Nieuwendyk, Dryden will have their numbers retired

The ceremony will be at the Union game Feb. 26. The 1970 title team will be honored the next night (which also is Senior Night).

[cornellbigred.com]

Maybe Dryden was in goal for that unbeaten team. See, the Sun isn't the only Ithaca information source with occasional factchecking glitches.

[www.cornellbigred.com]

CornellBigRed.com
The following night, Cornell will honor the 40th anniversary of the 1969 NCAA champions, the team that went 29-0-0 to become the only undefeated, untied national champion in NCAA history. Players from that team will be honored between periods of the Big Red’s game against Rensselaer. That night will also be Senior Night, with the traditional recognition of the Cornell seniors being held after the game.

I think it's fine to honor such players by hanging a jersey-ish banner somewhere, but why do they have to take the numbers out of circulation altogether?

Deja vous

Yeah unfortunately the basketball team will also be playing at home against Penn and Princeton that weekend. They really poorly scheduled basketball and hockey this year since there are 5 home games conflicts.

Bah. Retiring numbers is lame, and it pushes us that much nearer to atrocities like numbers > 31. Now get off my lawn!

Trotsky
Bah. Retiring numbers is lame, and it pushes us that much nearer to atrocities like numbers > 31. Now get off my lawn!

I think it's lame for a different reason: these guys clearly are having their numbers retired for things they did in their hockey careers beyond Cornell, because there were plenty of other players throughout Cornell's history that had as big an impact on Cornell's success as these guys. It makes no sense to retire these numbers and not plenty of others.

I have commented on this before, but I am not sure if I did it here. I am against retiring numbers of college players. Honoring them in some way like hanging jersey replicas, as suggested above, is fine. I don't particularly care for the "towels" that RPI uses, but I like the idea. i think that it is good for current players to wear numbers used by the great players who preceded them.

I am also against using high numbers. I am also against using them in the pros. Not allowing number 13 seems weird to me.

ursusminor
I am also against using high numbers. I am also against using them in the pros. Not allowing number 13 seems weird to me.

It's cause Schafer's a mason...

Ugh.

Honor them? Yes. A thousand times, yes.

Retire the numbers? NO!

RichH
Ugh.

Honor them? Yes. A thousand times, yes.

Retire the numbers? NO!

Amen.

Trotsky

ursusminor
I am also against using high numbers. I am also against using them in the pros. Not allowing number 13 seems weird to me.

It's cause Schafer's a mason...

He throws bricks. I knew it.

At least the bar is set pretty high. I don't mind as much as everyone else seems to.

RatushnyFan
At least the bar is set pretty high. I don't mind as much as everyone else seems to.

The problem is that once you start retiring numbers it can be hard to stop, hard to not lower the bar later. Look at the team that started the practice, the Yankees. They started by retiring numbers for guys who are truly part of the baseball pantheon (Gehrig, Ruth, DiMaggo, Mantle). But by now they've retired 15 numbers for 16 players, with much lower standards. (Billy Martin? Really?) They've literally reached the point where the team is almost out of numbers to hand out in March (I think there were two or three numbers below 100 that were unused last spring.)

ursusminor
Not allowing number 13 seems weird to me.

I always thought that was simply a superstition thing. But there are a few 13's in the pros now, so time to let that one go, too.

Jeff Hopkins '82

ursusminor
Not allowing number 13 seems weird to me.

I always thought that was simply a superstition thing. But there are a few 13's in the pros now, so time to let that one go, too.

Why? A tradition is a tradition. The more unique the better, in fact.

As was said, the Yankees' retired numbers are a self-parody, as is the whole "league retired number." Hockey is particularly risky because of the proliferation of all the stupid high numbers in the NHL. 91 isn't a flippin' hockey player, it's a non-skill football position or a NASCAR vehicle.

Trotsky

Jeff Hopkins '82

ursusminor
Not allowing number 13 seems weird to me.

I always thought that was simply a superstition thing. But there are a few 13's in the pros now, so time to let that one go, too.

Why? A tradition is a tradition. The more unique the better, in fact.

As was said, the Yankees' retired numbers are a self-parody, as is the whole "league retired number." Hockey is particularly risky because of the proliferation of all the stupid high numbers in the NHL. 91 isn't a flippin' hockey player, it's a non-skill football position or a NASCAR vehicle.

You can't mean to imply that Justin Tuck is a "non-skill football" player, despite what this past week may have shown.

Ronald '09

Trotsky

Jeff Hopkins '82

ursusminor
Not allowing number 13 seems weird to me.

I always thought that was simply a superstition thing. But there are a few 13's in the pros now, so time to let that one go, too.

Why? A tradition is a tradition. The more unique the better, in fact.

As was said, the Yankees' retired numbers are a self-parody, as is the whole "league retired number." Hockey is particularly risky because of the proliferation of all the stupid high numbers in the NHL. 91 isn't a flippin' hockey player, it's a non-skill football position or a NASCAR vehicle.

You can't mean to imply that Justin Tuck is a "non-skill football" player, despite what this past week may have shown.

"Skill position" is a poorly-named category, but it refers to QB/RB/WR and, if you want to stretch it, TE. To wit, Nnamdi Asumogha is a skilled football player while JaMarcus Russell plays a skill position.

Ronald '09
You can't mean to imply that Justin Tuck is a "non-skill football" player, despite what this past week may have shown.

No, it never occurred to me to check our 91. I started out with "a lineman" and then wasn't sure it might be a DB," so I switched it. Please don't send Justin Tuck to egg my house.

Trotsky
91 isn't a flippin' hockey player, it's a non-skill football position or a NASCAR vehicle.

Or Dennis Rodman.

Trotsky
Hockey is particularly risky because of the proliferation of all the stupid high numbers in the NHL. 91 isn't a flippin' hockey player, it's a non-skill football position or a NASCAR vehicle.

Honestly, I can't bring myself to care about this in the slightest. It's just a number, and if it makes the player happy to wear a high one, so what?

On the other hand, I think teams in general are overzealous about retiring numbers these days.