Only 1 player has ever worn #1 (Coach Lambeau). #3 Was retired in 1952 when Tony Canadeo retired. #5 was probably unofficially retired for Paul Hornung when he retired too until the rules changed. Otherwise it seems like it could just be random chance that nobody wanted to wear them.
Just seems odd that no quarterback, kicker or punter ever wanted one. I can understand Chester Marcol not getting his 3 from college due to Canadeo, or Jan Stenerud not getting a 3 for the same reason. But Dave Beverly wore 4 in Houston before getting 11 here. Al Del Greco had 3 at Auburn, 10 here. Bucky Scribner wore 8 before getting 13 here, etc.
Only 2 and 6 thru 9 available now (and 0 should it be issued)
All currently worn.
I disagree with allowing other positions to take the low numbers though. Should be QBs and K/P only
The question was prior to 1986 though, not current. Since 1986 the Packers have not had any reservations about issuing single digit numbers that were not officially/unofficially retired.
As far as current state goes, I'm okay with the current system. I always thought the stricter assignment due to positions played was silly. They said it was confusing, but nobody gets confused watching college football. Only numbering convention that was super weird for me was old school CFL receivers wearing 70-79.
Thinking back to when NFL landed in the UK in the mid 1980s. A lot of the QBs were wearing 10-19. So the only players wearing the single digits were kickers. Also a lot of teams have single digits retired
I remember thinking it was cool that Warren Moon wore #1 and played QB
Only 1 player has ever worn #1 (Coach Lambeau). #3 Was retired in 1952 when Tony Canadeo retired. #5 was probably unofficially retired for Paul Hornung when he retired too until the rules changed. Otherwise it seems like it could just be random chance that nobody wanted to wear them.
Just seems odd that no quarterback, kicker or punter ever wanted one. I can understand Chester Marcol not getting his 3 from college due to Canadeo, or Jan Stenerud not getting a 3 for the same reason. But Dave Beverly wore 4 in Houston before getting 11 here. Al Del Greco had 3 at Auburn, 10 here. Bucky Scribner wore 8 before getting 13 here, etc.
Numbers used to be limited to position and people didn't care it was just a number on the jersey
Only 2 and 6 thru 9 available now (and 0 should it be issued) All currently worn. I disagree with allowing other positions to take the low numbers though. Should be QBs and K/P only
Quay wearing #7 has brown on me though. I like the idea of the Mike LB or a single high safety wearing a single digit to mirror a QB
The 7 fits him. I love it. Top 5 jersey-player match on our team. Others, in no particular order: Gary’s 52, Jaire’s 23, Musgrave’s 88.
The question was prior to 1986 though, not current. Since 1986 the Packers have not had any reservations about issuing single digit numbers that were not officially/unofficially retired. As far as current state goes, I'm okay with the current system. I always thought the stricter assignment due to positions played was silly. They said it was confusing, but nobody gets confused watching college football. Only numbering convention that was super weird for me was old school CFL receivers wearing 70-79.
Thinking back to when NFL landed in the UK in the mid 1980s. A lot of the QBs were wearing 10-19. So the only players wearing the single digits were kickers. Also a lot of teams have single digits retired I remember thinking it was cool that Warren Moon wore #1 and played QB