I always thought y'all was a special nerd.

Since Braden is probably going to end up at tackle, wouldn't he get a number in the 70s?

Seth, your wife must put up with a lot.  That is a lot of special analysis you've done here.  Don't tell me you play fantasy baseball and Settlers of Catan too!

Nicely done.  I'd just like to say -- and this really isn't a complaint -- that I am REALLY uncomfortable about any speculation as to Josh Furman's future based upon something that, well, I don't know any more than you do, Seth.  I totally get the fact that Seth wasn't predicting anything.  And the Tony Gant history with #14 is a relevant and informative part of this post.  I just have a feeling, that Josh Furman is going to be playing a lot more good football at Michigan.  I don't want to get into favorable predictions any more than others might engage in negative speculation.  It's just that based on what (little) is publicly known, Josh Furman should enjoy a strong presumption of innocence.  Not because we are fans of Michigan football, but because that is the law. 

I enjoyed this analysis probably way too much.   Nice mixture of pure speculation peppered with cold, hard data.   This is a winning post for those of us who endlessly peruse the annual Michigan numerical roster top-to-bottom, enamored with the numbers matching with names, hometowns, and high school affiliations.

I hope RJS gets #10.   There's something about a stud collegiate LB with a low # on his jersey that is very appealing.   

I enjoyed this..probably more than I should have.  I might need some rehab, because all of this is exceedingly entertaining

Richardson will clearly be 12.  Who doesn't love a good pattern?

Thanks for putting so much work into this.

How much choice exactly do the new guys have when they pick their number from the available options? I'm curious how this works. Do they request a number, and then the equipment staff/coaches see if that works, and then resolve any conflicts/multiple requests for the same #?

If Treadwell goes blue, does that mean we'll finally let somebody wear the #1 again?

I always thought a good Fullback number would be like...44 or something similar.  As a bulldozer of types, I would think that a FB should not have the numeral "1" in it anywhere.  Call it a visual perception type of thing...

glad I'm not the only one who made a spreadsheet like this. Here are some of my predictions that differed from yours

Wormley-91

Johnson-30

Funchess-84

Williams-82

Chesson-86

Clark-39

RJS-50

Ross-51

thought i saw a picture of LLT wearing 72....just saying

Better get Levenberry in the fold before we hand out 10 to RJS.

OL numbers run 50-79, regardless of position, since they frequently change position through their career.  I think 72 would be a great choice for someone who hopes to be ending up at OT, since Dierdorf wore it.  Been a while since I've noticed that number on a starting OT.

I agree Kalis with 67 and Braden with 51 are mortal locks.

Pipkins has said in the past few months Mattison won't let him wear 56 because he wants the D-line to be in the 80s or 90s.

I'm guessing it's unlikely that a freshman is going to receive a "Michigan Football Legend" number

And I pretty much discounted it, because, well, they're not the sharpest pencils. But since you seem to theorize it, and you're much smarter than they are, what do people think?

I didn't think this "Legend" thing was to make the numbers like #1, to be handed out on special occasions. I thought the whole point of it was to honor the player who made the number most famous, but still be able to USE the number. The #1 is so rarely doled out now it's almost defacto retired. Some seem to think that it's being saved for someone special to earn it.  But then what great receiver gets 21, which gets 1, and which is more "valuable"? And really, beyond that political nightmare, doesn't it limit who can wear it by position? Doesn't that leave out guys like Biakabutuka who wore 21 at a different position? 

I think they should pass it out like the regular numbers, but the patch is there to remind everyone that this particular numbers ISN'T just another number, and have that player, no matter the position, give the speech on who wore that number and made it special. If you're going to only reserve it for great players you're A. not going to use it very much, thereby negating what the intent of honoring them and B. you're quite possibly never going to have anyone earn another "great number" to "honor" because you're switching your best players to numbers that are associated with someone else. That's fine for one number, the number one, but seems like a bad idea for what will be a handful of numbers in the near future.

But what do y'all think?

(And P.S. Norfleet being a return specialist makes him seem like the perfect candidate for 21)