Charles Woodson and the Lambeau Field Ring of Glory

[RingoCStarrQB]

Have we discussed this?
Seeing Bobby Dillon's ceremony at halftime last Sunday made we wonder what the plans are for Charles Woodson. I can't think of any reason Charles Woodson should not be honored at Lambeau Field.
Thoughts.......

[salmar80]

On one hand, Woodson's CB play was the finest I've seen in my years as a Packers fan. So I wouldn't riot if we did choose to honor him.

On the other, since he was a superstar for lengthy periods on two teams, I feel the correct place to honor him is the Pro Football HoF. Just like with Reggie White, putting him on Packers' Ring of Glory feels like an attempt to steal his career and legacy for us.

[go pak go]

On one hand, Woodson's CB play was the finest I've seen in my years as a Packers fan. So I wouldn't riot if we did choose to honor him.

On the other, since he was a superstar for lengthy periods on two teams, I feel the correct place to honor him is the Pro Football HoF. Just like with Reggie White, putting him on Packers' Ring of Glory feels like an attempt to steal his career and legacy for us.

Yeah but Reggie White is on there with his number retired.

Woodson was a Packer for 7 seasons. Won DPOY and a huge part of a championship. He was just as impactful on the 2000's Packers as White was to the 90's Packers. I have no problem putting him on the ring of honor.

[go pak go]

Other players I would consider on the ring of honor:

52 - Clay Matthews
80 - Donald Driver
38 - Tramon Williams
65 - Mark Tauscher
76 - Chad Clifton

[RingoCStarrQB]

Other players I would consider on the ring of honor:

52 - Clay Matthews
80 - Donald Driver
38 - Tramon Williams
65 - Mark Tauscher
76 - Chad Clifton

You have to be a Pro Football Hall of Famer to get your name placed on the Lambeau Field Ring of Glory facade wall. Exception is TT.
It's up to the Packers which names are put on the wall. Emlen Tunnell is not there. Charles Woodson is not there. Jan Stenerud is not there. Reggie White IS there.

So with Reggie being there, there is precedence for putting Charles Woodson up there.

[go pak go]

Other players I would consider on the ring of honor:

52 - Clay Matthews
80 - Donald Driver
38 - Tramon Williams
65 - Mark Tauscher
76 - Chad Clifton

You have be a Pro Football Hall of Famer to get your name placed on the Lambeau Field Ring of Glory facade wall.
It's up to the Packers which names are put on the wall. Emlen Tunnell is not there. Charles Woodson is not there. Jan Stenerud is not there. Reggie White IS there.

So with Reggie being there, there is precedence for putting Charles Woodson up there.

Ted Thompson is on the Ring of Honor and he isn't in Canton.

[RingoCStarrQB]

Other players I would consider on the ring of honor:

52 - Clay Matthews
80 - Donald Driver
38 - Tramon Williams
65 - Mark Tauscher
76 - Chad Clifton

You have be a Pro Football Hall of Famer to get your name placed on the Lambeau Field Ring of Glory facade wall.
It's up to the Packers which names are put on the wall. Emlen Tunnell is not there. Charles Woodson is not there. Jan Stenerud is not there. Reggie White IS there.

So with Reggie being there, there is precedence for putting Charles Woodson up there.

Ted Thompson is on the Ring of Honor and he isn't in Canton.

That's exactly why Jack Vainisi's name should be up there. TT shouldn't be there if Vainisi isn't there.

[RingoCStarrQB]

This thread is primarily about Charles Woodson and Packers that are Pro Football Hall of Famers with there names on the Lambeau Field ring of glory inner facade.

Debating TT, Vainisi, etc. deviates from the original question. Should Charles Woodson's name be up there with the other Packers Pro Football Hall of Famers? If not then why not. If so, then why so.

[Cdragon]

I have no problem adding his name to the ring. But you can't just keep retiring numbers, a team with a lot of worthy players like the Pack are going to run out. Certainly AR's number should be retired. I think they have to implement lifetime plus 10 years for number retirements minimum time 25 years. We can reintroduce numbers in a ceremony and give fans who have no connection to a distant past player a chance to connect to the player from long ago.

