Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Has RG3 Broken the Barrier on What Can Be Displayed on Players' Nameplates?

CRobi21

By CRobi21
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

pjfootballer

pjfootballer

Posted
Posted

Why is everyone so concerned (outside of ordering a jersey) about a players nameplate? I don't pay any attention to that. I just want to win a SB. That's all. Nothing more. FWIW I'm a Junior also. If I played pro sports, I'd probably not want that on my nameplate as my father never played. Kellen Winslow II will be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jacoah

Jacoah

Posted
Posted

My grandfather was senior, my father was Jr., and I have the III attached to my last name. So, for me, this is a good deal more personal (okay maybe I just think it's cool that RGIII is a III), and I think for Robert Griffen, he wants not only to feel that he stands out but that he's also carrying on his father's name; the III on the back of his jersey underscores who he is and who he represents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Elessar78

Elessar78

Posted
Posted

I think the biggest ball that has been dropped regarding Robert Griffin's jersey is that he's not number "3". His jersey on redskins.com is "10". Uh, RG3??? Dropped the ball, you marketing genuises.

It wouldn't be so bad if the current, listed #3 wasn't Jonathan Crompton. Backup QB.

Organization Fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hitman21ST

Hitman21ST

Posted
Posted
I think the biggest ball that has been dropped regarding Robert Griffin's jersey is that he's not number "3". His jersey on redskins.com is "10". Uh, RG3??? Dropped the ball, you marketing genuises.

It wouldn't be so bad if the current, listed #3 wasn't Jonathan Crompton. Backup QB.

Organization Fail.

I hope that's sarcasm.

He was 10 at Baylor, and he kept his jersey number. Why would he want to change numbers, especially when he's allowed to have "III" on his nameplate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRobi21

CRobi21

Posted
  • Author
Posted
To him, he might be superstitious about 10 but from a marketing standpoint, it's pretty obvious.

RG3 was already well marketed with him wearing #10 all through college though. Changing to #3 might have come off a bit cheesy to some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hitman21ST

Hitman21ST

Posted
Posted
To him, he might be superstitious about 10 but from a marketing standpoint, it's pretty obvious.

I don't know, marketing would keep the numbers the same if at all possible. "Griffin III" is associated with the number 10 ever since High School. It's different for WRs and LBs in college because they can wear whatever number they want (seemingly).

MAYBE if the "III" weren't allowed, I could see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
roanoker

roanoker

Posted
Posted
RG3 was already well marketed with him wearing #10 all through college though. Changing to #3 might have come off a bit cheesy to some.

Agreed about the marketing of RG3. That's what fueled my interest when I heard everyone talking and posting about him. Glad he is able to wear #10 and have his name on his jersey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted
To him, he might be superstitious about 10 but from a marketing standpoint, it's pretty obvious.

I could understand him taking 3 if we'd kept Gaffney and he wasn't allowed to put "Griffin III" on his jersey, but neither of those things happened, so we might as well let him keep 10. He's already well known at #10, so no real point in changing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky52Mc

Rocky52Mc

Posted
Posted
To him, he might be superstitious about 10 but from a marketing standpoint, it's pretty obvious.

Have you ever played on a Sports team? Just curious. The number on your back is just as important as the sleeves or the socks or the cleats. It's small psychological confidence boosters. Let's just be happy our QB isn't a ****ing sellout who would choose the #3 for that reason. I mean for all the people who ***** and moan about the Redskins being nothing but a marketing ploy to attracts sales figures - you would stay quiet on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MumboSauce

MumboSauce

Posted
Posted
Seems to me they changed it because of their ability to market "RG3" and not because of the significance that it holds to him. Without the marketing aspect they don't make the change... that frustrates me about the NFL.

^^^ I agree with this logic...sad but true...but that's the world it seems unfortunately. It's almost always about money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wholee

wholee

Posted
Posted

I'm not so quick to say that RGIII broke a barrier. With the switch from Reebok to Nike, an opportunity was there. I think he simply asked and the NFL approved it. Someone else probably was approved to make a similar nameplate change before his story broke out. It's big news because it's Griff but I wouldn't crown him as a pioneer. All in all, I'm glad the NFL approved it and excited to see GRIFFIN III in B&G.

HTTR

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IONTOP

IONTOP

Posted
Posted
Can Trent and Fred put thier inmate numbers on the back?

I LOL'ed...

But I'm ALL for this change, not because of RGIII, but because people wear the JR or III or IV because of their heritage... By putting that on your jersey you are showing you're not just some guy who is a football player, you're honoring your family and most likely the sacrifices they made to get you to this level.

Just like Jones-Drew or Fletcher-Baker... They were honoring people... Bringing up a conversation about them and what they mean to them...

This is not a slippery slope to "He Hate Me" just a small gesture to previous generations of a player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...