Looks like Peppers is #2

Submitted by BRBLUE on June 12th, 2014 at 5:57 PM

sorry guys I had a photo of the lockeroom that had a nameplate with jabrill peppers #2 on it. How do you post pics?

 photo 10447368_10152147966126629_502850585_n_zps3a782f4d.jpg


Wolverine Devotee

June 12th, 2014 at 6:57 PM ^

Jabrill Peppers retweeted me. We are also both class of 2014 HS graduates. Therefore, we are bros. 



Seriously though, I love how pumped we're getting over a jersey number being assigned to a player. But at Michigan, every jersey number has a story. 


June 13th, 2014 at 8:49 AM ^

I know I'm late to this party but when I read Wolverine Devotee's post on tweeting Peppers I literally let out an audible "ugh".

And then - the very first response was you with an "ugh".  Why do people insist on tweeting total and complete strangers regardless of their percieved "connection".  I do not get it.

Perhaps it would be helpful if Brian and other bloggers, say from 11W, wrote articles with helpful hints and posted them on the front page for others to read.

rob f

June 14th, 2014 at 12:47 AM ^

it seems marginally OK for an 18-yr-old recent HS Grad to tweet an 18-yr-old football player who is soon to begin his CFB career.

But what's to stop some 30-yr-old (or 40? or 50? or 60?, etc.) from pretending to be just an incoming college freshman is this scenerio?   I just think it's best to ratchet down the "hero-worship" a little bit and show extreme restraint when thinking about tweeting a kid who is yet to play a single down at The Big House.





June 12th, 2014 at 7:46 PM ^

In my opinion, it's close to being the dumbest idea ever in college sports, right alongside the retiring of jersey numbers in the first place.   Unless college football is going to expand jersey numbers out to 3 digits, it find it all kind of dumb.

I'm glad TB Mel Anthony wore No. 37, but I'm also very glad WR Jim Smith did too, And FB Bob Perriman after that. And LB Erick Anderson after that. And LB Jarrett Irons after that. 

Each of these players were very special and made huge plays for the Michigan football team. They are all remembered for their contributions and their jersey numbers.

Anthony Carter, Greg McMurtry, David Alexander, Braylon Edwards were all spectactular too wearing No. 1 in their own way.

But what good are all these great numbers, if kids can't even play with them anymore?  I think the practice kind of diminishes new players from making their own great story at Michigan, having to live in the shadow of prior giants.  Screw that. Everyone knows past is important.....for purposes of tradition. But living off the past, or living in it are both ill advised.

Peppers getting No. 2 is really cool.  I understand the choice.

In some ways, I wish he'd have picked little-used No. 39 or 38 or 46 at Michigan, to sort of say "screw it, I'm my own person, and I'll make my own damn legacy here, thank you".





June 12th, 2014 at 8:48 PM ^

Those players are remembered as legends because of what they did on the field. People remember Braylon as #1 as well as AC because each was amazing. If Peppers (or any other player using the same number as a former M legend) has an amazing, legendary career at M, he will likewise be remembered for his #, just like those before him. Having or not having the legends program will not change that.

I like the legends designation for #s of former Michigan players and hope that someday we have multiple players at those same numbers designated as legends. It was a bold decision by the athletic dept and it makes us stand out even more than other programs because of our history and tradition.

Sextus Empiricus

June 13th, 2014 at 12:22 AM ^

this drama detracts from the team concept in my mind.  Let's send all the legend jersey athletes to SEAL camp and see what kind of respect that garners them.  I say hand out the numbers and let the chips fall where they may (including the legends jerseys.)  This will create an atmosphere where (with double digit numbers) all jerseys will be legend jerseys sooner rather than later.

The way it's going...the numbers are changing before the players have a chance to leave their own legacy.  The possibility of generating additional legacy traditions is diminished by moving high performing or promising athletes to existing legacy jerseys.

Sextus Empiricus

June 17th, 2014 at 8:15 PM ^

 It's wasted time evaluating players with respect to their number and not their play.  They gave up helmet decal game week awards for this reason. 

 Honors like this are best left for banquets when a player's career is over when coaches, players and even fans can appreciate a player for what they have accomplished.  I'd rather the coaches spend this time coaching instead of fulfilling legacy requirements - to assign jerseys annually, leave that to the equipment manager.

Jersey numbers resonate as in my mind when I see players on the field.  I will always associate Leach with 7 and Lytle with 41 (who played as 25 as an under classmen.)  If performance is all that matters - let's swap jerseys every game based on who has a better practice week.



June 12th, 2014 at 8:57 PM ^

It's important to know whether this is an up-to-date photo or from a past recruiting visit.

IF it's recent, then the most interesting thing is what's on the photo's lefthand side. Given the evidence on the arm (that the number begins with a "1"), chest numeral (the number ends in a 1), and chest numeral placement (alignment precisely under the adidas logo tells us this is a #1 jersey and not a #11 jersey), it would appear the jersey was recently hanging for either (a) no reason at all or (b) because someone got it.

Earlier in this thread, I wrote about how it doesn't really make sense for any of the receivers to be getting a #1 jersey right now (Funchess, Chesson, Darboh, Harris, Canteen). But it isn't strictly insane to wonder whether the coaches might change their minds about Funchess's jersey.  

Maybe it doesn't make sense for him to have a TE legacy jersey now that he's switched positions. A tempting hypothesis compels us to ask whether the #87 might have been freed up by a Funchess move to #1 (by far the most deserving player on the roster). In such a world, Jake Butt could be a fitting wearer of #87.


June 12th, 2014 at 9:07 PM ^

I agree. My first thought was that this must be from a recruiting trip.

In the locker room, don't positions sit together? That's how we were in HS. If so, it wouldn't make sense for #1 (WR) to be next to #2 (DB)

Unless Jabrill is splitting duties already... /rumormongering


June 12th, 2014 at 11:51 PM ^

that Hoke went away from numerical seating and to position group seating. It was some kind of mini-story about the difference between his approach and RR's. A couple quick Google searches didn't turn up anything relevant but it's been like three and a half years, so that's not too surprising.

Perkis-Size Me

June 12th, 2014 at 9:38 PM ^

If you're going to wear that number, Peppers, then make sure you do it justice. Normally I'd say pick your own number and forge your own legacy, but many great linemen have worn #77, and the same goes with receivers and #1. Why not allow the great corners to wear #2?