[TheSkeptic]

I have no problem adding his name to the ring. But you can't just keep retiring numbers, a team with a lot of worthy players like the Pack are going to run out. Certainly AR's number should be retired. I think they have to implement lifetime plus 10 years for number retirements minimum time 25 years. We can reintroduce numbers in a ceremony and give fans who have no connection to a distant past player a chance to connect to the player from long ago.

If Paul Hornung's number was never retired, why should AR's or for that matter Woodson's? Or anyone else's? You are 100% correct, with a roster in the 80's including IR and PS, there is not room to have so many retired. Hudson, Starr, Nitschke and White, that is enough for permanent retirements. If you want a 5 year after leaving the game retirement of the number, that would be OK, they can work around that.

[go pak go]

#12 will absolutely and should absolutely be retired.

And yes. Put Woodson on the Ring of Honor. I don't know how much space is left so I don't care about qualifiers. He is the greatest defensive player GB in my lifetime after Reggie White.

[Yoop]

I have no problem adding his name to the ring. But you can't just keep retiring numbers, a team with a lot of worthy players like the Pack are going to run out. Certainly AR's number should be retired. I think they have to implement lifetime plus 10 years for number retirements minimum time 25 years. We can reintroduce numbers in a ceremony and give fans who have no connection to a distant past player a chance to connect to the player from long ago.

If Paul Hornung's number was never retired, why should AR's or for that matter Woodson's? Or anyone else's? You are 100% correct, with a roster in the 80's including IR and PS, there is not room to have so many retired. Hudson, Starr, Nitschke and White, that is enough for permanent retirements. If you want a 5 year after leaving the game retirement of the number, that would be OK, they can work around that.

because Hornungs accomplishments pale compared to Rodgers, the only person that wanted his # retired was Vince, and if there is a lack of room on the facade to add Rodgers name to it then Hornungs should be removed, or Thompsons, don't know why he was put up there either.

to answer your question Ringo, yes Woodsons name should be on the facade.

to my knowledge we've only retired 6 numbers, Rodgers will make 7.

[Drj820]

I would say Rodgers certainly meets ANY criteria that would make sense to be put forth, I would say probably Woodson too but I think Salmar gives a reasonable explanation for why he could be left off.

In general though I agree the standard should be extemely tough. We are not the Jags or Texans with no history. Even if back when we had less history, and added guys that may not make it today...we should not let guys like them in today just because of precedent. The standard should get tougher due to less space.

Also, TT should be in the ring. Glad he is.

[Yoop]

I would say Rodgers certainly meets ANY criteria that would make sense to be put forth, I would say probably Woodson too but I think Salmar gives a reasonable explanation for why he could be left off.

In general though I agree the standard should be extemely tough. We are not the Jags or Texans with no history. Even if back when we had less history, and added guys that may not make it today...we should not let guys like them in today just because of precedent. The standard should get tougher due to less space.

Also, TT should be in the ring. Glad he is.

Salmars reason doesn't make sense, ( no offense Salmar) where not stealing any other teams Glory, both White and Woodson played there very best with us.

and what is your reasoning for putting Thompsons name on the facade, what did Ted do to deserve it? compared to a guy like Ron Wolf he lacks pedigree, his greatest claim to fame was deciding to take Rodgers and about 5 or 6 quality draft classes, thats about all I can think of, please inform me of stuff he did that I'am over looking.

[go pak go]

I would say Rodgers certainly meets ANY criteria that would make sense to be put forth, I would say probably Woodson too but I think Salmar gives a reasonable explanation for why he could be left off.

In general though I agree the standard should be extemely tough. We are not the Jags or Texans with no history. Even if back when we had less history, and added guys that may not make it today...we should not let guys like them in today just because of precedent. The standard should get tougher due to less space.

Also, TT should be in the ring. Glad he is.

Salmars reason doesn't make sense, ( no offense Salmar) where not stealing any other teams Glory, both White and Woodson played there very best with us.

and what is your reasoning for putting Thompsons name on the facade, what did Ted do to deserve it? compared to a guy like Ron Wolf he lacks pedigree, his greatest claim to fame was deciding to take Rodgers and about 5 or 6 quality draft classes, thats about all I can think of, please inform me of stuff he did that I'am over looking.

