Retire #21 and #52?

Originally posted by Niners99:
Sounds like you need to take your own advice about tolerance. Some people feel strongly one way about this subject. If you believe in something, stand behind it and speak with authority, regardless of who is on the other side of the debate.

I believe retiring those numbers is a sign of respect, and is well deserved by those two players. To me, that should be very apparent for 49ers fans who have been watching the last 10 years.

I just dont feel like the 49ers fanbase has a very high overall football fan IQ. I think there are a lot of spoiled fans that grew up with a dynasty, and now expect the same. They compare every player to Joe Montana, and every coach to Bill Walsh.

Ultimately we end up with ungrateful fans that dont realize greatness when it was right in front of them. Patrick Willis is a top 5 MLB in NFL history, and he played all 8 years in red and gold. Yet because we lost SB47, he wasnt a championship caliber player, and thus wasnt good enough to get his number retired?

How some people can feel that way baffles me. Im not willing to leave that up to a debate because of "tolerance", because I think it's a ridiculous stance.

I agree with you, I think probably because we are just about the same age. But I don't think you are going to be able to change some people's minds on this. Just like those that were rooting for the sh*tcawks in the SB. I don't get it

I think uniforms should be retired for 5-10 years tops and then brought back in. That includes 16 and every other number.

Originally posted by HearstFan:
This era of political correctness absolutism is nauseating - I'm so sick of posters impugning anyone who dissents with their "loyalty measure" by saying "if you disagree" or you are critical "you are not a true fan." that kind of logic is juvenile and comical. Get off your self-righteous, self aggrandizing horse and join the real world of tolerance and discussions that have varying points of view.

This has nothing to do with political correctness. If you think a ring is the requirement for getting your number retired, you're just wrong on the facts.

Originally posted by crake49:

Originally posted by HearstFan:
This era of political correctness absolutism is nauseating - I'm so sick of posters impugning anyone who dissents with their "loyalty measure" by saying "if you disagree" or you are critical "you are not a true fan." that kind of logic is juvenile and comical. Get off your self-righteous, self aggrandizing horse and join the real world of tolerance and discussions that have varying points of view.

This has nothing to do with political correctness. If you think a ring is the requirement for getting your number retired, you're just wrong on the facts.

Too many people seem to think championship rings are the determining factor that define success. For retiring #s, and for getting in the Hall of Fame. I hate how you can be discussing one of the best players ever at a particular position, and then someone says "well he never won a ring, so therefore he isn't good." Wtf that's so stupid. Winning rings isn't that easy, you have to have a good team.
That's like saying Barry Sanders doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame, or doesn't deserve to have his # retired. Both of which, would be a joke. Sometimes great players just aren't lucky enough to be on a championship winning team. Just ask Karl Malone and John Stockton.
So to say that a player's potential # retiring or enshrinement into the HOF strictly hinges on whether they won a ring or not is just stupid in my opinion, when youre talking about rewards and accolades for individual achievements

Originally posted by SFGiant49ers:

Originally posted by crake49:

Originally posted by HearstFan:

This era of political correctness absolutism is nauseating - I'm so sick of posters impugning anyone who dissents with their "loyalty measure" by saying "if you disagree" or you are critical "you are not a true fan." that kind of logic is juvenile and comical. Get off your self-righteous, self aggrandizing horse and join the real world of tolerance and discussions that have varying points of view.

This has nothing to do with political correctness. If you think a ring is the requirement for getting your number retired, you're just wrong on the facts.

