Predictions on who will wear the vacant Legends numbers? (#11 & #21)

Submitted by Wolverine Devotee on June 13th, 2014 at 5:36 PM

Kind of talked about it a little yesterday.

My picks for who will wear the vacant Legends numbers are Chesson for #21 and Countess for #11.

The only reason I think they'd give Chesson #21 is because he's the only true receiver to have any significant playing time. This year is interesting because this is the first year we don't have a clear choice for #21 unlike 2012 and 2013.

Something I don't see happening but would make sense would be for Funchess to change from #87 to #21 since he is pretty much all but listed as a receiver, and Butt to get #87 since he's a TE.

This would drive many people crazy who already can't keep up with the crazy amount of number changes, though.


Your picks?

Comments

FreddieMercuryHayes

June 13th, 2014 at 5:41 PM ^

Frankly, I wouldn't mind either sitting out a year. When this started, I thought it was really cool, but that was with the assumption they wouldn't give them out every year as basically a requirement. Unless a player really wants it, and earned it, don't give it.

turd ferguson

June 13th, 2014 at 6:21 PM ^

IMO, they got really close to a cool, novel tradition but screwed up one detail. I like the patches as a way to honor past players while keeping numbers in circulation. I just don't like that they're a privilege to wear and guys earn them after starting with different numbers. Personally, I don't care if a true freshman gets #11 and I don't think it harms the program if the guy never becomes a great player or ideal citizen. I just don't like all the changing around of numbers, often with staff encouragement/inducement.

cutter

June 13th, 2014 at 7:02 PM ^

I think it's a unique way to honor past players--certainly much better than, for example, a ring of honor painted inside or outside the stadium.

It also directly connects the players who wear the numbers and the team itself to the Michigan legacy.  I've been in the football lockerroom a couple of times and those special lockers stand out as a reminder to UM's former legacy as much as the Team 135 signs.

I don't know about most fans, but I don't find it too difficult to keep up with the number changes.  There's only been a handful of them to date--21 Jeremy Gallon & Roy Roundtree, 47 Jake Ryan, 48 Desmond Morgan, 11 Jordan Kovacs & Courtney Avery, 87 Brandon Moore & Devin Funchess, 98 Devin Gardner.  It's not rocket science.

I suppose if anyone gets #21, it'll be a wide receiver and Chesson does make sense.  Butt could be the heir apparent to #87 from Funchess because I doubt they're going to have DF change jerseys twice.  

The Wistert Brothers were all offensive linemen, so that number's not likely to go there.  I imagine it'll stay in the secondary.

One day in the future, we'll see #1, #21 and perhaps #98 all at the WR position with #47 and #48 at LB, #11 in the secondary and #87 at tight end.  It'll then be so common place that we won't think twice about it--except to generate offseason discussion on who gets and/or deserves it for the next season.

 

 

 

 

 

Wolverine Devotee

June 13th, 2014 at 7:22 PM ^

This 100%.

I'm sure there were angry alums back when Crisler brought in the winged helmets and got rid of the black helmets with the white stripes on them.

The average Michigan fan probably had trouble naming the five retired numbers. I bet more than 75% can tell you the Legend numbers now and who they're honoring.

TIMMMAAY

June 13th, 2014 at 8:10 PM ^

You really think that 75% of all fans can rattle off the "Legend" numbers, and who they're honoring? I doubt that 75% of MGoBloggers (a pretty extreme segment of the fanbase) could name the "Legend" numbers, and who they're honoring. 

I've underestimated the scale of the bubble you live in. I say again, reality is out there if you look. 

gwkrlghl

June 13th, 2014 at 8:43 PM ^

I have MGoPoints so I proclaim myself important MGoBlogger and representative of all MGoBloggers. So let's see here...

obviously 11 and 21...99?...47...48? But who they are for, I have no clue. Ford is one....Oosterbaan...Harmon....Wistert? Don't even ask me to try to match names to numbers

Toledo_Wolverine

June 13th, 2014 at 9:22 PM ^

Most importantly, TIMMMAA's last paragraph sounded like something my Mather would say. I hope Devote reads that paragraph and thinks about it. My advice, which doesn't mean a damn, is coming from being an older brother who wished he would have listened to his dad's advice years ago.

Pit2047

June 13th, 2014 at 8:59 PM ^

THAT is a fantastic idea and a great way to honor old players. What I don't like is the fact that all the new players can't earn there own "legend" status with their numbers. When you think Michigan #16 who pops into your head. Imagine if Denard had to change his jersey. Jeremy Gallon should be synonymous with the number 10 but he had to change his number his senior year where he broke records. The patches should be rotated though players throughout the season or something kinda like Ohio did with Christian Bryant's? #2 last year. Just an idea but it needs to vhange

ZB75

June 14th, 2014 at 1:26 PM ^

You are exactly right about Denard.  He is and will always be #16.  I liked the idea someone posted a while ago about having one home game a year be designated a legends game where all the "legends" jerseys are worn by certain deserving upperclassmen. 

gwkrlghl

June 13th, 2014 at 6:20 PM ^

Won't we look back in 20 years and say "Hey, remember when every good receiver we've had for two straight decades has had their number changed to #21?"

