PDA

View Full Version : NBA to Enforce Stricter Dress Code


jacktruth
10-18-2005, 02:38 PM
NBA to Enforce Stricter Dress Code

Tuesday, October 18, 2005



NEW YORK There will be no more dress down days in the NBA (search).

The league announced in a memo to teams on Monday that a minimum dress code will go into effect at the start of the regular season on Nov. 1.

Players will be expected to wear business casual attire whenever they participate in team or league activities, including arriving at games, leaving games and making promotional or other appearances.

"If they're trying to change the image of league, that's cool," Suns forward Shawn Marion (search) said.

While the league may be trying to present a better image to its corporate partners, some of its players fear that they may lose out on the core fan base.

"We don't really sell to big business," Suns guard Raja Bell (search) said. "We sell to kids and people who are into the NBA hip-hop world. They may be marketing to the wrong people with this."

Some teams already have their own dress code in place.

Portland coach Nate McMillian is known for his strict rules, including bans on headbands and on cell phones on the team bus.

"It's important that the players understand they have to respect the game," McMillian said in August. "They have to respect the league. And they have to respect the fans. You must be a professional at all times."

Players will no longer be able to wear:

Sleveless shirts

Shorts

T-shirts

Chains, pendants, or medallions worn over the player's clothes.

Sunglasses while indoors

Headphones (other than on the team bus or plane, or in the team locker room).

Also jerseys and baseball caps will no longer be acceptable attire for postgame press conference.

"I think there needs to be some style improvement but at the same time it has to be with in reasons," Timberwolves forward Kevin Garnett said.

Players will also now be required to wear a sport coat on the bench when they are not in uniform. The NBA already requires its coaches to wear sport coats, dress shirts, slacks and shoes on the bench.

"I think it is appropriate, definitely, on the bench," Marion said. "I think you should be in a nice shirt and slacks."

However, the new dress code may not be practical for every NBA player, especially Garnett and his teammates who live in the cold Midwest.

"Not everyone lives in Minneapolis going out in 20 below," he said. "Not everyone wants to be in a suit and jacket. Hopefully they can go 50-50."

Big Boy Laroux
10-18-2005, 03:54 PM
not a big deal. iverson has overreacted to this, and i think i saw something where camby wanted the league to provide extra dollars if they make them wear nicer clothes. um, yeah right, marcus.

who cares, dress nice on the end of the bench and in press conferences, whether you're a scrub or a superstar.

Target sells suits now, marcus. save money that way!

HexNBA
10-18-2005, 06:59 PM
yeah that marcus camby quote is right up there with sprewell needing to feed his kids, what a tool.

overall i think this is dumb though. better clothes dont make them better people, and the nba is hip hop these days..stern can try to hide it but it just seems silly to me.

MavKikiNYC
10-18-2005, 07:25 PM
Stern, James Support New NBA Dress Code That Takes Effect at Beginning of Season

By BRIAN MAHONEY AP Sports Writer
The Associated PressThe Associated Press

NEW YORK Oct 18, 2005 David Stern wanted to come up with a dress code that wouldn't restrict his players.

So he picked one that wouldn't bother his owners, either.

"What we came up with is a dress code that even Mark Cuban could comply with if he wanted to," Stern said Tuesday.

The NBA commissioner spoke after addressing the Executive Forum on Sports and Social Responsibility, where he announced the league's "NBA Cares" initiative, which he guaranteed will raise and donate $100 million to charity over the next five years.

But instead of getting questions about how the players were going to clean up the communities, he got more about how he planned to clean up the players.

On Monday, the NBA announced in a memo to teams that a dress code will go into effect at the start of the season. Saying players must dress in "business casual" attire, the league banned items such as sleeveless shirts, shorts, sunglasses while indoors, and headphones during team or league business.

The policy also requires players on the bench who are not in uniform to wear sport jackets, shoes and socks.

And while Stern knows some players will be critical of the policy, he said there was no reason to be, as even jeans are still allowed.

"As it's properly understood, it will be embraced," he said. "The union's fine with it. It's quite liberal and easygoing."

Cleveland star LeBron James was among those who saw the reasoning behind the new rules.

"Sometimes you feel lazy on a flight and you don't want to put (dress) clothes on," James said. "But this is a job and we want to have fun, but it's a job and we should look like we're going to work."

Stern pointed out that when the topic was brought up during collective bargaining, the teams "preferred that we do it as a group."

Even so, many NBA players are more comfortable dressing like the fans they cater to. And Cuban, the maverick owner of the Dallas Mavericks, often dresses in T-shirts and jerseys.

"We don't really sell to big business," Phoenix guard Raja Bell said. "We sell to kids and people who are into the NBA hip-hop world. They may be marketing to the wrong people with this."

MavKikiNYC
10-18-2005, 07:30 PM
Makes so much sense it hurts. NBA is doing brand preservation here--they know which side of the bread has the most butter. Whatever hip-hop "culture" is, it's not putting as much $$$ in NBA owners' pockets as corporate sponsors are.

And don't we all just wish the new dress guidelines applied to owners as well?

dude1394
10-18-2005, 09:29 PM
How long before this is claimed to be racist?

mavs413
10-18-2005, 10:14 PM
Originally posted by: dude1394
How long before this is claimed to be racist?

Stephen Jackson already said it was racist earlier today.
I agree with everything that kiki said, I was thinking before last year that they would have to have a dress code eventually. I remember a game where Mav Marquis Daniels was sitting at the bench at a game last season with a Scarface print t-shirt with extra long chains hanging from his neck and thinking how rediculous that was.

Murphy3
10-18-2005, 11:55 PM
Of course it's racist. Everyone knows that white people don't like to dress comfortably.

chumdawg
10-19-2005, 12:19 AM
"...it's a job and we should look like we're going to work."This is precisely why this is a bad idea, and an idea that I'm sure will blow up in Stern's face.

Fans don't sign on to watch a guy clock in and clock out. In fact, the very suggestion that this is "work" goes contrary to everything that makes one want to be a fan. (Should this not be obvious?)

Fans sign on to watch personalities. They sign on to watch extraordinary skillsets. There is a reason why WNBA games don't get the ratings that NBA games do. (There are a number of reasons why college games don't get the same, but this is still one of them.)

This is one of the most needless moves I've seen in a long time. Trust me: it will end in disaster.

alby
10-19-2005, 12:47 AM
when you regulate everything, when you standarize everything, all the way down to telling a player he can't wear a t-shirt or a pair of jeans? its asking way too much IMHO and it may add more resentment towards the nba league officials from both the players AND the fans.

seeing iverson in a dr. J jersey
or kobe in a throwback MJ jersey

all those types of things are now gone..

FilthyFinMavs
10-19-2005, 02:29 AM
I don't think the rule is racist but it was definately created for a certain group of players. You'd think the commisioner would be worrying more about the oncourt and offcourt activities rather than whether not Tim Duncan has on a suit or if AI has his du rag on.

kriD
10-19-2005, 05:53 AM
Mavs mixed on dressing up

By DWAIN PRICE
Star-Telegram Staff Writer

AUBURN HILLS, MICH. - Mavericks players have mixed emotions about the NBA's new dress code that will be implemented when the season begins Nov. 1.

Commissioner David Stern, in what he said is an effort to enhance the league's image, has instituted a policy that requires players to wear business casual attire at all NBA games and other official league functions. Among the requirements are long or short-sleeved shirts with a collar, dress slacks, khaki pants, dress shoes or boots and socks.

The changes don't sit especially well with Mavs swingman Josh Howard, who usually wears bluejeans and a pullover shirt or jersey with a chain to games, and guard Marquis Daniels, who also prefers a more casual look.

