The Architect Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Kassian needs 74 + a dark visor Schroeder needs 31 Jensen needs 76 and red laces Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Marchand 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...
uber_pwnzor 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...
ilovewinona Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Is it still tabu to wear high numbers in Vancouver? I know the deal with Bure and Mogilny, but that's like a hundred years ago. How come the rookies at camp always end up with random numbers like 72, 57, 83? Is it beacuse they can't wear Canucks numbers even at rookie camp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disisdayear Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Yeah, Edler wears 2.3... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 5 or 52. I don't mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PONCHE Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Exactly why they don't wear high numbers. I don't get what your trying to say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disisdayear Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 5 or 52. I don't mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Attack Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I liked 52, but ah well. I'm kinda hoping Jensen will wear 71. He wears 17 regularly but obviously can't have it here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niloc009 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Not sure why people get so worked up about numbers? They're just numbers. Unless they have significant meaning to the player (Crosby's 87, Booth's 7, Edler's 23), I couldn't care less what number they wear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucks fan555555 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 32,225 posts...wow...that's a lot of posts, Vintage Canuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks top scorer Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 should of chose 69 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peaches Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 My sources close to him tell me that he is indeed a literal jet plane. #CONFIRMED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 32,225 posts...wow...that's a lot of posts, Vintage Canuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucksh Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Defense usually take low numbers.... mainly because at young hockey ages teams only have numbers from 1-18 to keep it simple, and the defensemen usually got numbers from 2-6. Why do people assume that the Canucks management tell the players to take lower numbers? I highly doubt they give a rats ass. WTF are with people in this city, so many people are so paranoid or whatever you want to call it... YOUR ALL WEIRD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucksh Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 116 posts... wow... that's not a lot of posts, diisdayear. pointing out the obvious is fun pointless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
avelanch Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 The irony..... The irony with my post also..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo Horvat Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 52 is not a defenseman number; 5 is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaku Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Well there goes the G-52 bomber idea.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Kane Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 52 is not a defenseman number; 5 is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.