I would be wary of giving 5 to Stringer. It’s always been a number of a leader. He could be a superstar, but I don’t see him ever being a leader. I’d give that one to either Smith (and I’m a bit leery about that, but he’s on the same tier of player as Stanton at least) or bump Heppell down.
I think BJ ought to get 5. Just like Jobe he really played his part in holding the club together during our dark times. Loyalty, leadership and strength all the attributes James Hird had and has.
I don’t get this. Goddard has been a star at Essendon, in the number 9. It’s his number. Why would he want to change it? He’s been fabulous in 9. All this veneration of the number 5 is starting to get on my goat. Players make numbers, not the other way round. Dean Rioli stuck with his 43, didn’t take a lower number and made 43 mean something. Some of you need to realise all numbers are ok and become something when players wear them, and turn them into special numbers when they have special careers.
Current vacancies/preferences #4 Smith or handover from Jobe to Parish (I know I know…) #5 McKenna but it will probably be Stringer (#15 to Stringer if Green goes) #24 Clarke/Saad? #31 (who forgot?) Shelve again #35 draft pick #40 draft pick #42 Saad
In recent times apart from Stanton, when has a player who wasn’t about a second or third year player changed numbers?
I get so sick of these suggestions for established players to change numbers. (It’s also worth noting, that Stanton had only just ended his 4th season when he changed numbers, so he wasn’t as established as someone like Heppell)