"I don't like it," Howard said. "I just don't think it's right. A lot of people feel comfortable in what they wear and what they wear to the game, but it's going to be difficult for a lot of guys."

Daniels said one dress code policy doesn't fit all.

Forward Dirk Nowitzki, who usually wears jeans and a casual shirt to games, said that he has no problem with the new dress code. And he has a plan to make it as inexpensive as possible.

"I'll buy a couple [of suits]," Nowitzki said. "Obviously you can't buy one. You want to rotate a little bit. I'll find some stuff, and then I'll be looking slick."

Mavs owner Mark Cuban, who usually comes to games and team functions in jeans and a T-shirt, said the league is out of bounds on this issue.

"The base problem is there are owners and senior management of teams who are unable to communicate with their players," Cuban said. "If a player is dressing in a manner the team, or league, feels inappropriate, like in any business relationship, there should be a direct dialogue discussing whatever is at issue. Unfortunately because several owners and their management are unable to establish such relationships, they push the issue to the league office."

Some players have a problem with the expense of such a policy.

Mavs rookie free-agent forward Rawle Marshall has a two-year contract but only one year is guaranteed -- albeit at $398,762. He said, however, that he doesn't want to buy new clothes, especially since he won't receive his first full paycheck until Nov. 15.

"I'm living off my per diem [$102 a day] right now, so it's a tough situation," Marshall said. "But I've already got a special situation, because my uncle wears the same size as me. The rookies coming in now, we don't have money to buy some of that stuff."

Guards Jason Terry and Jerry Stackhouse, both of whom usually wear suits to games, said they aren't opposed to the dress code.

"They're paying our bills," Terry said of the NBA. "I always play better when I put on a suit anyway."

Mavs guard Darrell Armstrong said he understands the players' frustrations.

"For guys who do like to wear the hats and the jerseys, that's really going to change their style and their outfits," Armstrong said. "Now all of a sudden they have to get suits made, outfits made. But I'm already about 80 suits deep, so everybody else just got to adjust to it."

The dress code does not include owners. Thus, Cuban said: "I certainly will not be wearing a sports coat, a suit or anything that isn't sold on www.mavgear.com."

DubOverdose
10-19-2005, 07:51 AM
Seriously, its not a big deal. Heck, highschool players (atleast at prep schools) have to be in suits all day before a game, and when they arrive at the other school. Its a sign of respect. Respect for your fans, for the other team, for the league, etc.

MavKikiNYC
10-19-2005, 08:34 AM
Originally posted by: chumdawg

"...it's a job and we should look like we're going to work."This is precisely why this is a bad idea, and an idea that I'm sure will blow up in Stern's face.

Fans don't sign on to watch a guy clock in and clock out. In fact, the very suggestion that this is "work" goes contrary to everything that makes one want to be a fan. (Should this not be obvious?)

Fans sign on to watch personalities. They sign on to watch extraordinary skillsets. There is a reason why WNBA games don't get the ratings that NBA games do. (There are a number of reasons why college games don't get the same, but this is still one of them.)

This is one of the most needless moves I've seen in a long time. Trust me: it will end in disaster.

Chum, I think you're wrong on several counts.

I definitely don't watch the NBA for the personalities. The Iversons, Bryants, Shaqs, R.Wallaces, Aretsts and the Cubans, Nelsons, Phil Jacksons and Larry Browns of the league have been far more of an interest killer than an incentive to watch for me. (Or maybe it's just that I'm getting older.) From what I can remember, this issue really started oozing in a public, high-profile way back about 10 years ago with Rodman--he really leached off the NBA league brand and league image to promote a decidedly alternative "look" that was not at all consistent with the league's previous marketing plan.

Or maybe it BECAME the league's marketing approach as the league staggered through the 90s promoting individual personalites over teams, promoting the NBA as some sort of quasi-WWF spectacle, doing things to attract the interest of the casual fan. But that vein of fan-interest has had a short life.

I think Stern and the NBA have been seeing a brand erosion for the last several years--declining ratings, declining television revenues (or smaller-than-projected increases), and truth-be-told probably declinling attendance. The Pacers/Pistons brawl last year was and is a huge black eye for the league, and if you look at the players/personalities involved, they were not by and large of the suit-and-tie wearing variety.

And who knows how negative the response has been to Stern and other league execs both with domestic corporate sponsors, as well as what they've encountered as they've marketed the game internationally.

The dress code certainly isn't going to be a cure for any fan-interest problems the league is encountering--
by itself, it's not really going to have that much effect (either positive or negative), certainly not enough to backfire on the league. But it is a necessary first step, a cosmetic step, to rehabbing the league's image and having the league assert more control over its own image and brand.

I wish they'd started 10 years ago.

FilthyFinMavs
10-19-2005, 10:01 AM
I do believe Stern is just trying to make up for the Pistons/Pacers fiasco that went down last year. He wants a different image than the one the league currently has and in order to do that he's barring the t-shirts and du rags that are on the bench.

Murphy3
10-19-2005, 10:13 AM
Every time Cuban open his mouth, I'm more and more shocked that he was successful in life at any level.

jacktruth
10-19-2005, 10:28 AM
I have to wear business casual to work. So does everybody else that works here, no matter thier race. I don't think I've ever heard it called racist. That's a new one.

I'm also not paid millions of dollars per year.

DubOverdose
10-19-2005, 11:12 AM
Shit, I had to wear a uniform to school AND we had to pay for that. If players know 'its a business' like they say whenever someone is traded, then they need to act like it is one. I'm dissappointed in Cuban right now, speaking against this and all. The league doesn't want the individualistic approach to basketball. It is a TEAM sport, and the players need to realize that on multiple fronts. When they arrive, they should look like a team, ONE. And freakin' Raja Bell needs to shut up. Ofcourse this doesn't fall in hand with the Hip-Hop culture. However, if you want it to, look over at P-Diddy...he's always well dressed, as well as some other rappers. And someone has to be the role model, and NBA players are great targets to be role models. Why don't they start talking about 'team' more than their own play? If the players act more professional, which includes dress, their talk, etc. then it should have a trickle down effect, and possibly give people higher aspirations in life that look up to these players. The players will be viewed as professionals in many regards rather than solely professional athletes.

HexNBA
10-19-2005, 11:38 AM
Cuban has two blog entries about it:

http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/1234000247063975/
http://www.blogmaverick.com/entry/1234000287064079/

dude1394
10-19-2005, 11:47 AM
Cuban....he's being put-down by the man...

And if I'm stern I steer as far away from the hip-hop, gangsta culture as possible. It's a loser for all involved.

DelNegro
10-19-2005, 12:29 PM
Mavs rookie free-agent forward Rawle Marshall has a two-year contract but only one year is guaranteed -- albeit at $398,762. He said, however, that he doesn't want to buy new clothes, especially since he won't receive his first full paycheck until Nov. 15.

"I'm living off my per diem [$102 a day] right now, so it's a tough situation," Marshall said. "But I've already got a special situation, because my uncle wears the same size as me. The rookies coming in now, we don't have money to buy some of that stuff."

My God! $102 a day? That's only $37,230 a year! How can we possibly expect someone to be able to scrape together a couple pairs of dockers and a sports coat or two on those kinds of wages?

Tell you what Rawle, being that I'm the charitable type, if you're really that bad off I'll loan you a pair of slacks and a blazer for you to use until that first paycheck comes in.

rakesh.s
10-19-2005, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by: DelNegro

Mavs rookie free-agent forward Rawle Marshall has a two-year contract but only one year is guaranteed -- albeit at $398,762. He said, however, that he doesn't want to buy new clothes, especially since he won't receive his first full paycheck until Nov. 15.

