Burke mandates lower jersey numbers

[irrevocable]

I gotta say I'm pretty happy with this change (even with my #93 hanging right beside me). I've always loved the classic numbers! At the end of the day though, who really cares? Burke is trying to build a championship team and it's very, verrrry early into this rebuild. Numbers that players wear shouldn't be a hot topic issue.

Let the man build the team and stop worrying about what number is on the back of a player. If you love the player, love the player, the number is just that--a number.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by redforever

Nothing whatsoever with being a senior. I am a senior and think Burke is nuts to bring this in.

Burke isn't a senior, he's actually a mere 42 years old.

But that's how you look after being GM of the Toronto Maple Leafs.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Burke isn't a senior, he's actually a mere 42 years old.

But that's how you look after being GM of the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Burke is 52 years old - born June 30, 1955

[Enoch Root]

that would make him 58

[saXon]

The maths in this thread is strong.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

I find opposition to this bizarre.
Much of what we have talked about this year is culture.
This speaks directly to culture - team over individual.
The big picture is created by all the small parts.
For me it falls under who cares... But I see the philosophy behind it

From and outside perspective, the culture on this team is pretty damn good. If it ain't broke, don't fix it? What problem is this attempting to solve?

[goodyear]

Not sure why, I just don't like the birth year high numbers. Other high numbers I'm cool with.
Ex: RNH #93 as opposed to Smyth #94.

My all time fav Flames high number would be Nylander's #92.

[chalms04]

Originally Posted by saXon

The maths in this thread is strong.

All the more reason to keep the numbers low.

[Oil Stain]

I never really got the "team over the individual" angle. Certain numbers were always popular back in the 50's for the best players.

1 for goalies. 2 and 4 for defence. 9 for forwards, etc.

I did some internet digging and it turns out (according to random guy on the internet) that certain numbers were awarded to certain players based on getting the best accommodations on the TRAIN when travelling to and from away games.

"The train answer is the right one. Your sleeping berth on the train matched your jersey number. The goalie got #1, defensemen from #2 up, and forwards generally from #7 on up. Lower numbers meant lower berths - higher numbers put you on the 'top bunk' which was less comfortable.

Rookies were given higher numbers and had to 'earn' a lower number - Gordie Howe wore #17 as a rookie, and was advised to take #9 when it came open to get better accomodations on the train. Ditto for Bobby Hull, who wore #16 as a rookie.

Eventually, plane travel made the practice unnecessary, but it had become tradition by then. Teams routinely assigned lower numbers to their best players, and higher numbers to the lesser players. When a backup goalie was required, teams gave him the highest number available, generally #30, since they never envisioned using more than 30 players (or buying more than 30 jerseys) in a season. If a third goalie came in, he was usually given #31

A few, such as Tony Esposito, ended up with #35.

Kids have always wanted the same numbers as their heros, so #9 was very popular. (Hull, Howe, Richard). Because of Belliveau, half of Quebec kids wanted #4 (Lafleur wore #4 in juniors)

When Gretzky couldn't get #9 in juniors, he resorted to #99

When Phil Esposito was traded to the Rangers, he couldn't wear #7, so he got #77 and convinced Ken Hodge to go from #8 to #88.

When Lemieuz was getting hyped in junior as the next Gretzky, he wore #66 as a response. For similar reasons, Lindros wore #88.

High numbers became accepted, and desired, due to the influence of the later stars, just as lower numbers were desired by those who admired the older stars.

As for goalies, They were routinely assigned numbers in the mid 30's during their rookie camps - they either switched to a different (a more traditional or 'favorite') number when they "made it" the next year, or they kept the old one and made it their own, like Roy, Hasek, and previously, Esposito. As a result, those numbers became the desirable numbers to get for the next generation.

#1 has faded as a favorite - it's been retired by some teams, and a lot of the young goalies grew up watching guys who didn't wear it.
On the other hand, due to Roy's influence, #33 has practically become a 'traditional' number, just as Esposito's did for #35. "
-BC30

http://goaliestore.com/board/forum/t...-shirt-numbers


Its pretty funny that while low numbers were originally used to favour the best players on a team, they are now used by some managers/coaches as a way of trying to make everyone feel equal.

[UKflames]

Sounds like Burke putting his foot down because he can't find anything else to change, just reminding everyone he is in charge. I don't see the logic in this or his arguement about the fifties. Wearing no goalie mask worked in the fifties but you wouldn't do it now.

[Wastedyouth]

The low number thing is abject stupidity. Burke should be focusing on far more important things.

Alas, his antiquated thinking rears its head again.

[Hugh Jahrmes]

#1 GAUDREAU plz

[Stochansky]

I was under the impression, after listening to Burke being asked about Gaudreau's and Arnold's numbers, that this move was made to make earning a permanent spit on this team something a little more special. He said players would wear their rookie/training camp numbers until they got a permanent spot when they would be switched to a traditional number.

I don't have that much of a problem with it when it is approached like this - it doesn't really sound like Burke is trying to wage war with or assert control over any "high-numbered" players. Personally I kinda like the unique numbers, but I can get behind this.

One thing that no one seems to have considered is that maybe the players themselves support this. It appears many of us have jumped to the conclusion that Burke arrived at this decision in a vacuum and the players will automatically reject it simply because they may happen to have high numbers.

Just my two cents on the whole thing.

Oh yeah, and go Gaudreau and Billy!!!

[transplant99]

The whole thing seems like a colossal waste of time and energy, that could have some backlash among the players...so what's the point really?

Dumb idea at best, and at worst could be bad for the room.

[Iggy Snipe]

One must think #12 is not even an option.

[wwkayaker]

Doesn't Burke have bigger concerns? This seems pretty silly.

[Dan403]

So much whining in this thread, I thought I was on the Oliers' boards.

[OzSome]

I was wondering about all these high numbers lately. i too agrees with Burkie on this one. I guess it's okay to have a high number if they are producing the way Gretzky and Lemeiux did. They are exception.

[direwolf]

I'm astonished that this thread is at 9 pages already. Why are people so upset about the low number thing? Who gives a crap?

[BigTuna]

Burke did this in Toronto as well. I love the guy, but who cares about jersey numbers?