Too many people seem to think championship rings are the determining factor that define success. For retiring #s, and for getting in the Hall of Fame. I hate how you can be discussing one of the best players ever at a particular position, and then someone says "well he never won a ring, so therefore he isn't good." Wtf that's so stupid. Winning rings isn't that easy, you have to have a good team.
That's like saying Barry Sanders doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame, or doesn't deserve to have his # retired. Both of which, would be a joke. Sometimes great players just aren't lucky enough to be on a championship winning team. Just ask Karl Malone and John Stockton.
So to say that a player's potential # retiring or enshrinement into the HOF strictly hinges on whether they won a ring or not is just stupid in my opinion, when youre talking about rewards and accolades for individual achievements

Rings help when you have a short career...the guys you used as examples played minimum 10 or years

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SFGiant49ers:

Originally posted by crake49:

Originally posted by HearstFan:
This era of political correctness absolutism is nauseating - I'm so sick of posters impugning anyone who dissents with their "loyalty measure" by saying "if you disagree" or you are critical "you are not a true fan." that kind of logic is juvenile and comical. Get off your self-righteous, self aggrandizing horse and join the real world of tolerance and discussions that have varying points of view.

This has nothing to do with political correctness. If you think a ring is the requirement for getting your number retired, you're just wrong on the facts.

Too many people seem to think championship rings are the determining factor that define success. For retiring #s, and for getting in the Hall of Fame. I hate how you can be discussing one of the best players ever at a particular position, and then someone says "well he never won a ring, so therefore he isn't good." Wtf that's so stupid. Winning rings isn't that easy, you have to have a good team.
That's like saying Barry Sanders doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame, or doesn't deserve to have his # retired. Both of which, would be a joke. Sometimes great players just aren't lucky enough to be on a championship winning team. Just ask Karl Malone and John Stockton.
So to say that a player's potential # retiring or enshrinement into the HOF strictly hinges on whether they won a ring or not is just stupid in my opinion, when youre talking about rewards and accolades for individual achievements

Rings help when you have a short career...the guys you used as examples played minimum 10 or years

I know rings definitely help, but when people say "Oh he never won a ring so he doesn't deserve this or that" that bothers me. I know to a certain extent rings should be taken into consideration but maybe not quite as much as they seem to be. Just my opinion, and each player and situation is different of course

Originally posted by SFGiant49ers:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SFGiant49ers:

Originally posted by crake49:

Originally posted by HearstFan:

This era of political correctness absolutism is nauseating - I'm so sick of posters impugning anyone who dissents with their "loyalty measure" by saying "if you disagree" or you are critical "you are not a true fan." that kind of logic is juvenile and comical. Get off your self-righteous, self aggrandizing horse and join the real world of tolerance and discussions that have varying points of view.

This has nothing to do with political correctness. If you think a ring is the requirement for getting your number retired, you're just wrong on the facts.

Too many people seem to think championship rings are the determining factor that define success. For retiring #s, and for getting in the Hall of Fame. I hate how you can be discussing one of the best players ever at a particular position, and then someone says "well he never won a ring, so therefore he isn't good." Wtf that's so stupid. Winning rings isn't that easy, you have to have a good team.
That's like saying Barry Sanders doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame, or doesn't deserve to have his # retired. Both of which, would be a joke. Sometimes great players just aren't lucky enough to be on a championship winning team. Just ask Karl Malone and John Stockton.
So to say that a player's potential # retiring or enshrinement into the HOF strictly hinges on whether they won a ring or not is just stupid in my opinion, when youre talking about rewards and accolades for individual achievements

Rings help when you have a short career...the guys you used as examples played minimum 10 or years

I know rings definitely help, but when people say "Oh he never won a ring so he doesn't deserve this or that" that bothers me. I know to a certain extent rings should be taken into consideration but maybe not quite as much as they seem to be. Just my opinion, and each player and situation is different of course

If Willis played a few more years...then it's a easy decision...but now he will fade away in the next 5 years till he's elgible for voting...and by then kuekly and the other former bill...forgot his name could be lighting up the league enough for people to over look what Willis has done .. there's a short attention span now days

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SFGiant49ers:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SFGiant49ers:

Originally posted by crake49:

Originally posted by HearstFan:
This era of political correctness absolutism is nauseating - I'm so sick of posters impugning anyone who dissents with their "loyalty measure" by saying "if you disagree" or you are critical "you are not a true fan." that kind of logic is juvenile and comical. Get off your self-righteous, self aggrandizing horse and join the real world of tolerance and discussions that have varying points of view.

