Prediction Player jumper numbers

[Saintly Viewed]

Yeah, I've seen that post so I expect that to happen as well. Call me old fashioned but I actually think the captain should be wearing number 1, but that tradition seems all but dead and buried!

There might still be some players who would shy away from wearing that number, but Stephenson doesn't seem to be the nervous type. Just like Fasolo before him, he doesn't appear to lack self-confidence!

You Sir are going back to when 1 was the captain. Even 2 was the vice captain as I recall Len Thompson in 2.

Once Ray Shaw ascended to the captaincy (late 70s) that was the end of 1 for the captain.
Now that it is 40 years or so I think it’s safe to say it’s dead and not being revived.

Going back 100 years or so we used give numbers in alphabetical order.
Hence Jack Regan is credited with the league record of wearing the most numbers over a league career.

 

[35Daicos]

They've just updated that article BTW, but haven't added anything of real significance. It does say:

Kelly's decision regarding No.23 could allow fellow new recruit Jordan Roughead to continue with the jumper he played 138 games in for the Western Bulldogs, with the ruckman yet to be given a number.

Last year's top Magpie draftee Jaidyn Stephenson will be allocated a new number in the coming weeks.

 

[JezzasOnTheAsphalt]

Can't remember many rookies wearing a number as low as 9 recently..

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Can't remember many rookies wearing a number as low as 9 recently..

Nope.
Though Murray is in 9 from being a senior player.

 

[JezzasOnTheAsphalt]

Nope.
Though Murray is in 9 from being a senior player.

I think a relegation to the 40s would be fair enough. That said, I don't like the idea of Beams in his Brisbane number either. Dilemmas everywhere

 

[nahnah]

I would like to see Beams in 17 again but don’t think Brown should have to give it up, don’t want Beams in 9.

Stephenson in 1 is very obvious.

 

[35Daicos]

Can't remember many rookies wearing a number as low as 9 recently..

Nope.
Though Murray is in 9 from being a senior player.

Certainly not for Collingwood. The unfortunate Alex Johnson of Sydney wore #2 in 2018, and that was easily the lowest of any of the 2018 Rookie List players. In Johnson's case he'd had that number for a couple of seasons before being pushed down to the Rookie List.

I've only looked as far back as 2008, but Sharrod Wellingham with 21 that year appears to be the lowest number a Collingwood Rookie List player has had in that time.

 

[Jen2310]

I would like to see Beams in 17 again but don’t think Brown should have to give it up, don’t want Beams in 9.

Stephenson in 1 is very obvious.

If Callum offered it that's different. If not, looks like it could be 11 Beams get.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Certainly not for Collingwood. The unfortunate Alex Johnson of Sydney wore #2 in 2018, and that was easily the lowest of any of the 2018 Rookie List players. In Johnson's case he'd had that number for a couple of seasons before being pushed down to the Rookie List.

I've only looked as far back as 2008, but Sharrod Wellingham with 21 that year appears to be the lowest number a Collingwood Rookie List player has had in that time.

Adelaide have given #1 to a rookie listed player a couple of times, Luke Thompson and Jono Beech

 

[76woodenspooners]

Journalist says (7:40) “so, number 42” ( drama at Collingwood!!!) ...



... but what he really said was “so, number 40 Atu”

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Notice the joy in Atu and Isaac.

They will play with joy.

 

[legendstatus]

All impressive media performers already - good to see

Eight Oakleigh Chargers at the club, as a former Oakleigh Boy, I’m mighty proud. A few good ones coming through in the next few years as well.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[SchuPie]

Journalist says (7:40) “so, number 42” ( drama at Collingwood!!!) ...



... but what he really said was “so, number 40 Atu”

Needs more “obviouslys”

 

[Pragmatic Shill]

Needs more “obviouslys”

Media needs to stop asking obvious questions.

 

[Black_White]

Media needs to stop asking obvious questions.

You want the media to start thinking originally?
Unheard of!

 

[Jen2310]

I wish I had asked Beama one friday when I talked to him at training if he knew his number; but then he probably would be sworn to secrecy and unable to say.

 

[barrackers]

Certainly not for Collingwood. The unfortunate Alex Johnson of Sydney wore #2 in 2018, and that was easily the lowest of any of the 2018 Rookie List players. In Johnson's case he'd had that number for a couple of seasons before being pushed down to the Rookie List.

I've only looked as far back as 2008, but Sharrod Wellingham with 21 that year appears to be the lowest number a Collingwood Rookie List player has had in that time.

We've had a few others in the 20s, but from memory none lower. An unusual one is cat b rookie Ben Richmond wearing #30.

23 Lachlan Keeffe (ASADA)
24 Josh Thomas (ASADA)
25 Ben Hudson (rookie list)
27 Tony Armstrong (delisted/rookied)
30 Ben Richmond (category b rookie)

 

[Saintly Viewed]

We've had a few others in the 20s, but from memory none lower. An unusual one is cat b rookie Ben Richmond wearing #30.

23 Lachlan Keeffe (ASADA)
24 Josh Thomas (ASADA)
25 Ben Hudson (rookie list)
27 Tony Armstrong (delisted/rookied)
30 Ben Richmond (category b rookie)

For got Ben Richmond.

I thought of the people’s beard the wonderful Ben Hudson as the lowest rookie number if a player brought in only as a roookie.
And truthfully the people’s beard was de facto senior guy anyway.

But ofcourse you’re right Keeffe wins our lowest rookie number.