Imagine if we changed Denard to #7 for Michigan QB's. I'm glad he kept #16. Now #16 and Denard will always be associated. It's better that way

cutter

June 13th, 2014 at 7:17 PM ^

Do you have a problem remembering Braylon Edwards?   After all, he did start his career with #80 before he got the #1 jersey.  I would also add that he's also associated with that number by most Michigan fans as well.  What about Jeremy Gallon or Roy Roundtree?  Have you forgotten those two guys yet or will it take a couple of decades for that to happen?

The things that make those players memorable wasn't the number changes.  It was their production on the field.  If you say Braylon Edwards and Michgian State or Roy Roundtree/Jeremy Gallon and Notre Dame, then you have an immediate image of those players's feats in those game--and that doesn't tie into the number they wore at the time.

 

 

 

ShadowStorm33

June 13th, 2014 at 7:38 PM ^

The distinction there is desire; I really hope both Gallon and Roundtree wanted the jersey, similar to Devin, Kovacs, Avery, etc. There weren't any problems originally, since Hemingway was already wearing 21. It's when guys start changing, every season sometimes, that I can see problems. Gallon in particular didn't look very thrilled with it, despite saying all the right things. That's the biggest difference with Braylon; Braylon lobbied HARD for the 1, and even had to wait a year and prove himself to get it. If a guy feels that way about one of the legends jerseys, I'm 100% behind it. But if you're forcing it on someone just so it's out there every year, that's what I (and I'd presume a number of those less enthusiastic about them) have issues with.

gwkrlghl

June 13th, 2014 at 8:49 PM ^

Great players are often associated with their number. Braylon is 1, Woodson 2, Desmond 21, Denard 16, Mike Hart 20, Jake Long 77. It'll be a shame when our list goes Braylon 21, Woodson 21, Desmond 21, Denard 21, Mike Hart 21, Jake Long 21, etc. 

Obviously those guys aren't all receivers so that wouldn't happen but my point is why force everyone to take the same numbers over and over again? I love that players can forever associate themselves with a number in our minds

Wolfman

June 14th, 2014 at 4:18 PM ^

It is undebateable as to which player made the #1 jersey special at UM. I am surprised any UM fan was unaware of this, doubly so for poster who associated it with Braylon first because he's a site member, therefore, should have a much keener knowledge of UM football.  It was he -Braylon- who wanted the #1 jersey, not to make it special, but because it already was.  No doubting he had a great career here but had AC been at UM after we adopted the pro-style offense his staggering numbers may have been even greater.  There are a few other reasons this jersey will always be his, no matter the size of endowment extended by Braylon.  He never dropped a catchable ball that I can recall and he also was one of the greatest return men in UM history.  Considering the number of times we threw the ball during his time here, his cumullative average, scoring a TD every fourth time he touched the ball, pulling what is now referred to as a "Forcier" on another ND defender, etc. becomes even more remarkable. 

And as an aside, I dislike the conditions that Braylon placed on who should be worthy of wearing the number as if he owned it and had every right to lay down the terms associated with having the honor of wearing it.  It contradicts the true meaning of The Team, The Team, The Team and it's my contention this was his true purpose all along, so some fans like the one you referred to would actually do what he did and mistakenly honor the wrong player. 

Mr Miggle

June 13th, 2014 at 6:40 PM ^

I think it was a nice idea to bring back these numbers. Sadly, the players who had worn them were mostly forgotten and this brought some well deserved attention to their legacies. Going forward, I'd just as soon see them awarded like any other numbers. Let them go to freshmen unless an upperclassman asks to switch. I'd make an exception for 98. One or two earned jerseys should be enough.

Mr. Yost

June 13th, 2014 at 5:59 PM ^

But all of those were discussed as well...you even made the now famous GUARANTEE that Countess or Taylor would wear #11.

I made the counterpoint that Wilson could easily wear it as Kovacs and Avery were the last two to have it and they were both safeties. Not saying he will, but it certianly puts a crimp in any guarantee. Because it would make perfect sense if Wilson did.

As for 21, clearly it'll be Chesson or Funchess and Butt would get Funchess' legacy # if he switched.

They're the only two with experience. Flip a coin.

BayWolves

June 13th, 2014 at 6:02 PM ^

I am not a fan of any of the crazy number changes except for the formerly coveted #1 jersey. I would perhaps agree to also having a coveted #2 jersey but that's it.  If you want to honor the legends, a sticker or patch should do without all the changes. I would rather less time be devoted to this issue by the program and more go into other things tht are actually necessary for player and team development.

Qmatic

June 13th, 2014 at 6:35 PM ^

Keep the patches, let anyone have the #. Exceptions being to #1 (should go to a standout receiver) and I think that #98 should've been kept retired.

Mr. Yost

June 13th, 2014 at 7:23 PM ^

This "earning" business is garbage.

There will never be a set standard for every player...and if you wait until the player does something big, he may keep his own number.

Manningham wanted #1 coming in, after he had success in #86 he kept it. Not that it was offered, but when asked, he wasn't interested.

And earn it? Bullshit. JUSTIN TURNER had the number.

Sam McGuffie, Vince Smith, Shawn Crable, Cato June...all these guys wore #2 and didn't have to earn it.

We're just making shit up as we go along. You have to "earn" #2, but the player who made you come up with that isn't even a legends patch, lol.