You can choose how the rules will break down for your own breakdown, of course, but if it helps, this was my thinking: I decided a single player may only be identified with one number. So even if Braylon Edwards is far and away the best player to ever wear No. 80, which he wore for two seasons, he must be considered amongst the No. 1's. That way, the player's entire contributions could be counted for him when discussing that number. Another way you could do this, though, would be to only include the contributions made while wearing that jersey, e.g. put up the total of Braylon's freshman and sophomore years against three years of Alan Branch and four years of Jerame Tuman. What I wanted to avoid was stuff like the Hutchinson thing -- counting a player's entire contribution double or triple just because he switched numbers. I also didn't want a guy's contribution to the program diminished by switching numbers, which was the effective result of the "contributions made under that number" idea. I also wanted to give current players a fair opportunity, though, which I found was almost impossible to do at a point in the year when nobody on the current roster has his senior (normally best) year counting for him. For this, I thought of projecting current players' best years to date as the standard for their remaining careers, e.g. if Brandon Graham has another year like last he will be the best No. 55 of all time. Eventually, though, for posterity's sake I decided against this. Both B-Graham (55) and Zoltan the Inconceivable (41) still qualified as the best players to wear their respective numeros, simply based on their contributions to date. It is in the nature of such a list to change in the future, anyway -- why project when the best player in Michigan history may not even have been born yet? Good luck taking down Gordie, there, Tater-Force This decision also helped with the younger players, since our hype machine typically blinds us to the fact that few players ever live up to our hopes. Example: considering the competition (Gordon Bell), if Forcier becomes the guy we now project him to be, No. 5 could well be his. Yet in two years from now we could just as likely end up talking about whether Devin Gardner can beat out Terrance Robinson for the position, and choosing T-Force over the guy who went yard-for-yard and then some with Archie Griffin would look pretty damn dumb, then, wouldn't it? If it didn't happen already on the field, it didn't happen. In the end, the value of a list that associates each number with a current or former player is to bring back memories of iconic players wearing those numbers. Because of this, I would strongly advise against using a "Star Player X used to wear this number" loophole to improve the overall talent of the list, fill a weak number, or move a contender from a crowded spot that he is better associated with. Start with the jersey -- who does that number remind you of. You can always add Honorable Mentions at the end. Let me know if you need any help (misopogon [at] att [dot] net), and good luck.