Ron Wolf - Took over a failing franchise and turned them into champions. SB Champion, 2 SB appearances, 2 NFC Title appearances, 5 playoff appearances, Traded HoF QB and Signed Reggie White

Ted Thompson - Took over a failing franchise and turned them into champions. SB Champion, 1 SB appearance, 3 NFC Title appearances, 9 playoff appearances, drafted HoF QB and signed Charles Woodson

I don't see any similarities at all.

I'm in favor of Woodson being on the ring. Woodson is to Thompson what White was to Wolf.

[Drj820]

his greatest claim to fame was deciding to take Rodger

that sort of pick defines a mans career. I dont agree thats all he did, but if it was...that should do it!

[go pak go]

his greatest claim to fame was deciding to take Rodger

that sort of pick defines a mans career. I dont agree thats all he did, but if it was...that should do it!

And then stuck with him in 2008. That took serious balls.

[Yoop]

I would say Rodgers certainly meets ANY criteria that would make sense to be put forth, I would say probably Woodson too but I think Salmar gives a reasonable explanation for why he could be left off.

In general though I agree the standard should be extemely tough. We are not the Jags or Texans with no history. Even if back when we had less history, and added guys that may not make it today...we should not let guys like them in today just because of precedent. The standard should get tougher due to less space.

Also, TT should be in the ring. Glad he is.

Salmars reason doesn't make sense, ( no offense Salmar) where not stealing any other teams Glory, both White and Woodson played there very best with us.

and what is your reasoning for putting Thompsons name on the facade, what did Ted do to deserve it? compared to a guy like Ron Wolf he lacks pedigree, his greatest claim to fame was deciding to take Rodgers and about 5 or 6 quality draft classes, thats about all I can think of, please inform me of stuff he did that I'am over looking.

Ron Wolf - Took over a failing franchise and turned them into champions. SB Champion, 2 SB appearances, 2 NFC Title appearances, 5 playoff appearances, Traded HoF QB and Signed Reggie White

Ted Thompson - Took over a failing franchise and turned them into champions. SB Champion, 1 SB appearance, 3 NFC Title appearances, 9 playoff appearances, drafted HoF QB and signed Charles Woodson

I don't see any similarities at all.

I'm in favor of Woodson being on the ring. Woodson is to Thompson what White was to Wolf.

I'am looking at over all football accomplishments, Wolf was instramental in the AFL merger with the NFL back in the 60's, he helped Al Davis produce winning seasons for most of his 20 plus seasons with the Raiders.

course if this is strictly a Packer thing I can see your point, I just disagree with it.

[Drj820]

Salmars reason doesn't make sense, ( no offense Salmar) where not stealing any other teams Glory, both White and Woodson played there very best with us.

and what is your reasoning for putting Thompsons name on the facade, what did Ted do to deserve it? compared to a guy like Ron Wolf he lacks pedigree, his greatest claim to fame was deciding to take Rodgers and about 5 or 6 quality draft classes, thats about all I can think of, please inform me of stuff he did that I'am over looking.

Ron Wolf - Took over a failing franchise and turned them into champions. SB Champion, 2 SB appearances, 2 NFC Title appearances, 5 playoff appearances, Traded HoF QB and Signed Reggie White

Ted Thompson - Took over a failing franchise and turned them into champions. SB Champion, 1 SB appearance, 3 NFC Title appearances, 9 playoff appearances, drafted HoF QB and signed Charles Woodson

I don't see any similarities at all.

I'm in favor of Woodson being on the ring. Woodson is to Thompson what White was to Wolf.

I'am looking at over all football accomplishments, Wolf was instramental in the AFL merger with the NFL back in the 60's, he helped Al Davis produce winning seasons for most of his 20 plus seasons with the Raiders.

course if this is strictly a Packer thing I can see your point, I just disagree with it.

Pretty sure the Packers Ring of Glory is limited in scope to contributions to the Packers

[Yoop]

his greatest claim to fame was deciding to take Rodger

that sort of pick defines a mans career. I dont agree thats all he did, but if it was...that should do it!

why, he didn't do anything except make the pick, Wolf traded a first to get a QB nobody wanted, this isn't about Ted not being a good GM, it's that Wolf was a icon go look up his history.