September 11, 200917 yr I saw a short segment done by Rick Reilly today on ESPN and he brought up an interesting question... Should the NBA officially retired #23 for Michael Jordan? Before you are quick to respond, remember that the NHL retired #99 for Wayne Gretzky and the MLB retired #42 for Jackie Robinson. And lastly, the Miami Heat have already retired #23 for Michael Jordan and he didn't even play there. P.S. I don't care about Lebron James' feelings lol.
September 11, 200917 yr No. I don't think any sport should retire any number. The teams can do it. That's enough.
September 11, 200917 yr No. I don't think any sport should retire any number. The teams can do it. That's enough. :thumb:
September 11, 200917 yr Author No. I don't think any sport should retire any number. The teams can do it. That's enough. I have mixed feelings about it. And you feel this way about Jackie Robinson's number too?
September 11, 200917 yr I have mixed feelings about it. And you feel this way about Jackie Robinson's number too? Robinson's # was not retired just because of his playing ability.
September 11, 200917 yr The only number that should be retired in sports is already retired, and that is #42 Jackie Robinson. Jordan took the game to a higher level in the popular culture, was a tremendous competitor, and is probably the greatest player ever. However, he didn't truly transcend the game to the point that Jackie Robinson did. Jackie was the epitomy of breaking through in the face of hatred, w/ grace under fire. His was a showing that african-americans were every bit as smart as white players, and could handle anything that their counterparts could throw at them. In that fish bowl, he showed the American culture, that African-Americans could indeed work side-by-side w/ them and be every bit if not more successful than caucasians. All this occured during the Jim Crow era. All Jordan did was win championships, and make billions on endorsements. He didn't represent a positive culutral movement.
September 11, 200917 yr I have mixed feelings about it. And you feel this way about Jackie Robinson's number too? I don't think MLB should have 42 retired, but I think each team should retire it. It's like states' rights vs. federal rights. Sorry that I can hardly resist turning each thread political.
September 11, 200917 yr I have mixed feelings about it. And you feel this way about Jackie Robinson's number too? Yes. As jahearme stated, Robinson's number was retired for a different reason, so I'm willing to bend on that one. But, personally, I think there are other ways to "honor" a player or their memory. I wouldn't have retired the number. I don't think MJ, nor any other player, in any other sport, should have their number retired by the league or sport. Perhaps there could be a situation where I'd be for it...but it would be for more than just being a great player.
September 11, 200917 yr I don't think MLB should have 42 retired, but I think each team should retire it. It's like states' rights vs. federal rights. Sorry that I can hardly resist turning each thread political. There is such a thing as preemption and the supremacy clause.
September 11, 200917 yr Jackie Robinson's number retirement was a PR move ... plain and simple. No sport should universally retire a number. That decision should be up to each individual franchise.
September 11, 200917 yr There is such a thing as preemption and the supremacy clause. True, but but the federal government shouldn't have as many statutes...but I think this may be the least applicable thread to do this in, so we can save it for another day...
September 11, 200917 yr No. I don't think any sport should retire any number. The teams can do it. That's enough. :thumb: Except for Jackie Robinson. There should be an exception when it is something as socially significant as what his joining MLB meant to society, ... not just as a player.
September 11, 200917 yr I agree that it should be up to an individual franchise (though Robinson was a good exception). As for MJ, he did nothing to transcend the game like Robinson...
September 11, 200917 yr Author Robinson's # was not retired just because of his playing ability. Did I say it was? lol I'm just posing the question because I thought it would create an intersting discussion. I'm sure my name on BGP would suggest that I think it should...but I don't care either way lol.
September 11, 200917 yr No no and no. If an individual team chooses to retire it, so be it. Otherwise leave it alone.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.