This has nothing to do with political correctness. If you think a ring is the requirement for getting your number retired, you're just wrong on the facts.

Too many people seem to think championship rings are the determining factor that define success. For retiring #s, and for getting in the Hall of Fame. I hate how you can be discussing one of the best players ever at a particular position, and then someone says "well he never won a ring, so therefore he isn't good." Wtf that's so stupid. Winning rings isn't that easy, you have to have a good team.
That's like saying Barry Sanders doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame, or doesn't deserve to have his # retired. Both of which, would be a joke. Sometimes great players just aren't lucky enough to be on a championship winning team. Just ask Karl Malone and John Stockton.
So to say that a player's potential # retiring or enshrinement into the HOF strictly hinges on whether they won a ring or not is just stupid in my opinion, when youre talking about rewards and accolades for individual achievements

Rings help when you have a short career...the guys you used as examples played minimum 10 or years

I know rings definitely help, but when people say "Oh he never won a ring so he doesn't deserve this or that" that bothers me. I know to a certain extent rings should be taken into consideration but maybe not quite as much as they seem to be. Just my opinion, and each player and situation is different of course

If Willis played a few more years...then it's a easy decision...but now he will fade away in the next 5 years till he's elgible for voting...and by then kuekly and the other former bill...forgot his name could be lighting up the league enough for people to over look what Willis has done .. there's a short attention span now days

Well in Niner land what Willis did will never be forgotten. It sure as hell shouldn't. Its not too often that a player makes the Pro Bowl every single year of his career including rookie year. (excluding his injury shortened season of course)

Originally posted by SFGiant49ers:

Well in Niner land what Willis did will never be forgotten. It sure as hell shouldn't. Its not too often that a player makes the Pro Bowl every single year of his career including rookie year. (excluding his injury shortened season of course)

We have fans already forgetting how solid of a team we are and it hasn't been a year !

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SFGiant49ers:
Well in Niner land what Willis did will never be forgotten. It sure as hell shouldn't. Its not too often that a player makes the Pro Bowl every single year of his career including rookie year. (excluding his injury shortened season of course)

We have fans already forgetting how solid of a team we are and it hasn't been a year !

Well that's because of all the BS that happened last year it has clouded everyone's minds

Originally posted by SFGiant49ers:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by SFGiant49ers:
Well in Niner land what Willis did will never be forgotten. It sure as hell shouldn't. Its not too often that a player makes the Pro Bowl every single year of his career including rookie year. (excluding his injury shortened season of course)

We have fans already forgetting how solid of a team we are and it hasn't been a year !

Well that's because of all the BS that happened last year it has clouded everyone's minds

IMO rightfully so, however people take that to a whole other extreme. Like hoping for failure or pretending they know the outcome of our coaches hirings before they even hit the field sh*t gets exhausting


And no to removing the numbers, but retire and put a huge plaque at Levi's to remember them by, I just hate seeing numbers removed unless they contributed more than just football, for example retiring Jackie Robinson's jersey makes perfect sense.

Originally posted by SFGiant49ers:

Originally posted by Niners99:


Ultimately we end up with ungrateful fans that dont realize greatness when it was right in front of them. Patrick Willis is a top 5 MLB in NFL history, and he played all 8 years in red and gold. Yet because we lost SB47, he wasnt a championship caliber player, and thus wasnt good enough to get his number retired?

How some people can feel that way baffles me. Im not willing to leave that up to a debate because of "tolerance", because I think it's a ridiculous stance.

I agree with you, I think probably because we are just about the same age. But I don't think you are going to be able to change some people's minds on this. Just like those that were rooting for the sh*tcawks in the SB. I don't get it

The last selection in the poll says it all. They simply can't retire every number no matter how deserving. How 'bout adding them both to the "wall of fame" at the top of the stadium. And I mean like TODAY

Gonna miss Frank and wish him the best. But I have a good feeling about Carlos Hyde and Kendal Jenner.

at some point we need to unretired some numbers...

Bob St. Clair says hello from beyond the grave to all those who think you need a ring to have your number retired.