"I'm living off my per diem [$102 a day] right now, so it's a tough situation," Marshall said. "But I've already got a special situation, because my uncle wears the same size as me. The rookies coming in now, we don't have money to buy some of that stuff."

My God! $102 a day? That's only $37,230 a year! How can we possibly expect someone to be able to scrape together a couple pairs of dockers and a sports coat or two on those kinds of wages?

Tell you what Rawle, being that I'm the charitable type, if you're really that bad off I'll loan you a pair of slacks and a blazer for you to use until that first paycheck comes in.

These guys want to wear Armanis and other custom made $1000 crap.. No way in hell they're going to wear Dockers khakis from JCPenney.

Well, Dirk might..It sounds like he's heading over to Sears to do some shopping.

dude1394
10-19-2005, 12:34 PM
Actually I don't know what the per diem entails. If only meals then they easily spend 65-75 per day on meals. A decent restaurant will cost them $40 easy. I have to assume they don't pay any hotels as those surely run to $150 per night.

DelNegro
10-19-2005, 01:02 PM
These guys want to wear Armanis and other custom made $1000 crap.. No way in hell they're going to wear Dockers khakis from JCPenney.

Well, Dirk might..It sounds like he's heading over to Sears to do some shopping.

Too bad. I want to wear Armani suits too. If I could afford them I would, but I can't so I settle for less. Rawle's ability to play basketball just well enough to earn a 6 figure paycheck doesn't exempt him from such realities of life. At the end of the day we're still talking about a dress code that the average American could comply with without much of a financial burden.

jayC
10-19-2005, 01:29 PM
All you have to do is wear a collared shirt with pants or cachys. Big deal! It is still a buisness and they get paid on average 4.5 million dollars. They can afford to wear nicer clothes. It isn't the end of the world. AI still can wear his hip-hop clothes on his latest comercial for his new shoes. Buisness casual shouldn't be this big of a deal. ESPN and scoop jackson love to play the race card game.

jacktruth
10-19-2005, 01:58 PM
And speaking of price. The last I checked a good pair of workout clothes costs quite a bit more than dockers and a polo. And the workout gear they wear is a lot pricier than I would ever pay.

Dirkenstien
10-19-2005, 02:28 PM
It's a business. If players don't like wearing appropriate business clothes in the NBA, then they can leave and wear them while working as car salesmen or some other typical job. Regardless, the standards are there so suck it up and get with the program



Well, Dirk might..It sounds like he's heading over to Sears to do some shopping.

You gotta love Dirk.

Dirkenstien
10-19-2005, 02:29 PM
It's a business. If players don't like wearing appropriate business clothes in the NBA, then they can leave and wear them while working as car salesmen or some other typical job. Regardless, the standards are there so suck it up and get with the program



Well, Dirk might..It sounds like he's heading over to Sears to do some shopping.

You gotta love Dirk.

mary
10-19-2005, 03:06 PM
Criticism Over Dress Code Comes From All Directions

18th October, 2005 - 11:06 pm

ESPN - Calling the rules "quite liberal and easygoing," David Stern even joked that the dress code is something that "even [Dallas Mavericks owner] Mark Cuban can comply with." But Cuban, who often wears T-shirts and jeans to games, told ESPN.com that there was "no chance, no way" that he would comply with the league's off-the-court dress code for its players. Sleeveless shirts are not allowed under the policy.

Indiana Pacers guard Stephen Jackson, contending that a league ban on chains worn over clothing is "a racist statement" from the league, wore every long, diamond-studded chain in his collection Tuesday night as a protest.

Jackson voiced no opposition to the bulk of the "business casual" demands in the NBA's new dress code, but he described the jewelry ban as "attacking young black males."

"I think it's a racist statement because a lot of the guys who are wearing chains are my age and are black," said Jackson, 27. "I wore all my jewelry today to let it be known that I'm upset with it.

"I'll wear a suit every day. I think we do need to look more professional because it is a business. A lot of guys have gotten sloppy with the way they dress. But it's one thing to [enforce a] dress code and it's another thing if you're attacking cultures, and that's what I think they're doing."

San Antonio's Tim Duncan, far less vocal but also a critic of the new policy, did not play in Tuesday's game and sat on the bench wearing an untucked shirt and baggy jeans -- attire that could result in a fine if seen during a regular-season game

Nash13
10-19-2005, 03:24 PM
I can't believe i'm saying this, but I actually agree with Chum.

This is basketball. About 98% of people that go to basketball games dress down. I've been to many crowded places wearing suits and i feel hot, itchy, and uncomfortable. It really doesn't matter what a player not playing isn't wearing mainly b/c he's not being paid too much attention too. And if you're going to be there for 4 or 5 hours, you should feel as comfortable as possible. While i don't like people wearing baggy clothes, it shouldn't be mandated that they don't. This isn't high school.

MavKikiNYC
10-19-2005, 05:06 PM
This isn't high school.

Actually.....that's probably part of the issue.

More and more younger players who never went through a college program, and never got the discipline or maturity that playing in a big-time college program would instill.

Teen-agers with too much money, too much sense of entitlement, too little sense of responsibility.

Not the whole problem, but as the NBA has evolved, certainly part of it.

alby
10-19-2005, 05:08 PM
San Antonio's Tim Duncan, far less vocal but also a critic of the new policy, did not play in Tuesday's game and sat on the bench wearing an untucked shirt and baggy jeans -- attire that could result in a fine if seen during a regular-season game.

TIM DUNCAN??? =p
what a gangster

Murphy3
10-19-2005, 08:43 PM
So, I work in Finance...it's just Finance. But, I have to wear khakis and a button down shirt. It's just Finance.

Where do you draw the line? Wherever the boss wants to. I have no problem wearing khakis and a button down shirt. I'd rather be wearing shorts, sandals and a tank top...but guess what, my boss and corporate policy does not allow that. Why? I don't know...it's not like I ever see clients. But, it's their decision. I support it. I don't like it, but it's their decision.

I'd love to see Cuban and these other candy asses stick their head where the sun doesn't shine and just do something without bitching for once. The league believes that it's in their best interest. It's not racist...it's simply a dress code. Yes, it might be racist if everyone had to wear shorts that said 'slavery is underrated' or 'all white men should die'...but, the last time I checked, this dress code wasn't about race.

So get over it. Adhere to the damn dress code and shut the hell up.

Thespiralgoeson
10-19-2005, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by: Murphy3
So, I work in Finance...it's just Finance. But, I have to wear khakis and a button down shirt. It's just Finance.

Where do you draw the line? Wherever the boss wants to. I have no problem wearing khakis and a button down shirt. I'd rather be wearing shorts, sandals and a tank top...but guess what, my boss and corporate policy does not allow that. Why? I don't know...it's not like I ever see clients. But, it's their decision. I support it. I don't like it, but it's their decision.

I'd love to see Cuban and these other candy asses stick their head where the sun doesn't shine and just do something without bitching for once. The league believes that it's in their best interest. It's not racist...it's simply a dress code. Yes, it might be racist if everyone had to wear shorts that said 'slavery is underrated' or 'all white men should die'...but, the last time I checked, this dress code wasn't about race.

So get over it. Adhere to the damn dress code and shut the hell up.

