No More #89! Ferguson on the move!!

CaliforniaCheez

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
2,486
Reaction score
0
Location
Citrus Heights CA
Well not yet. He is changing numbers to #87 until he gets cut.

It kept Martin hanging on the roster so long he may hope he will hang on the roster much longer than he should.


Also Hodge has switched from #55 to #52.

Packers.com has the story.
 

PackerLegend

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
1,947
Reaction score
0
Switching numbers
Two Packers are changing their uniform numbers for the upcoming season.
Wide receiver Robert Ferguson, who has worn No. 89 for his first six seasons with the Packers, is switching to No. 87.

Meanwhile, linebacker Abdul Hodge, who wore No. 55 last season as a rookie, is changing to No. 52. Hodge wore No. 52 in high school in Florida and in college at Iowa, and it's the number his younger brother, Elijah, wears as a linebacker for the Wisconsin Badgers.
 

scharles

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Messages
140
Reaction score
0
Location
Jackson County, Wisconsin
pyledriver80 said:
CaliforniaCheez said:
I'm fine with no more 89.


I was all excited when I read the title. 87 is a great number for Fergie. The number of underacheivers it seems

Robert Brooks wore 87 and was not an underachiever. He had to call it quites early because of injury.

Brooks seemed to just disappear, I always wondered where he went...
 

Pack93z

You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
4,855
Reaction score
8
Location
Central Wisconsin
rabidgopher04 said:
pyledriver80 said:
CaliforniaCheez said:
I'm fine with no more 89.


I was all excited when I read the title. 87 is a great number for Fergie. The number of underacheivers it seems

Robert Brooks wore 87 and was not an underachiever. He had to call it quites early because of injury.

Brooks seemed to just disappear, I always wondered where he went...

I think maybe he was talking about Martin... worlds of potential never really tapped due to injury and what not:)
 

pyledriver80

Cheesehead
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
0
scharles said:
rabidgopher04 said:
pyledriver80 said:
CaliforniaCheez said:
I'm fine with no more 89.


I was all excited when I read the title. 87 is a great number for Fergie. The number of underacheivers it seems

Robert Brooks wore 87 and was not an underachiever. He had to call it quites early because of injury.

Brooks seemed to just disappear, I always wondered where he went...

I think maybe he was talking about Martin... worlds of potential never really tapped due to injury and what not:)


Yeah, it was meant for Martin.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
21,963
Reaction score
2,068
Location
Milwaukee
I looked on packers.com and packersnews.com and couldnt find a mention of it..

Just was wondering why the change
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
7,033
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Canada
Just was wondering why the change

Probably more to do with Ferggy wanting a "Fresh start" without the baggage of his injury history.

Falling short of getting that fresh start with a new team, he decides to do it with a new number. If I'm not mistaken, Jerry Porter did the same thing with the Raiders this year,
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
21,963
Reaction score
2,068
Location
Milwaukee
all about da packers said:
Just was wondering why the change

Probably more to do with Ferggy wanting a "Fresh start" without the baggage of his injury history.

Falling short of getting that fresh start with a new team, he decides to do it with a new number. If I'm not mistaken, Jerry Porter did the same thing with the Raiders this year,

That is what I think it was, but what iffffffff a certain non packer, wants to be #89 if he were to be traded to the packers

:thumbsup:
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top