At his introductory press conference at Lambeau Field on Friday, blockbuster acquisition Micah Parsons announced he would wear #1 for the Packers. What would be a small detail for many franchises across the NFL is a fairly big deal in Green Bay.
While the reception to this news among the Packers fanbase has been even more positive than I first imagined, there is still a vocal minority of fans not pleased with "unretiring" the illustrious single digit, no matter how high-profile Parsons is.
Number 1 of course represents the great Curly Lambeau — a legend who has every right to take his place among the Mount Rushmore of Green Bay Packers greats alongside Vince Lombardi and whatever duo of Hall of Fame quarterbacks you deem most worthy.
The No. 1 jersey has always carried this mythical aura in Green Bay. A jersey that was never officially retired, never really photographed, and virtually nobody alive today has seen it first-hand in a real game. If you search for images of Curly Lambeau, you'll not find many pictures of him that bear any number on his jersey. Those that do actually contain No. 20.
While perhaps not frequently photographed, Lambeau did indeed wear #1, along with #20, #14, #42 and perhaps more. It's no surprise to learn players weren't exactly tied to numbers back in the 1920s teams were lucky to source a set of jerseys to begin with. After Lambeau left Green Bay in 1950, the #1 jersey was never officially retired. Instead Lambeau was honored by the name of the Packers' stadium — a name that will stand forever, immortalized more than any digit between 0 and 100 ever could.
For decades, #1 has just sat idle. The tagline of being "unofficially retired" is the worst state of limbo that any football number can find itself in. No place on the 53-man roster, nor is it emblazoned on the North Endzone facade at Lambeau Field. It was essentially shadow-banned.
The Packers flirted with returning the No. 1 jersey when they drafted Jayden Reed in 2023 and officially announced Reed would wear the single digit. While this move was treated with excitement by the vast majority of Packers fans, somebody somewhere along the way at 1265 Lombardi Ave got cold feet and Reed eventually switched to No. 11 just hours later.
Ironically, it was Reed in the position to either surrender his No. 11 jersey to Parsons for a healthy fee, or tell him to look elsewhere. It's still unclear whether that interaction actually happened. Perhaps Parsons wanted a change. Either way, it seems the Packers did indeed give Parsons the option between No. 0 and No. 1. They didn't just bestow this historic number and the pressure that comes with it onto Parsons without his consent.
So while perhaps inadvertent, I do feel the Packers have now gotten this monkey off of their backs. They could not in good faith give #1 to a totally unproven rookie only for him to flame out in a handful of years, leaving the number to return to anonymity. This number required a sure-fire superstar to offload almost ten decades worth of tension. Parsons just so happens to be that superstar.
The only two remarkably established talents to make their way through the door over the last 30 years (Reggie White & Charles Woodson) weren't eligible to wear a number in the single digits. While you could have made a case for Josh Jacobs or Xavier McKinney claiming the jersey, neither player carried the hype into Green Bay that only a player of Parsons' caliber can harness.
If Parsons stays in Green Bay for more than just this 4-year contract, and the Packers can grab a ring or two, the #1 jersey could once again return to its vacant state. Only this time it would be suitably etched in history, earning its place on the North facade — perhaps with the names of both Parsons and Lambeau beneath it — next to 14, 3, 15, 66, 92, 4 and (soon) 12.
If that isn't the case and Parsons still has a great four years in Green Bay but nothing worth retiring another jersey for, we've simply got the number back in the rotation. The monkey is off Green Bay's back. No young rookie has to bear the responsibility of being the first guy to wear the #1 jersey in 100 years because thankfully one of the most proven elite defenders in the NFL has already done that for them. Likewise, the organization doesn't have to feel the backlash from the same vocal minority for 'tarnishing' the legacy of a number that was never truly honored to begin with.
I'm not entirely convinced the Packers cared so deeply about this decision. I would love to find out. If #1 was, in fact, intentionally held vacant for literally decades until a player of Parsons' ability to come about, then I believe it makes for an incredibly cool story.