I for one have to agree with Chum here. Playing in the NBA isn't working in finance. It's not a normal job. I for one am in the group that likes personality. The NBA is unique in the kind of access players have to the fans. You just don't get the same kind of thing in the NFL or NHL or MLB. Allen Iverson for example is one of my two favorite players. AI is an icon of this league, and not only because he's a phenominal player. AI just wouldn't be the same AI if he was wearing suits his whole career, nor would he be the same AI without the cornrows and tattoos. I love seeing AI be himself outhere, same with Nash, Cuban and others. I have to wear certain clothes to work too, and no, I don't have a problem with it... But I don't play in the NBA; it's not the same thing. I watch basketball to be entertained, not to watch people "do their jobs"

Nash13
10-19-2005, 10:49 PM
It's a business. If players don't like wearing appropriate business clothes in the NBA, then they can leave and wear them while working as car salesmen or some other typical job. Regardless, the standards are there so suck it up and get with the program

I have a problem with that it's a business statement. Ok, i work 3 jobs (and no i'm not Jamacan). One of those is at a local pool. That's a business but yet i'm allowed to wear anything that doesn't have offensive words. Another job is with the Department of Commerce. If i work normal business hours, i have to wear something similar to Murph, but if i work after-hours, which i always do, i can wear whatever i want. And that's for the gov't. So it really doesn't matter if it's a business.



Actually.....that's probably part of the issue.

More and more younger players who never went through a college program, and never got the discipline or maturity that playing in a big-time college program would instill.

Teen-agers with too much money, too much sense of entitlement, too little sense of responsibility.

Not the whole problem, but as the NBA has evolved, certainly part of it.

I can agree with that to some extent. But i'll tell you something they really need to start being strict on, that's TATOOS. I mean, if you watched the Sun's training camp or one of there games, look at Eddie House. Should be the first thing they need to go after when trying to improve the NBA's image.

chumdawg
10-19-2005, 10:59 PM
With due respect to Keke and Murph and others who have expressed their points of view...

Kiki's take is an interesting one. At thirty-two ripe young years old, I consider myself still hanging on to that 25-to-34 demographic the marketers so crave. And still, I came of basketball age in the years when Magic Johnson was battling it out with Larry Bird, and personalities were as good as gold. I remember the shoe commercial where Magic pulled up in the limo when Bird was shooting hoops. I certainly remember all the commercials that came afterwards.

I'd like to be on board with Kiki and say that the entertainment element isn't what does it for me, but I'd be lying. Michael Jordan absolutely defined the personality element of NBA basketball--and I was there to watch it.

Keke speaks to optimistic side of the argument, the side that says whoever you think are you can always be better. I can respect that. But some causes just aren't worth fighting for.

Murph speaks to the fall-in-step side of the argument--don't make waves, if you will. This is true, too, and certainly I expect the NBA players to fall in step if they are required to.

But the fact remains that this is an entertainment industry. I suppose I'd probably like it if it were like the leagues of yore that Kiki harkens back to, when the game was bigger than the players. But the players are now bigger than the game. I dare say that a fair amount of guys make more money off the court than they do on it. (Though perhaps I exaggerate.)

And the entertainment industry plays by its own set of rules. You don't tell Jack Nicholson he can't wear his shades courtside at the Forum. You don't tell Spike Lee he can't wear a jersey in his seats at the Garden.

And you can't tell NBA players how to dress when they aren't in uniform.

Oh, you can try. You can certainly try. But you are kidding yourself if you think it's going to do any good. I'm here to tell you, there ain't any companies who are looking for white-bread, sportscoat-wearin' dudes as their spokesmen who are looking with interest toward the NBA. Who do we pretend we are kidding here? Have you looked around at who pays the advertising dollars in the NBA? They don't want to see Josh Howard in khakis.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that if Josh Howard were in khakis they would be LESS interested.

But then, perhaps someone else would be interested moreso.

But that would lack integrity, wouldn't it?

Let the kids wear what they want. I've always thought Allen Iverson was a stand-up guy, for what it's worth. Perhaps I was impressed by that one Reebok commercial. I've always thought Dirk was something of a slob in postgames, but that's just Dirk. Michael Finley and Darrell Armstrong always dressed like it was prom night (overdressing, I might add), and I appreciated that accordingly. Let the guys wear what they want to wear, and let us sort it all out.

A t-shirt never hurt anybody.

Thespiralgoeson
10-19-2005, 11:02 PM
But i'll tell you something they really need to start being strict on, that's TATOOS. I mean, if you watched the Sun's training camp or one of there games, look at Eddie House. Should be the first thing they need to go after when trying to improve the NBA's image.

I really hope it never comes to that.

Murphy3
10-19-2005, 11:15 PM
Chum, it's fine to make waves, but find something to make waves that's worth making waves about. Perhaps this will actually in some way make the league marketable to both America's youth and to more of the growing older population that is disinterested with the league. What does that mean for players, owners and the commissioner alike? More money.

I am by no means a guy that just falls in line. However, I'm also not tolerant of people whining and bitching about nothing. Chum, with all due respect, they are completely different things. I'm sorry, but I have absolutely no problem with a company imposing some sort of dress code. It is completely within their rights AND this was negotiated by the players union along with the league. So why all the bitching and moaning? It's your own damn fault. If they paid a little more attention to what was going on with labor negotiations, maybe they wouldn't be sitting where they are now........ And that's actually looking like representable members of a business.

Regardless, fine the hell out of anyone that even whines about it. I've heard enough of the crying idiots such as Mark Cuban, Stephen Jackson, and Allen 'Overrated' Iverson.

Nash13
10-19-2005, 11:17 PM
Spiral that needs to happen. B/c in a business world, lots a places require that you don't have a visible tatoo. Like many things i don't like in this world, i've grown to accept tatoos. But what i absolutely cannot stand are huge or multiple tatoos. To me, that's the worse part of the NBA's image.

chumdawg
10-19-2005, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by: Murphy3
Chum, it's fine to make waves, but find something to make waves that's worth making waves about. Perhaps this will actually in some way make the league marketable to both America's youth and to more of the growing older population that is disinterested with the league. What does that mean for players, owners and the commissioner alike? More money.

I am by no means a guy that just falls in line. However, I'm also not tolerant of people whining and bitching about nothing. Chum, with all due respect, they are completely different things. I'm sorry, but I have absolutely no problem with a company imposing some sort of dress code. It is completely within their rights AND this was negotiated by the players union along with the league. So why all the bitching and moaning? It's your own damn fault. If they paid a little more attention to what was going on with labor negotiations, maybe they wouldn't be sitting where they are now........ And that's actually looking like representable members of a business.

Regardless, fine the hell out of anyone that even whines about it. I've heard enough of the crying idiots such as Mark Cuban, Stephen Jackson, and Allen 'Overrated' Iverson.Fair enough. I'm not really trying to make waves, and I agree with you that it's pointless to make waves about nothing. But in a way, I think that's what the NBA is doing: making waves about nothing.

Yeah, I think a guy ought to own a sportscoat--or, gasp!, a suit--and ought to feel comfortable wearing it, but I recognize that some guys don't.

You are getting into grey areas, when you start prescribing what people can and cannot wear. Fashion is simply not as rigid as that.

I do appreciate the money aspect of it all. Certainly I do. But is the path towards more money? I find it hard to see that it is.

In fact, I find it hard to find ANY reason why they NBA would enforce this dress code. That's why I said from the beginning: this is a needless rule. Perhaps it's a rule that I agree with in spirit--in fact, it certainly is--but it's a rule that I do not see the need for.

It's just such a strange battle to choose. If they want to deal with image, test for marijuana twice a month. That'll do a whole lot more than putting a guy in a sportstcoat.

It's just a poorly thought-out idea.

