avelanch Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Clearly Salo's number is being retired Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunder Bunnies Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Should've took 29 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yogolol Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Do you think somebody called him and said "hey we like to have all our defenceman wear low numbers" seriously, all our defenceman have a number below 10 now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captain_kirk1 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I was hoping for 44. And that he'd grow a mustache like Dave Babych. But w/e, it's just a number. It's the logo on the front that matters. #Runforthecup2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meyer_Buttreeks Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Looks like Dana Murzyn doesn't get his jersey retired for a few more years at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raiun Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I wonder how seriously the Canucks take their "Low numbers for defensemen only" thing. I'm just curious whether he was forced into this choice, or just did it to fit in with the team, or always wanted to be number 5. Who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Fatigue Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Looks like Dana Murzyn doesn't get his jersey retired for a few more years at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herberts Vasiljevs Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 no more g-52 bombers from the blueline... kinda wish he took 6, like a G-6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilovekevinbieksa Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 looks like someones gonna have to change his twitter... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etsen3 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I wonder how seriously the Canucks take their "Low numbers for defensemen only" thing. I'm just curious whether he was forced into this choice, or just did it to fit in with the team, or always wanted to be number 5. Who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckCupFever Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 we have such boring numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB007 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 AV hates high numbers.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB007 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 #5 is an awesome # and it's a traditional defensive # Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vancanfan Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Former # 5 jerseys worn by Canucks: Bryan Allen, John Arbour, Garth Butcher, Colin Campbell, Larry Carriere, Christian Ehrhoff, Larry Goodenough, Marc-Andre Gragnani, Jim Hargreaves, Sheldon Kannegiesser, Lukas Krajicek, Grant Ledyard, Bob Manno, Dana Murzyn, Tracy Pratt, John Schella, Darryl Sly, Zenith Komarniski. and now Garrison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meyer_Buttreeks Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 LOL, Larry Goodenough. There's a blast from the past. Brings back some bad memories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Singh Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 we have such boring numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cs2016 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 There's always the C-5 Galaxy but that's not a bomber unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFCanuck Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Should've took 29 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnInconvenienceBrah Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I don't get why the Canucks don't allow their players higher numbers?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.