NBA to Enforce Stricter Dress Code

[Thespiralgoeson]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Originally posted by: Thespiralgoeson

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Oh...even as a Mavs fan, I like Tim Duncan. But his comments were pretty immature...definitely not something I expected from him.

[DelNegro]

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]

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]

has there been a bigger non-issue getting this much attention recently?

[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.

[sike]

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]

DHoop, excellent post.....

[Windmill360]

[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

[FilthyFinMavs]

You know the rule is effed up when not only is Duncan upset but he's actually speaking out. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif[/img]

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]

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]

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

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]

It isn't stupid period except to those with closed minds or a lack of comprehension. Even Charles Barkley gets it.

[FilthyFinMavs]

Originally posted by: DelNegro

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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 . . .

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."