Thespiralgoeson
10-19-2005, 11:33 PM
Originally posted by: Nash13
Spiral that needs to happen. B/c in a business world, lots a places require that you don't have a visible tatoo. Like many things i don't like in this world, i've grown to accept tatoos. But what i absolutely cannot stand are huge or multiple tatoos. To me, that's the worse part of the NBA's image.

Again, it's the same argument. You say "in a business world etc.." It's like Kiki comparing playing in the NBA to working in finance. IT AIN'T THE SAME THING! I appreciate the fact that it is a business, but as we've already covered, it's an entertainment business. If I want to see "a business world" I'll watch the Apprentice, not NBA basketball. I like personality, I want to see players BE THEMSELVES! Again I say that a player like Allen Iverson wouldn't be the same Allen Iverson if he didn't have the cornrows and the tattoos.

mary
10-19-2005, 11:44 PM
I have to say, I don't care about this matter too terribley much one way or the other. I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep over the players having to suffer through a dress code. Its not a very strict code, and it doesn't seem like it should be a big deal - and I would expect the players to comply with it.

But in principle, I have to agree with Chum on this one. The NBA is an entertainment industry, and even though I pretty much loathe A.I., his throwbacks do add a certain personality to the his game (..and the same for all players who usually dress a certain way).

This isn't being done to market youth. For the most part, kids will think this is stupid. I also don't think the majority of fans really care that Dirk doesn't wear collared shirts during his annual ankle injuries.

This is being done to create an image for advertisers, and they are the ones writing the checks. So that's that.

mary
10-19-2005, 11:47 PM
It's just such a strange battle to choose. If they want to deal with image, test for marijuana twice a month. That'll do a whole lot more than putting a guy in a sportstcoat.


A VERY good point.

Nash13
10-19-2005, 11:52 PM
Well as far as "It's Entertainment" i'm quite sure an actor would have a really hard time finding work if he had a tatoo on his NECK.

Most of the tatoos look tacky. To me, it makes them look bad. B/c Charles Barkley of all people made me change my entire view on the dress code. Teenagers and young adults look at what players look like and imitate it and then expect to get jobs. When you make 16 million a year, you can do whatever you want. What it comes down to is that these people are role models and should set an example.

mary
10-19-2005, 11:57 PM
I understand the "role model" bit, but that's really only true in cases where kids don't have real role models to begin with.

People should be accountable for their own actions.

ETA: Let me clarify and be less harsh. My bro got completely tatooed up while he was in the army - arms, chest, back, hands - they are everywhere.

I wish this hadn't happened, as I think it will be a major disadvantage for him in the "real world". But he was following a certain "image", and that was his choice. He is responsible for it....not whatever so called role-models that created that image in the first place.

Thespiralgoeson
10-19-2005, 11:59 PM
Originally posted by: Nash13
Well as far as "It's Entertainment" i'm quite sure an actor would have a really hard time finding work if he had a tatoo on his NECK.

Maybe so, but not because you think it looks bad. An actor might have trouble finding work because they would be limited to playing characters that have tattoos. Not a good analogy.

mary
10-20-2005, 12:08 AM
Originally posted by: Thespiralgoeson

Originally posted by: Nash13
Well as far as "It's Entertainment" i'm quite sure an actor would have a really hard time finding work if he had a tatoo on his NECK.

Maybe so, but not because you think it looks bad. An actor might have trouble finding work because they would be limited to playing characters that have tattoos. Not a good analogy.



Its an actors job to portray other people, and clearly the tatoo may interfere with that (without the help of special effects or make-up of course). But I'm sure if that actor were 7-foot, athletic, could dribble, pass, and had a sweet move in the post, he would have less trouble getting a job in the NBA. Because the tatoo doesn't interfere with actual job performance. That is why its a bad analogy.

It may very well interfere with the commissioner's idea of what a player should look like - and I think that is the issue here.


I also think its a bad analogy to compare the NBA as other businesses. Why? Well, if I walk out of work, my firm will be inconvenienced, but will suffer minimal damage from my departure. I'm more willing to comply with stupid rules, because I realize that I'm easily replaced.

Not so with the NBA, as the players are the NBA. They are the "product". They realize this, and I'm sure it gives some of them an overstated sense of self-importance, and they probably feel they have more bargaining power than your average joe. As they should. Because the fact is, they do.

Nash13
10-20-2005, 12:17 AM
Mary, they don't necessarily have to be role models. I can tell you that i'm 2 years removed from high school and i can tell you that 70% of students dressed fairly similar to the way an AI or Stephen Jackson dress. So although they may not be everyone's role models, they along with rappers are setting a trend on how our youth appears.

Spiral, think about it. The only roles where tatoos are used is to play either a thug, prisoner, or punk rocker. And what Hollywood does now is hire people and give them fake, easily removeable tatoos that actors have no intentions on keeping. The only actors i can think of that have a visible tatoo in regular clothes who's been sucessful are LL Cool J and Brad Pitt.

Thespiralgoeson
10-20-2005, 12:21 AM
Spiral, think about it. The only roles where tatoos are used is to play either a thug, prisoner, or punk rocker. And what Hollywood does now is hire people and give them fake, easily removeable tatoos that actors have no intentions on keeping. The only actors i can think of that have a visible tatoo in regular clothes who's been sucessful are LL Cool J and Brad Pitt.

Right... that's why it's not a good analogy... If an actor has a tatoo, that limits him to playing characters that have tatoos in the script... As Mary stated, it effects his ability to perform. It has nothing to do with whether you think it looks tacky or not... Any other kind of entertainer, as well as athletes OTOH are in no way shape or form effected by having tattoos.

rabbitproof
10-20-2005, 03:11 AM
For every stupid dispute that takes place, an equally stupid rule will be created.

The players against the rule can thank Ron Artest and Co. This is defintely an image cleanup job and it may be rationalized, even at the cost of dollars and profit, but ultimately, it's one of those rules that are made because rules will be made.

I don't think Stern is trying to squish personality out of the game -- nor do I think he could -- because strong personalities will always stand out. Rasheed Wallace in a suit isn't going to suddenly become Tim Duncan and AI without his bling isn't going to transform into Ray Allen or another nice guy-type. It's more of a pull-it-in shift to the medium thing; a little more Gap, a little less Sean John. More people will buy Gap, less people will get offended.

Personally, I say let 'em wear what they want. Using the finance equation, do you get 15k docked from your next check if you skip a meeting?

Murphy3
10-20-2005, 05:17 AM
Yes, the NBA is the entertainment industry. But so what? That STILL doesn't change the fact that the NBA wants their players to represent the league a certain way while on 'company time'. It is entertainment. That is exactly why they are doing this....Because the NBA is a type of entertainment is something that people can to choose to spend their money on or not. And yes, how the players dress at times will impact how certain people feel about the players. Like it or not, it's true.....my parents are a good example. Yes, they know that the players are forced into the dress code, but they still believe that they're setting a better example for the youth of our country now. And yes, they'll be more apt to watch. Yes, they'll now be more apt to go to games.

Hey, it works that way with some people. And guess what.....the people that are turned off by the image that many of these players put out there....that's the people that the NBA's trying to win back.

Basically, there's no justification for arguing against the Dress Code unless you're a lazy ass player that needs something to bitch about.

Drbio
10-20-2005, 08:19 AM
I rarely agree with Charles Barkley, but last night on Jay Leno he was amazing. Barkley was asked if he was against the dress code in the NBA. He replied "Hell no". Barkley accurately pointed out that young black kids are dressing ghetto (his words not mine) and that they have no chance of landing jobs because of it. Barkley stated that employers rightfully discriminate against those who do not represent their business image. These young kids need to learn to dress professionally and give themselves a chance. Barkley further stated the players shoudl back this effrot 100% and that they can wear whatever they want to on their time but that they needed to be examples for the black youth of America and dress professionally while on the job.