 

[35Daicos]

We've had a few others in the 20s, but from memory none lower. An unusual one is cat b rookie Ben Richmond wearing #30.

23 Lachlan Keeffe (ASADA)
24 Josh Thomas (ASADA)
25 Ben Hudson (rookie list)
27 Tony Armstrong (delisted/rookied)
30 Ben Richmond (category b rookie)

Yeah, Keeffe was still #23 back in his early days at the club, when he was on the Rookie List (prior to the ban).

I haven't bothered looking from before 2008.

 

[barrackers]

For got Ben Richmond.

I thought of the people’s beard the wonderful Ben Hudson as the lowest rookie number if a player brought in only as a rookie.
And truthfully the people’s beard was de facto senior guy anyway.

But ofcourse you’re right Keeffe wins our lowest rookie number.

While Keeffe wore 23 (and 61) for our VFL team in 2008 prior to being rookie listed he started as an AFL listed player in 44.

 

[35Daicos]

We've had a few others in the 20s, but from memory none lower. An unusual one is cat b rookie Ben Richmond wearing #30.

23 Lachlan Keeffe (ASADA)
24 Josh Thomas (ASADA)
25 Ben Hudson (rookie list)
27 Tony Armstrong (delisted/rookied)
30 Ben Richmond (category b rookie)

For got Ben Richmond.

I thought of the people’s beard the wonderful Ben Hudson as the lowest rookie number if a player brought in only as a roookie.
And truthfully the people’s beard was de facto senior guy anyway.

But ofcourse you’re right Keeffe wins our lowest rookie number.

Now I've checked from 1998-2007 inc., and the lowest number given to a R/L player was 32 for Marcus Barham in 1998. I'm not sure about the rookies' numbers from 1997 (first year of the R/L) apart from Mal Michael, but certainly back in those days they weren't given anything at all early. The 1997 AFL Season Guide didn't give the R/L player numbers, and any Football Record (SLV) that I saw for a Collingwood game didn't show those players' numbers either.

 

[35Daicos]

While Keeffe wore 23 (and 61) for our VFL team in 2008 prior to being rookie listed he started as an AFL listed player in 44.

Ah, I only looked at the Collingwood 2010 page on Draftguru (https://www.draftguru.com.au/lists/2010/collingwood) and saw it had Keeffe in #23 that year (so I'm happy to blame them for that!). The AFL Season Guide does indeed have him in #44.

 

[35Daicos]

We've had a few others in the 20s, but from memory none lower. An unusual one is cat b rookie Ben Richmond wearing #30.

23 Lachlan Keeffe (ASADA)
24 Josh Thomas (ASADA)
25 Ben Hudson (rookie list)
27 Tony Armstrong (delisted/rookied)
30 Ben Richmond (category b rookie)

I'm still scratching my head trying to figure out how Ben Richmond scored #30! Of our Cat. B's he made Darrean Wyatt look like a success story in comparison! Perhaps they were expecting something more from him!!

 

[barrackers]

I'm still scratching my head trying to figure out how Ben Richmond scored #30! Of our Cat. B's he made Darrean Wyatt look like a success story in comparison! Perhaps they were expecting something more from him!!

It's an odd one. There's a few circumstances that may have contributed:

• No existing players upgraded numbers. The premiership players who did upgrade had already done so.
• Of those with a number above 30 they were either recent additions in the last year or two or established premiership players.
• This included three senior listed players with numbers in the forties (Seedsman 40, Gault 44, Williams 46). Seedsman who was recruited in 2010 was the oldest of these.
• Young (FA), Russell (trade), Lynch (FA) were brought in from other clubs. The latter two took on the number worn at their previous clubs.
• The four players we drafted all gained numbers around 30 (Kennedy 27, Broomhead 29, Ramsay 31, plus Grundy in the 35 scheme)

In saying that you'd think preference would have gone to a new category a rookie (Martin 37, Dwyer 41, Oxley 43 or Frost 45) for the higher number if no one wanted an upgrade. Afterall all four were mature rookies with Oxley the youngest at 20. Even though he was 2 years away I wonder how much Darcy Moore factored into it. 30 did sit vacant the following season.

 

[35Daicos]

It's an odd one. There's a few circumstances that may have contributed:

• No existing players upgraded numbers. The premiership players who did upgrade had already done so.
• Of those with a number above 30 they were either recent additions in the last year or two or established premiership players.
• This included three senior listed players with numbers in the forties (Seedsman 40, Gault 44, Williams 46). Seedsman who was recruited in 2010 was the oldest of these.
• Young (FA), Russell (trade), Lynch (FA) were brought in from other clubs. The latter two took on the number worn at their previous clubs.
• The four players we drafted all gained numbers around 30 (Kennedy 27, Broomhead 29, Ramsay 31, plus Grundy in the 35 scheme)

In saying that you'd think preference would have gone to a new category a rookie (Martin 37, Dwyer 41, Oxley 43 or Frost 45) for the higher number if no one wanted an upgrade. Afterall all four were mature rookies with Oxley the youngest at 20. Even though he was 2 years away I wonder how much Darcy Moore factored into it. 30 did sit vacant the following season.

Thanks for the very detailed response! Obviously the number was available, but I checked in case 30 was the no. his father wore (for Richmond, of course!!). It wasn't. Maybe he knew/grew up admiring fellow Tasmanian James Manson, who wore that number for us over many years, and requested it?!