Jump to content

Iginla Retires Update: Flames to retire #12

cross16

By cross16
in Flames Talk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Cowtownguy Advanced Member

Cowtownguy

Posted
Posted
Just now, cross16 said:

I hope the Flames do the right thing and bypass their silly "Forever a Flame" thing and retire his number. 

Why did they stop retiring numbers? Was it a practical fear that some day, they will need to have three digits on uniforms? I imagine original 6 teams have retired quite a few numbers by now. If that was the case, one would think that the NHL would introduce a consistent policy on the matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cross16 Advanced Member

cross16

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, Cowtownguy said:

Why did they stop retiring numbers? Was it a practical fear that some day, they will need to have three digits on uniforms? I imagine original 6 teams have retired quite a few numbers by now. If that was the case, one would think that the NHL would introduce a consistent policy on the matter.

 

ken King doesn't agree with retiring numbers. never specified why, at least not when I was there. He thinks the Forever a Flames allows them to honor more people from the past that a jersey retirement doesn't allow for. 

 

It's a Ken King call. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thebrewcrew Advanced Member

Thebrewcrew

Posted
Posted

Glad to have him retire here. Nobody should ever wear 12 again... plain and simple.

 

The fact the Bolligs, Shores and Freddie’s of the world were allowed to wear Nieuwendyk’s “honoured” 25 drives me wild. If it’s so honoured don’t let anyone else wear it... anyway end of rant 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stubblejumper1 Advanced Member

stubblejumper1

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

ken King doesn't agree with retiring numbers. never specified why, at least not when I was there. He thinks the Forever a Flames allows them to honor more people from the past that a jersey retirement doesn't allow for. 

 

It's a Ken King call. 

 

Thanks, I have always wondered why they did the Forever a Flame thing.  

 

If anyone deserves to have his number retired in Calgary it is Iginla.  Hopefully the Flames will make an exception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
89Again Advanced Member

89Again

Posted
Posted

You just can’t say enough good about him.  Its a team sport but he was as good as is gets in a flames era that was simply put - poor.

 

Thanks for the memories Iggy, my 11 year old never saw him play in person but when he got his new ball cap he wanted Iggy’s signature on it!   People in the community who knew him through baseball coaching etc can’t say enough good things about him.  

 

Chapeau!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flyerfan52 Advanced Member

Flyerfan52

Posted
Posted

It's only right he retires as a Flame. Give him a 1 day contract to make him really a Flame rather than alumni @ the announcement.

In 3 years he'll be inducted into the HHOF & the only suitable uniform features a flaming :C" with the smaller C sewn on the left side of his chest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The_People1 Advanced Member

The_People1

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, 420since1974 said:

Yes, I'd add 2, 12, & 14 to the 9 & 30 already hanging.

Add #5 down the road and we'd have a great starting lineup, though with 3 RWs.

Iggy could move to centre and Theo to LW.

 

Really #5??  Only if we win the Cup... Or reach Finals at the very least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
phoenix66 Advanced Member

phoenix66

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, The_People1 said:

2, 12, and 14 should be on the rafters with 9.  

I believe the FAF and retirement can coexist.

Hang the FAF for players who had a major impact but didn't necessarily have their best years as Flames .

As much as I loved MacInnis and Joe ,  sorry, they may have had great seasons here and left a legacy but their best seasons came in another jersey .. I agree with not retiring the number 

 

Lanny..anything less than a retirement would have been an insult . He WAS the Calgary Flames .. 

 

Vernon may have been borderline , but being a hometown boy, pushed him over the edge.. I agree with the retirement 

 

 

 

 That being said , the only 2 on the list that need to be retired are Iggy and Fleury 

I'm on the fence with Kipper .. checks the boxes but not sure if he had enough seasons 

 

At the same time , having the 2 systems allows you to put up 2 missing ones on the FAF that are glaringly missing and that's the other 12 and 14..   Loob and Nilsson 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MAC331 Advanced Member

MAC331

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

I believe the FAF and retirement can coexist.

Hang the FAF for players who had a major impact but didn't necessarily have their best years as Flames .

As much as I loved MacInnis and Joe ,  sorry, they may have had great seasons here and left a legacy but their best seasons came in another jersey .. I agree with not retiring the number 

 

Lanny..anything less than a retirement would have been an insult . He WAS the Calgary Flames .. 