I was shocked but I could not agree with Barkley more.

kriD
10-20-2005, 08:30 AM
Mavericks feel buttoned-up

Players deal with it, but don't like being told what not to wear

By EDDIE SEFKO / The Dallas Morning News

While Mark Cuban is angling to make the new NBA dress code work for the Mavericks, not against them, most of his players spent the first days after the league directive trying to make sense of sensitive issues like hypocrisy, racial overtones and whether a league that sells out most of its games could have an image problem.

Cuban already has dressy Mavericks apparel in the team's shop at American Airlines Center and online at mavgear.com. Button-down shirts by Tommy Bahama, Cutter & Buck and other high-end brands can be had, for a price. And Cuban said more are on the way as he hopes Mavericks gear would meet the code in the workplace as well as the gym.

Meanwhile, the players vented their disapproval at the mandate that, starting Nov. 1, they must dress in business-casual clothing at all team or league functions.

"I'm against it, but I guess we got to try to deal with it," said Marquis Daniels, a confirmed jeans-and-T-shirt man. "They say they want us more businesslike, and I can understand that. But there are a lot of kids who follow us, and their parents are buying our attire. Personally, I don't like it. They don't tell the owners how to dress.

"The way things are going, maybe they'll say something about your hair or your tattoos. I think it's extreme right now."

That's a key element of the topic being told how to carry oneself. Jerry Stackhouse said players many of whom are products of the hip-hop generation value their individuality. Players are hopeful that the rules will be relaxed or amended once the league sees the backlash.

The flip side to that is that they are earning millions of dollars from fans, television and corporate sponsors to whom commissioner David Stern must market the players.

"If I was a hip-hop dresser, maybe it would bother me," said Stackhouse, who always wears a suit and tie to games. "People can slant this any way they want. But we're selling tickets.

"And some of the biggest draws in the game, some of the biggest jersey sellers are the ones who aren't wearing business clothes and sports coats to the game. You go to the NBA store, and one of the first jerseys you see is Allen Iverson's. So I don't get it. I don't think it's necessarily racism. Dirk [Nowitzki] was in the paper [as one of the prime offenders] and he's definitely not hip-hop."

And then, there's LA Lakers coach Phil Jackson, who proudly was a beach bum and hippie and dressed the part when he was a player, who now says the league is instituting the dress code to eliminate a "thug" element associated with certain players.

"That's a contradictory statement," Josh Howard said. "He was a flower child, no disrespect to him. It's our time now. We're young, and we're developing the league. I think it's a negative stereotype.

"My grandma will like it, but I don't."

Stern said the dress code was designed liberally. He went so far to say that it was a code "even Mark Cuban could comply with if he wanted to."

What it boils down to is the rule will be in place on Nov. 1, and it's up to players to abide by it or risk fines, coach Avery Johnson said.

"It's a different era and culture," he said. "Are you calling the players thugs? It's just a different culture. And we have to abide by the rules no matter what we think of the rules. I am the leader of the Johnson household. So until Avery Johnson Jr. can grow up and run his own house, he has to abide by the rules, right?"

And so will the kids of the NBA. At least for now.

mary
10-20-2005, 08:38 AM
I don't think this was done with FANS in mind (much less children) - just a move to make the product more corporate friendly.

A.I. will still get plenty of exposure in his throwbacks and baggy pants....endorsements, magazines, outside appearances, etc. We will only see the players "dressed up" so to speak either while they are injured (in those brief moments during a game where you get a glimpse of injured players), or during B-coverage of a player walking to and from the arena. I'm not sure what kind of impact that is REALLY going to have on the NBA's overall image. As a matter of fact, A.I. (and I'm just being random by using him as an example) might actually get MORE publicity now when he's "off the clock" because now seeing players in street clothes will be a novelty.

I'll even go one step further. The new dress code, coupled with defiance of certain superstar players, might make kids want to emulate their "hip-hop" style even more so. Isn't the "man" coming down on hip-hop, an even greater incentive for kids to keep it real?

If you don't want your kid wearing baggy pants - don't buy him baggy pants!

Let me just repeat - the whole thing does really not make that much difference to me, and I hope all of our players follow the leads of the veterans on the team, and comply with the new policy. Its the respectful thing to do, even if you don't agree with the merits of the policy.

Speaking of such...did anybody hear what a crybaby Duncan was being about the new dress code? He says he may choose to sit in the locker room during games he is injured.

I have to say, much more CLASS was exhibited by our own casually dressed superstar (thank you Dirk).

mary
10-20-2005, 08:54 AM
don't think Stern is trying to squish personality out of the game -- nor do I think he could -- because strong personalities will always stand out. Rasheed Wallace in a suit isn't going to suddenly become Tim Duncan and AI without his bling isn't going to transform into Ray Allen or another nice guy-type.

The more I thought about this, I think you're right. The dress code's impact on the perception of the NBA players will be minimal.

Our primary exposure to the players is still when they are on the court, wearing their standard issues - or on the news when somebody gets busted smoking pot, beating up his girlfriend, carrying an illegal firearm, etc.

Now, if you want to bring back tiny shorts........

Dirkenstien
10-20-2005, 09:27 AM
The argument that wearing suits hinders the players "personalities" is quite rediculous.

If you want to see a player's personality, then look for it on the court where it really matters. The NBA is a sport and a business, not a petty fashion show.


If you want to wear your 'own style of clothes' then do it when you're not on the job, just like every other working American.

Dirkenstien
10-20-2005, 09:30 AM
Speaking of such...did anybody hear what a crybaby Duncan was being about the new dress code? He says he may choose to sit in the locker room during games he is injured.

So in essence he is deciding to put his own selfish wants before cheering and supporting his team to victory.

That a way to put your team first, Duncan!

DelNegro
10-20-2005, 09:48 AM
Speaking of such...did anybody hear what a crybaby Duncan was being about the new dress code? He says he may choose to sit in the locker room during games he is injured.

I have to say, much more CLASS was exhibited by our own casually dressed superstar (thank you Dirk).

Please. It's one comment in a newspaper. Duncan is all class and he was just blowing off steam because his island gear isn't going to fly under the new dress code. Hopefully, Duncan never has to worry about this since I want him wearing #21 to each and every game, but in the unfortunate event that he does have to make this decision I have no doubts he'll be there for his teammates, just like he's always been.

mary
10-20-2005, 10:05 AM
Oh...even as a Mavs fan, I like Tim Duncan. But his comments were pretty immature...definitely not something I expected from him.

DelNegro
10-20-2005, 10:21 AM
Originally posted by: mary
Oh...even as a Mavs fan, I like Tim Duncan. But his comments were pretty immature...definitely not something I expected from him.


Now that part, even as a Spurs fan, I will agree with. Totally unexpected from him, and if he were to actually stay in the locker room for a game my opinion would definitely drop. However, until he does that the classless and crybaby claims are unfounded.

Dalhoop
10-20-2005, 01:25 PM
The idea of sports or entertainment is a good one, but it is not the issue. Image is the issue. The NBA wants to change theirs and this is the first step.

All sports have forms of dress code. Remember the Yankees? They don't allow facial hair. Want to play for the Yankees? You had better shave.

When a player is at a public function, representing the team/NBA, why should he be allowed to wear "whatever he wants"? He is there, like it or not, because he signed a contract that he would be a member of the organization. He is an employee. MJ. Bird and Magic were employees.

