Clay and Aaron both make it into Canton.

In my opinion Rodgers rates above Favre.

How does Matthews compare to Nitchke ?

Seriously? Cmon now, I can’t even put Matthews in the top 5 in the league, he’s not even in the picture when you bring up HOF, or all time best conversation. A sack every other game or so doesn’t put a man in this category.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Besides AR, who is a candidate to get their # retired in the future. Clay? Jordie? Woodson?

There are 20-some players in the Hall of Fame who played about half or more of their careers with the team. 6 players have had their numbers retired. Lambeau wore #1 but is primarily regarded as an owner/coach and that number is still available.

While I would regard Woodson as a future HOFer, he's not a "pure" Packer in having spent around half his career in Oakland. Matthews and Nelson do not have those kinds of resumes, not yet anyway, and they don't have a lot of highly productive years left.

So, no, there isn't anybody other than Rodgers who is of that caliber.

 

[El Guapo]

Retired numbers? That's a pretty big deal. I see a few guys that could make the Packers HOF. I'm not even positive that the Packers are going to retire #4 and #12 just yet. From the Packers website:

There are 128 members of the Packers Hall of Fame and there are 20 individuals recognized by name within Lambeau Field for membership in the Pro Football Hall of Fame, but there are only four retired numbers.

http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...au-Field/950eaf69-5aa4-11df-a3b6-528cc843f916

 

[HardRightEdge]

In my opinion Rodgers rates above Favre.

As a QB, yes. But as time passes these kinds of perceptions take in intangibles and the sweep of history.

Favre is perceived as the critical figure in turning around a moribund franchise that was wallowing in mediocrity or worse for the better part of 2 decades. For many Packer faithful, Rodgers is the continuation of the Favre legacy if not a usurper. I think he's going to have to win one more Super Bowl to stand above on his own even if it is obvious that is not entirely under his control.

 

[PackAttack12]

As a QB, yes. But as time passes these kinds of perceptions take in intangibles and the sweep of history.

Favre is perceived as the critical figure in turning around a moribund franchise that was wallowing in mediocrity or worse for the better part of 2 decades. For many Packer faithful, Rodgers is the continuation of the Favre legacy if not a usurper. I think he's going to have to win one more Super Bowl to stand above on his own even if it is obvious that is not entirely under his control.

All of those things are accurate, but just for fairness, and I'm sure you will probably agree with this, Rodgers deserves a ton of credit for taking over for a great hall of fame quarterback, and not only that, but performing at the all time great level he's performed at with the pressure and expectations that have come with it.

Either way, we've been extremely blessed at the most critical position in all of sports the past 25 years.

 

[HardRightEdge]

All of those things are accurate, but just for fairness, and I'm sure you will probably agree with this, Rodgers deserves a ton of credit for taking over for a great hall of fame quarterback, and not only that, but performing at the all time great level he's performed at with the pressure and expectations that have come with it.

Either way, we've been extremely blessed at the most critical position in all of sports the past 25 years.

Of course, I would agree with that. I wanted to see Favre traded in the early 2000's. I was speaking of others' perceptions.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Retired numbers? That's a pretty big deal. I see a few guys that could make the Packers HOF. I'm not even positive that the Packers are going to retire #4 and #12 just yet. From the Packers website:

http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...au-Field/950eaf69-5aa4-11df-a3b6-528cc843f916

#4 is retired. The retired numbers are:

• #3 Tony Canadeo.
• #4 Brett Favre.
• #14 Don Hutson.
• #15 Bart Starr.
• #66 Ray Nitschke.
• #92 Reggie White.

 

[HardRightEdge]

First, #5. Not sure what the delay is. It's basically been retired all of these years, so make it official before it's too late.

Here are players who have worn #5 since Hornung:

QB Vince Ferragamo
QB Willie Gillus
QB Don Majkowski
K Curtis Burrow

It's a QB/K number. Maybe nobody has wanted it since 1987 (Majkowski switchesd to #7 in 1988).

Anyway, I cannot think of a player more than Hornung in any sport who has gotten so much credit for touching a ball or a puck or whatever so little.

Over the course of his career, he had 893 runs + 130 catches = 1,023 run/pass touches in the regular season. For a little perspective, Lacy had 894 in his 3 1/3 seasons in Green Bay.

Hornung returned 10 kickoffs and threw 55 passes for 67.5 rating over his career during the regular season.

He was a good place kicker in his time for two seasons, 1960 (when he set the all-time scoring record that stood for decades) and 1961. Scoring all those points made these his only HOF-worthy seasons.

Lombardi loved Hornung for what he represented as much as for how he played. Taylor, on the other hand, was a lunch bucket kind of guy and a thorn in Lombardi's side in constantly asking for more money in light of what Hornung was paid.

Some folks want to make the argument that Hornung blocked for Taylor. Well, guys don't get their number retired for being a blocking fullback. Further, when Hornung carried the ball the shoe was on the other foot and Taylor was not shy about laying wood. I watched these games as a kid. Taylor was the straw that stirred that drink. And Starr called Taylor's number by a 2:1 ratio which tells you what he thought.

If you're going to retire anybody's number, it should be Taylor's, the most productive running back in the history of the game behind only Jim Brown at the time of his retirement.