Numbers - 2017

Langford in 4 and laverde in 5 when possible

WHAT IS WRONG WITH 30 and 33??

A lot compared with 4 & 5! Champion numbers need future champions, and they will suit them perfectly

Langford in 4 and laverde in 5 when possible

WHAT IS WRONG WITH 30 and 33??

A lot compared with 4 & 5! Champion numbers need future champions, and they will suit them perfectly

So 31 was no good for a champion like Fletch and 32 was no good for a champion like Tim Watson?
All the numbers up to about 36 are pretty good IMO.

PS: You probably would have changed Michael Jordan’s number from 23 because it was too high for a champion like him (yes, I know… different sport).

Conor Mckenna could get 17… I can see that

His career has been so promising so far, why do you want to ruin it with the doomed number?

next you’ll tell me peeto has joined the bandwagon.

■■■■ Peeto

Every fkn year this thread is made too early. Why not start it post draft/trade period??

I reckon Dea has to get 1 if possible - displays the characteristics of numerous past players in the number.

Assuming he is there, Kelly could have any of 14, 16, 17 or 19. The other who could rightfully have one of these is Hartley.

Agree that one of Lav/Lang if not both could be promoted to a higher, although I like the idea of Lang in 4 that so many have spoken about. Who knows, it still might be free yet.

Also no certainty on 15 being free yet either so hold that thought.

Hartley has said that he wants to keep the number 36

Langford in 4 and laverde in 5 when possible

WHAT IS WRONG WITH 30 and 33??

A lot compared with 4 & 5! Champion numbers need future champions, and they will suit them perfectly

So 31 was no good for a champion like Fletch and 32 was no good for a champion like Tim Watson?
All the numbers up to about 36 are pretty good IMO.

PS: You probably would have changed Michael Jordan’s number from 23 because it was too high for a champion like him (yes, I know… different sport).

You’ve clearly missed the point here champ!

Langford in 4 and laverde in 5 when possible

WHAT IS WRONG WITH 30 and 33??

A lot compared with 4 & 5! Champion numbers need future champions, and they will suit them perfectly

So 31 was no good for a champion like Fletch and 32 was no good for a champion like Tim Watson?
All the numbers up to about 36 are pretty good IMO.

PS: You probably would have changed Michael Jordan’s number from 23 because it was too high for a champion like him (yes, I know… different sport).

You’ve clearly missed the point here champ!

Not really champ!

My point is that you would have given Fletch and Timmy lower numbers after a year or two, but they kept their numbers and made them great.

Langford in 4 and laverde in 5 when possible

WHAT IS WRONG WITH 30 and 33??

We’re not great at keeping players with those numbers at our club :neutral:

This thread is too early. But I reckon Dea should keep 49 and that we also keep it in rotation as a little nod to the blokes who helped us.

Langford in 4 and laverde in 5 when possible

WHAT IS WRONG WITH 30 and 33??

We’re not great at keeping players with those numbers at our club :neutral:


Russell Ellen and Andy Wilson didn’t last too long, although Wilson did win a Crichton.
This thread is too early. But I reckon Dea should keep 49 and that we also keep it in rotation as a little nod to the blokes who helped us.

Yes it is too early, but having said that, I would give Dea 19, but I would keep Kelly in 47 if he stays on.

Langford in 4 and laverde in 5 when possible

WHAT IS WRONG WITH 30 and 33??

We’re not great at keeping players with those numbers at our club :neutral:

Kevin Walsh? Glenn Hawker…oh, hang on.

Langford in 4 and laverde in 5 when possible

WHAT IS WRONG WITH 30 and 33??

We’re not great at keeping players with those numbers at our club :neutral:


Russell Ellen and Andy Wilson didn’t last too long, although Wilson did win a Crichton.
Langford in 4 and laverde in 5 when possible

WHAT IS WRONG WITH 30 and 33??

We’re not great at keeping players with those numbers at our club :neutral:

Kevin Walsh? Glenn Hawker…oh, hang on.

I had McPhee and Ryder in mind, coz Im just a youngin

Langford in 4 and laverde in 5 when possible

WHAT IS WRONG WITH 30 and 33??

A lot compared with 4 & 5! Champion numbers need future champions, and they will suit them perfectly

So 31 was no good for a champion like Fletch and 32 was no good for a champion like Tim Watson?
All the numbers up to about 36 are pretty good IMO.

PS: You probably would have changed Michael Jordan’s number from 23 because it was too high for a champion like him (yes, I know… different sport).

You’ve clearly missed the point here champ!

Not really champ!

My point is that you would have given Fletch and Timmy lower numbers after a year or two, but they kept their numbers and made them great.

Haha have a listen to these assumptions! But, in 1 to 2 years when langfords in 4 and Lav in 5, I’ll give ya a cheers happy

Langford in 4 and laverde in 5 when possible

WHAT IS WRONG WITH 30 and 33??

A lot compared with 4 & 5! Champion numbers need future champions, and they will suit them perfectly

So 31 was no good for a champion like Fletch and 32 was no good for a champion like Tim Watson?
All the numbers up to about 36 are pretty good IMO.

PS: You probably would have changed Michael Jordan’s number from 23 because it was too high for a champion like him (yes, I know… different sport).

You’ve clearly missed the point here champ!

Not really champ!

My point is that you would have given Fletch and Timmy lower numbers after a year or two, but they kept their numbers and made them great.

Haha have a listen to these assumptions! But, in 1 to 2 years when langfords in 4 and Lav in 5, I’ll give ya a cheers happy

Yeah, makes perfect sense.

Conor Mckenna could get 17… I can see that

His career has been so promising so far, why do you want to ruin it with the doomed number?

Judd Lalich though?

Would clearly have been multiple Brownlow medalist Judd Lalich if not for the curse of 17.

Retire/destroy #17 please.

And #23 isn’t far behind. Alot of decent players have been injured because of it and there have also been alot of not-so decent players.

Retire/destroy #17 please.

And #23 isn’t far behind. Alot of decent players have been injured because of it and there have also been alot of not-so decent players.

What’s wrong with it, the great Jay Nash wore number 17!

Daryl Gerlach, my first footy hero. Skilful, quick and courageous.

Retire/destroy #17 please.

And #23 isn’t far behind. Alot of decent players have been injured because of it and there have also been alot of not-so decent players.

What’s wrong with it, the great Jay Nash wore number 17!

greatest player the clubs ever seen, under his leadership we would not have had a drug saga.