When the boss says "this is our new uniform" then guess what ... that's the new uniform. Getting off the plane is a team function, be in uniform. Press conference? If your representing the team, put on the uniform. Sitting on the bench, in the arena, on game night .... DAMN RIGHT, put on the uniform. If you don't want to be "hot and uncomfortable" then watch from the locker room. Players don't get played to just play the game, they get paid to represent the team.

Racism - Can we please put that to bed, its really tired. The NBA is something like 80% black players, any .... ANY rule that is made will effect far more black players then white ones. Was the Hand Check rule racist? Why not? Far more black players get called for the foul then whites. For that matter the refs must be all racists as well ... Look at all the fouls that are called on black players as opposed to white players. Let's please only pull the Racism card when it is truly a factor.

Business casual not your life style? Well, like most business, you should leave your lifestyle at home when you go to work.

sike
10-20-2005, 01:50 PM
has there been a bigger non-issue getting this much attention recently?

DelNegro
10-20-2005, 02:19 PM
Once the games start to count this will blow over. In the mean time we're left scrounging for something of significance to talk about.

sike
10-20-2005, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by: DelNegro
Once the games start to count this will blow over. In the mean time we're left scrounging for something of significance to talk about.

i disagree...preseason has started, the Mid-West looks like a tight race, and Quisy is playing off the heezy....there is plenty O' stuff to take up my basketball mind...this nonsense just cannot compete.

Murphy3
10-20-2005, 05:21 PM
DHoop, excellent post.....

Windmill360
10-21-2005, 12:13 AM
[quote]
Duncan rips dress code as 'basically retarded'
Story Tools: Print Email
FOXSports.com
Posted: 7 hours ago



Spurs superstar Tim Duncan is known to be understated and shy but not about the NBA's new dress code.

Duncan, according to a report in The San Antonio Express-News, joined the Indiana Pacers' Stephen Jackson with not-so-kind words for commissioner David Stern's dress-up policy.

Tim Duncan, seen in his sideline attire of choice last season, calls the NBA's new dress code "a load of crap." (Rocky Widner / Getty Images)

"I think it's a load of crap," Duncan said. "I understand what they're trying to do with the hats and do-rags and jerseys and stuff. That's fine. But I don't understand why they would take it to this level. I think it's basically retarded.

"I don't like the direction they're going, but who am I?"

Duncan, a two-time NBA MVP and three-time NBA Finals MVP, did not play in Tuesday night's 94-81 exhibition loss to the Indiana Pacers at Conseco Fieldhouse. He wore what The Express-News called his typical injured-list wardrobe: jeans and a dress shirt.

However, an NBA spokesman said Duncan would have to tuck his shirt in once the regular season starts and the policy goes into effect.

In the new policy, players will be allowed to wear "dress jeans" and a collared shirt or sweater to and from the arena, but they must put on a sport coat if they are sitting near the bench and not in uniform.

This clearly isn't music to the ears of Duncan, who is thinking of remaining in the locker room on nights he does not play.

As for Jackson, his problem lies in the fact that players will not be allowed to wear large chains, pendants or medallions over their clothes when they enter an (NBA) arena.

"I have no problem dressing up (business) casual because I know I'm a nice-looking guy," Jackson said. "But as far as chains, I definitely feel that's a racial statement. Almost 100 percent of the guys in the league who are young and black wear big chains. So I definitely don't agree with that at all."[quote]





FoxSports (http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/5009466)

FilthyFinMavs
10-21-2005, 01:29 AM
You know the rule is effed up when not only is Duncan upset but he's actually speaking out. i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

Its really a dumb rule though. This is Stern's move to change the image of his product but he fails to realize he's upsetting the players that put those billions in his pocket. If the guys don't want to wear suits than fine. People aren't paying to attend games to see what suit a player is wearing. Our attention is on the court. I'm fine with dress code on the court but this rule is just stupid.

Murphy3
10-21-2005, 07:36 AM
I never thought I'd see Tim Duncan act in such an immature manner. He's making himself look as bad as half the idiots in the league. I thought he was better than that.

DelNegro
10-21-2005, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by: FilthyFinMavs
You know the rule is effed up when not only is Duncan upset but he's actually speaking out. i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

Its really a dumb rule though. This is Stern's move to change the image of his product but he fails to realize he's upsetting the players that put those billions in his pocket. If the guys don't want to wear suits than fine. People aren't paying to attend games to see what suit a player is wearing. Our attention is on the court. I'm fine with dress code on the court but this rule is just stupid.

It's a petty rule, but it's not stupid. There's nothing to lose. Best case, the league is able to attract new fans or avoid losing current fans who just aren't down with the doo-rags, excessive jewelry and throwback jersey look; worst case, the policy has no effect whatsoever. The overwhelming majority of us who don't care how the players dress will continue not to care and those who don't like the dress code policy aren't going to quit watching because of it, so where's the downside for the league? The players may not like it, but what are they going to do, quit?

One point lost in all this debate is that this dress code is something the players union agreed to in the CBA negotiations and that every single player had a chance to vote on that CBA. If the players really felt this strongly about it they had their opportunity to say something about it. Billy Hunter is every bit as much to blame here as David Stern is.

Drbio
10-21-2005, 09:27 AM
It isn't stupid period except to those with closed minds or a lack of comprehension. Even Charles Barkley gets it.

FilthyFinMavs
10-21-2005, 09:34 AM
Originally posted by: DelNegro

Originally posted by: FilthyFinMavs
You know the rule is effed up when not only is Duncan upset but he's actually speaking out. i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

Its really a dumb rule though. This is Stern's move to change the image of his product but he fails to realize he's upsetting the players that put those billions in his pocket. If the guys don't want to wear suits than fine. People aren't paying to attend games to see what suit a player is wearing. Our attention is on the court. I'm fine with dress code on the court but this rule is just stupid.

It's a petty rule, but it's not stupid. There's nothing to lose. Best case, the league is able to attract new fans or avoid losing current fans who just aren't down with the doo-rags, excessive jewelry and throwback jersey look; worst case, the policy has no effect whatsoever. The overwhelming majority of us who don't care how the players dress will continue not to care and those who don't like the dress code policy aren't going to quit watching because of it, so where's the downside for the league? The players may not like it, but what are they going to do, quit?

One point lost in all this debate is that this dress code is something the players union agreed to in the CBA negotiations and that every single player had a chance to vote on that CBA. If the players really felt this strongly about it they had their opportunity to say something about it. Billy Hunter is every bit as much to blame here as David Stern is.


So there are fans out there who won't watch the NBA because when Allen Iverson is out he decides to wear a Julius Erving throwback with a du-rag to match? Are those the fans Stern is trying to attract? Those fans would rather watch an injured player sit on the bench in a Versaci suit rather than watch T-Mac give someone a facial? Stern is trying to please the wrong guys here. As a fan I could careless. The rule doesn't effect me and I was one of the people who rarely even looked at the injured player on the bench to begin with. I do think this rule will eventually blow over though. What's gonna be the fine for not wearing a suit when hurt? $5,000-10,000? Players will eat that and soon this rule will be forgotten.

BTW, how is the league looked at if none of their attractable players(Duncan, AI, Jermaine O'Neal etc.) don't abide by the rule? Won't the league be looked at even worse than it already is?

u2sarajevo
10-21-2005, 10:21 AM
FFM - In my opinion this move has more to do with Corporations and their sponsorship of the league than it does with the average fan sitting at home watching on Television.

chumdawg
10-21-2005, 10:24 AM
BTW, how is the league looked at if none of their attractable players(Duncan, AI, Jermaine O'Neal etc.) don't abide by the rule? Won't the league be looked at even worse than it already is? Great point, MFF. Here's a very interesting take on this from the inimitable Dan Rosenbaum, in a comment on Cuban's blog:


I love the NBA and I hate the fact that lots of basketball fans at the college and high school level dislike the NBA because of their misguided perceptions of NBA players.

