Why Are There No Quarterbacks Who Wear #1?

[Fox1994]

I always thought of it as a prestigious number that some folk just don't pick. It seems that all the smaller numbers are 'prestigious' and at least somewhat rare, which is why the college/HS players do it. . . it makes them feel cooler or something.

[Cryolemon]

With runningbacks lining up at wideout, in the slot, and wideouts lining up at the runningback position, same goes for tight ends ... why is the league just not making it to where the following numbers are available for RB/TE/WR?

11-49; 80-89

Might as well. No sense in preventing Wide Receivers from wearing #23 when RB's can wear #23 and still line up in the slot and with Devin Hester's move from DB to WR and keeping his number, might as well make it uniform across the league.

QB should always be from 1-19
RB should be from 11-49; 80-89
TE should be from 11-49; 80-89
WR should be from 11-49; 80-89
OL should be from 50-79

End of Story.

This would make a lot more sense than the current system. What would you do for defence? Anyone can wear any number?

[Sportsbuck]

Forget QB's wearing #1, how about this annoying trend of WR's wearing 11-19?

It looks so bush league. This isnt the SEC, pick a number in the 80's you goofballs.

How does it look bush league? It's a freaking number.

[Cryolemon]

Or ... because it's not necessarily important to know who's eligible on defense, why not make it where they can wear any number? There is no sense in restricting the unrestricted.

I agree with that, Also, it would make it easier for a guy like Vrabel when he played as a TE if he wore an eligible number.