Rook #s- Possibly In Flux

[Fletch59]

OTAs are here, and with that, the rookies suit up with veterans for the first time.   The team is, in theory, whole. If you're a jersey buyer, maybe hold off.   Now I haven't added one since 2001 - I got a rookie Dan Morgan for like $10 after he'd already gotten hurt, and a gameworn Les Miller (yes, it is in fact a little embarrassing to roll around in #69 but I own it) from 96 or 97.   I hate to suggest I've grown out of it but, it is what it is. I do like the idea of tracking the numbers given, and I don't get the feeling that Xavier Legette or Ja'Tavion Sanders are staying put.   Sanders specifically said he wanted "0" but felt he had to earn it, and that could mean that he's going to aim to change it, or that he'll have to wait a year.  Legette said he wanted #2, but that he stuck with #17 based on council from family.  My guess is, it's not complete on change.  And those numbers, they're absolutely available.  Is the team using this as some form of carrot-and-stick way of showing that the rookies haven't arrived?  Will it be a rite-of-passage to award those numbers?  If yes and yes, interesting.  But, there's also no official way of forcing this and, I have no idea if teams actually care, this one included.  As far as pressing issues, I would say the team needs another cover guy to wear a number in the 20s, but that's a whole other thing. So, a prediction might include, by opening day, Sanders is 0 and Legette is 2. But for now, 17 for Legette; 24 for Jonathon Brooks, and Sanders carries the quite legendary 85.  Trevin Wallace is 56,  Chau Smith-Wade is 26, Jaden Crumedy 96, Michael Barrett 41.  I'll throw in Jalen Coker at 18 since there's a lot of heat on his name, too, and Andrew Raym's 60 might also have a real shot at making it. 
I've talked about the single digit thing here enough, but it does carry a little bit of an honor, from Brian Burns throwing on 0 last year, to the DJ Moore change from 12 to 2, to the 2021 opening day change from the ILBs.  College programs - and there was a college program in place when these changes became possible - left an air that, if you weren't a QB or specialist, you had to earn it.  On the other hand, Raheem Blackshear's #3 is a definitive backup who might not make the roster, all the same. Newcomers find that easier - Stephon Gilmore wore 9 when he came, Jaycee Horn 8 from the jump.   Diontae Johnson comes in with 5 this year. Jadeveon Clowney comes in with 7.  Robert Hunt provides the interesting 50. There are also two different #16s, Harrison Mevis (K, but at his size, the K is in bold) and Jack Plummer (QB).  So none of this is all that written in stone. 
All that said, while I'm boring you, I always liked the most traditional sense of the situation - back when LB were 50s, DL were 90s, receivers and TEs were 80s, and so on.   But is it neat to see a guy wearing a single digit rush the passer?  Yeah, it's pretty cool.   And a common thread remains, I suppose, nobody wants to touch those 40s numbers if they can help it. Does any of this gain you anything?  Not a damn thing. Maybe, schematically, the numbers game is more confusing to read a defense, the funny nature of a QB calling the protection by saying anything other than a number in the 50s being the Mike, but oddly, DBs haven't taken the 10s numbers by storm.  Just happens here and there.  I'd figure, those would be popular. 

Source: http://absolutepanthers.blogspot.com/fe ... ts/default