I fear that with actions like this dress code, David Stern just reinforces this misguided perception rather than combats it. It is as if he is saying that NBA players are thugs and we need to dress them up in pretty clothes to trick people into thinking otherwise. That attitude in my opinion is condescending to both NBA players and to fans in general. And I think it is counterproductive because it will inevitably lead to players challenging these limits which will serve to reinforce the very perceptions this action is attempting to eradicate.

Instead I wish that David Stern would use his bully pulpit to defend NBA players from these misguided perceptions - much like what Mark Cuban is doing here. The players need someone to in the league office to consistently and vigorously stand up and defend them against these baseless accusations. On this issue the silence of the league office is deafening.

FilthyFinMavs
10-21-2005, 03:00 PM
Originally posted by: u2sarajevo
FFM - In my opinion this move has more to do with Corporations and their sponsorship of the league than it does with the average fan sitting at home watching on Television.


Really? I see plenty of Mcdonalds and Sprites commercials and ads that include the NBA logo. What Coporations are you referring to?



And I think it is counterproductive because it will inevitably lead to players challenging these limits which will serve to reinforce the very perceptions this action is attempting to eradicate.


Yea Chum he said it a lot better than I did as well. Its a point though that shouldn't be looked over.

FreshJive
10-21-2005, 03:35 PM
I'm going to have to agree that this is a bad idea. They've gone and turned Tim Duncan into a rebel, and I see it as having little to no effect on the league's image. When team marketing reps go to meet with corporate sponsors it's probably helpful for the rep to be wearing a nice suit, but sponsors only care that the NBA and its players appeal to the masses. I don't think the average fan cares how the players dress. Even luxury product companies steer thier marketing toward the masses (whom can't afford thier product), because it is the easiest way to build name recognition and establish it as a status symbol. Corporations that sponsor NBA events don't care if the NBA appeals to other execs. They just want the event to be popular.

poohrichardson
10-22-2005, 12:19 AM
How many millions of dollars are these guys making? Certainly enough to be considered professionals. From Tim Duncan down to Nikoloz Tskitishvili and every player inbetween, I feel it's not asking very much for a player to look presentable during a game.

On a side note, does any player in the league look more badass than Erick Dampier in a pinstripe suit?

MavKikiNYC
12-04-2005, 05:35 PM
I like the uniform rule, but the enforcement sounds a little wack.

Also, has anyone else noticed the weird enforcement of technical fouls for hanging on the rim this season? I've seen it called in each of the last two games I've gone to, where players are dunking in traffic, grasp the rim to keep from coming down off balance and end up with a T for their trouble.

There was another article posted a few days ago (can't find it at the moment) that talked about how NBA referees were also quicker with the T this year for arguing calls from the bench.

I'm all about law and order on the court, but some of this sounds close to going beyond what's necessary.


Coming up shorts
NBA's ridiculous uniform rule is . . .

http://www.nydailynews.com/ips_rich_content/600-marbury_robinson.JPG Stephon Marbury (l.) and Nate Robinson are among players who have been fined by NBA for wearing shorts that are too long.

NBA players are steaming over the league's strict enforcement of the one-inch shorts rule, and they have unusual allies: Their own teams, who are just as upset over the fact that they're forking over thousands of dollars in fine money for something that isn't their fault. Six players, including the Knicks' Stephon Marbury and Nate Robinson, have already been fined $10,000 apiece for wearing shorts that exceed the allowable length. This week, they are supposed to join four Sixers, including Allen Iverson and team rep Kevin Ollie, in filing a grievance, seeking to overturn the fines.

Team executives and players have no idea who is making the inspections - is it league personnel sitting in the stands, refs, Spike Lee? - but several teams this past week received notifications that they are going to be fined $20,000 per infraction.
First a little background to shorts-gate: The 400 players don't dress themselves. They wear uniforms provided by Reebok, official supplier for the NBA. The league is standing firm behind its rule that pants can't come down lower than one inch above the knee.

"That's why I've got some players rolling up their waist-bands, to make themselves legal," said Detroit president Joe Dumars. "We were just warned about it. But I don't think it looks very good when guys are playing with their waistbands turned inside-out."

This is the same league that imposed a new dress code on its players this season to help improve its image. David Stern wants players to dress like professionals off the floor, in coats and ties. But on it, he has what looks like a church-league game, with several players running around with their waist-bands showing. How's that for some warped logic?

Teams are getting in a nasty mood over the enforcement of the rule. While players get $10,000 fines for every infraction, they aren't supposed to be docked until the fourth step of the process. First, teams are warned about potential violations in a letter. Then the team is subject to two fines - $20,000 per infraction, per player - before the player is finally penalized.
In the Sixers' case, players were notified of their fines before the team received its warning.

"It's ridiculous and it's absurd," said one Eastern Conference GM whose team received a warning letter this past week. "For one thing, we don't make the uniforms. Reebok makes them. So they should have our players measured before the season and outfitted correctly. Aren't we a professional league? Isn't this the NBA? It's an embarrassment. The league is out of control on this."

The league talked to the NBA Players Association over the last few days about possibly altering, for lack of a better word, its penalties. The league knows it will look preposterous if it begins taking money from players who are merely wearing uniforms that are team-issued. And it will look equally stupid to fine teams who merely are entrusted with handing out the uniforms. The league's decision to call a halt to the madness while Reebok delivers the correct shorts would stop the players' plans to go to an arbitrator to have the fines wiped out. As of now, though, it doesn't seem as if the league is in a mood to bargain.

"The biggest thing is that Reebok has to step forward and take some responsibility for supplying us with uniforms that don't conform to the rules,'' said the Knicks' Antonio Davis, the president of the NBA Players Association. "Reebok needs to answer why they've been giving us shorts that are not within the rules. Because of that, we don't think the fines are warranted.''

Added a league spokesman:"It's the team's responsibility to ensure that their players are properly attired during NBA games."

Here's the irony. The NBA has been actively courting the hip-hop culture the past few years, sometimes to nauseating degrees. Long shorts are part of the culture and zillions are sold bearing the NBA logo and team colors. So now their own players can't wear them? That's rich.

On a positive note, though, this could be another sign that the league wants to distance itself from hip hop. It officially started when Stern cracked down on players by banning do-rags, chains and other oversized jewelry.

Maybe as players head to the tailors to pick up their new sports coats and suits, they can bring their pants and have them shortened, too.

Larry who?
It hasn't taken Flip Saunders long to give the Pistons exactly what they were looking for. Hired to redesign an offense that was famous for going long stretches without scoring, Saunders has been at his creative best, spreading the court, running fewer sets than Larry Brown and giving his players more freedom than they've ever had to go one-on-one.
In their first dozen games, the Pistons hardly looked like the same team that died in Game 7 in San Antonio when they mustered all of 35 points over the final 24 minutes.

"We're still built on defense and we're going to play defense no matter what," said Tayshaun Prince. "But Flip told us that when he watched films of us over the last couple of years, he noticed that we weren't aggressive. His plays are more open than Larry's. They flow better and anybody can score."

The results have been startling. Last season, the Pistons didn't reach 100 points for the seventh time until their 32nd game, on Jan. 7. This season, they did it by game No. 11, on Nov. 25.

"Here's the thing, you have to be able to look at your team objectively and honestly," said Dumars. "And the weakest part of our team, over the last couple of years, was offensively we were having too many lulls. Flip's main strength has been to open up the offense."