 

Vernon may have been borderline , but being a hometown boy, pushed him over the edge.. I agree with the retirement 

 

 

 

 That being said , the only 2 on the list that need to be retired are Iggy and Fleury 

I'm on the fence with Kipper .. checks the boxes but not sure if he had enough seasons 

 

At the same time , having the 2 systems allows you to put up 2 missing ones on the FAF that are glaringly missing and that's the other 12 and 14..   Loob and Nilsson 

I'm not sure I agree with your thinking that Lanny and Vernon belong with numbers retired but Joe and MacInnis don't because their success came later in another jersey. Are you saying this because they won a SC here ? because if that is the qualifying criteria then Fleury and Iginla shouldn't have their numbers retired either. Joe was one of the best players this franchise ever had and only by trading him did we get the best ever Flame in Iginla. MacInnis and Fleury were good players and I could live with them both being FAF retirees. I am not big on retiring numbers either however if I were Joe and Jerome would be on my list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
phoenix66 Advanced Member

phoenix66

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

I'm not sure I agree with your thinking that Lanny and Vernon belong with numbers retired but Joe and MacInnis don't because their success came later in another jersey. Are you saying this because they won a SC here ? because if that is the qualifying criteria then Fleury and Iginla shouldn't have their numbers retired either. Joe was one of the best players this franchise ever had and only by trading him did we get the best ever Flame in Iginla. MacInnis and Fleury were good players and I could live with them both being FAF retirees. I am not big on retiring numbers either however if I were Joe and Jerome would be on my list.

You may have misunderstood. What I'm saying is there is different tier between Between those with a stellar career and great accomplishments and "Face of the Franchise"

Instead of one or the other , retiring numbers should be reserved for the latter .

I agree with the FAF if they differentiate the 2.. we will find out Monday hopefully if its a joke or not . If they just put Iggy on the FAF , its a joke .

Lanny, Iggy and Fleury , to me are the only former Flames that fit that category .. to me , Vernon didn't quite, but because you add Hometown boy to the list I was ok with it .

Joe, Al etc.. were great players deserving of honor for what they did here .. but I just dont feel they are in the same category as the other 3 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cross16 Advanced Member

cross16

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I think they should pick one or the other personally. I think if you run FAF and still retire jerseys you run the risk of marginalizing one or the other. Does FAF really much to the player if you want retire his jersey but you will others, what does that say about those players? Do we need to have a debate every time if this is a FAF player or a jersey retirement player? Just makes the process more trivial to me. 

 

My idea for honoring the past was as part of the new building have a Flames Hall of Fame and you can honor players there. Doesn't have to be a ceremony on the ice, which is silly IMO anyway, but it's a spot where you can honor, celebrate and remember the past and engage the new fan base.

 

I do think 2 should be up there and 12 is a given. I'm indifferent on 14 just because of his attitude towards the organization since he left. I think if you put Vernon up there you need to put Kipper because he has much better numbers and player here basically as long as Vernon did. Vernon probably shouldn't be up there though....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
phoenix66 Advanced Member

phoenix66

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, cross16 said:

I think they should pick one or the other personally. I think if you run FAF and still retire jerseys you run the risk of marginalizing one or the other. Does FAF really much to the player if you want retire his jersey but you will others, what does that say about those players? Do we need to have a debate every time if this is a FAF player or a jersey retirement player? Just makes the process more trivial to me. 

 

My idea for honoring the past was as part of the new building have a Flames Hall of Fame and you can honor players there. Doesn't have to be a ceremony on the ice, which is silly IMO anyway, but it's a spot where you can honor, celebrate and remember the past and engage the new fan base.

 

I do think 2 should be up there and 12 is a given. I'm indifferent on 14 just because of his attitude towards the organization since he left. I think if you put Vernon up there you need to put Kipper because he has much better numbers and player here basically as long as Vernon did. Vernon probably shouldn't be up there though....

 

 

My big thing , is there is another 12 and 14 that deservedly should be up there too. If you did  combine the systems, keeping the retiring for the truly next tier players , that would allow you to do both in situations like this.

 

ya, actually Kipper wouldnt upset me at all either 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MAC331 Advanced Member

MAC331

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

You may have misunderstood. What I'm saying is there is different tier between Between those with a stellar career and great accomplishments and "Face of the Franchise"

Instead of one or the other , retiring numbers should be reserved for the latter .

I agree with the FAF if they differentiate the 2.. we will find out Monday hopefully if its a joke or not . If they just put Iggy on the FAF , its a joke .

Lanny, Iggy and Fleury , to me are the only former Flames that fit that category .. to me , Vernon didn't quite, but because you add Hometown boy to the list I was ok with it .

Joe, Al etc.. were great players deserving of honor for what they did here .. but I just dont feel they are in the same category as the other 3 

This discussion has no end really. One could say Lanny was mostly a Leaf with his best seasons but won a Cup here. Don't get me wrong I love Lanny and know him personally.

Vernon won a Cup but went on to better years in DET. Fleury was not a better player or contributor than Joe at all IMO. A lot of good players went through here around those two periods of time unfortunately it became a mess as Iginla came into the picture.

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...