Retired numbers in MBB

[TomahawkCruise]

I’d like to hear some thoughts about the numbers Utah has retired in men’s basketball, because it seems to be a bit odd.

Is there any specific criteria that must be met to qualify for a jersey number to be retired, or is it just totally left to the discretion of the folks in charge?

There are a few numbers that aren’t retired, but should be – such as Jensen’s #50 and Doleac’s #51. Then there are retired numbers that are questionable, like Vranes’ #23 and (especially) Bogut’s #4.

I think Bogut’s is the worst one on the list. The guy was at the U for only two seasons and really didn’t accomplish anything remarkable at the university level. I know this isn’t part of the equation, but some of Bogut’s personal views are also a bit unappetizing and not befitting of someone holding such an honor.

Is there anyone I’m missing in terms of jersey numbers that should be retired, but are not? Tom Chambers’ #42? Poeltl’s #42? Loveridge’s #21? Carlson’s #35?

I’d like to know what you folks think.

PS- This is a bit unrelated, but another idea I’ve thought of recently. I think Utah should honor Rick Majerus by naming the Runnin Utes court after him. A lot of schools have done this. Here, I guess it would be something like Rick Majerus Court at the Jon M Huntsman Center. I just like the idea of honoring Majerus in that way and think it would be a nice legacy move for the program.

[Tony (admin)]

If you are questioning Vranes’s retired number, we’re done with this conversation.

[TomahawkCruise]

Perhaps you can enlighten me why this is so.

I’ll admit that I’m not terribly familiar with Vranes, but a cursory review of his stats makes me wonder why he received the honor when others with similar accolades have not.

To me, it’s obvious why McGill, Gardner, Ferrin, Chambers, Miller and Van Horn are up there. And it’s more than fair to question Bogut’s inclusion, especially since they had to change criteria to get him in there. And, sure, I can see there’s definitely data supporting an argument for Vranes, but to me he just doesn’t stand out as a clear choice, like most of the others.

You clearly disagree with that, and I’d like to hear your point of view on it.

[NarfUte]

A candidate had to be a first-team All-American, a two-time All-Conference player or a conference Player of the Year, a statistical leader in a school record, have played for his country in an international competition, and played for four years at Utah.

They broke the rules for Bogut, and then again for Tom Chambers. Chamber’s # was retired a couple years ago.

[Tony (admin)]

Methinks it is because Bogut donated some $$$$

[TomahawkCruise]

Oh, I wasnt aware they retired Chambers’ number. But that’s good, it should be up there.

[UteFan Vineyard]

I guess it depends what you use as criteria. Here are some of Bogut’s accomplishments in the 2004 – 2005 season. Pretty impressive in my opinion.

ESPN.com National Player of the Year
Basketball Times National Player of the Year
Wooden Award Top 5 Finalist
Naismith Award Top 4 Finalist
Associated Press First Team All-America
USBWA First Team All-America
NABC First Team All-America
Mountain West Conference Player of the Year
Mountain West Conference All-Tournament Team
USBWA District 8 Player of the Year

I guess the reason to leave him off would be that he only played 2 seasons?

[TomahawkCruise]

Yeah, I mean it’s not inexplicable why Bogut had his number retired, it just seems to me that he didn’t stick around long enough to really have the impact you’d expect from someone who has their number in the rafters.

There’s surely an argument for having Bogut’s number up there, but I just don’t think he deserves to be up there as much as some others.

[ProudUte]

IMO, Boguts may be the most deserving player to have his number retired. He was the consensus national player of the year, he was first team AA, he was first picked in the NBA draft, etc. By the standards set up by the university, (he only played two years) he would not have qualified for the honor. However, no other player received the recognition he did, and he donated tons of money to the U. So yes, I am pleased he has his number retired.

As for Vranes, I don’t get your problem with him. He qualified because he was picked for the Olympic team and was a first team AA. He was 5th picked in the NBA draft. Since he was surrounded by other greats like Chambers, Bankowskis, Judkins, etc. – his stats may not have been as glossy as others. But again, Vranes deserved to have his number retired IMO. I was there the night he was honored.

Go Utes!!!

[FountainofUte]

Like was mentioned above, they altered some rules to allow Bogut to qualify. I don’t know which ones or in what way. I will say, I think it’s arguable that Bogut is the best player that’s ever passed through our program.

He was an unstoppable force AS A SOPHOMORE! Had he stayed four years like Van Horn, he would have smashed every record we have. As it is, he left as the Naismith and Wooden players of the year AND the number 1 draft pick. No question they should have found a way to retire his number.

As for any personal views or beliefs, I don’t know what you’re referring to. But his inclusion among the retired numbers is no scandal in my book. Like I say, even after watching Van Horn and Miller with my own eyes, I’m not sure Bogut wasn’t arguably better than both. Certainly he was the best of the three as a soph. And after that it’s just speculation.

I was a little young to have seen Vranes or Chambers at the U. I only watched Chambers in the NBA and can only imagine what it would have been like to watch him in crimson and white.

[Sanders]

Chambers, Vranes and Martin at point running the show was like poetry in motion

[Charlie]

Would not take any off the list, several others could be added.

[Author]

Posts