NBA Dress Code

So what do y'all think of the controversy surrounding the NBA dress code story?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/basketball/nba/10/19/jackson.dress.code.ap/index.html?cnn=yes

I think I'll wait until I see it on TV to comment on it.

I wonder if Stephen Jackson will take off into the stands and beat the shit out of David Stern.

i think its silly, wouldn't go so far as to call it racist, though

asking for a clothing stipend is absurd. plus, gold chains and a lot of those throwback jerseys can cost just as much as a decent suit. that said, i think jason richardson made the best arguments.

Originally posted by god's shoeshine:
i think its silly, wouldn't go so far as to call it racist, though

i liked mark cuban's take on it on PTI yesterday … it's not racist, just stupid … old people (owners) who don't understand youth culture … he has a good perspective on it, being in on the owners' negotiations and all

So should corporate employees be allowed to wear whatever youth culture clothing they want to the the workplace? I mean, NBA players are simply highly paid workers for the NBA corporation, right?

Originally posted by HoyaParanoia:

Originally posted by god's shoeshine:
i think its silly, wouldn't go so far as to call it racist, though

i liked mark cuban's take on it on PTI yesterday … it's not racist, just stupid … old people (owners) who don't understand youth culture … he has a good perspective on it, being in on the owners' negotiations and all

why not let them wear team apparel? it would seem that they are trying to sell the game by dressing up, why not be total billboards and have them wear something from the team store? i'd be all about wearing a wiz do rag if gilbert arenas wore won on the bench

Originally posted by Xavier Bush, Power Forward:
So should corporate employees be allowed to wear whatever youth culture clothing they want to the the workplace?

As long as they change before work begins, yes. Likewise, NBA players should be allowed to dress as ridiculously as they wish right up until game time.

Your boss can tell you what to wear at work, but he certainly can't tell you what to wear after hours… unless you boss is the NBA.

Traveling in sports is considered part of the work day I believe, that's why they have a dress code in the first place. I can just imagine what my boss would say if I wore bling bling necklaces to work over my work clothes. Guarentee I'd get sent home…….Or laughed at.

So the only time an NBA player is on the job is game time?

Does that equate to the only time a corporate employee is on the job is when he/she is in a business meeting?

Originally posted by [username edited by p.c. moderator]:

Originally posted by Xavier Bush, Power Forward:
So should corporate employees be allowed to wear whatever youth culture clothing they want to the the workplace?

As long as they change before work begins, yes. Likewise, NBA players should be allowed to dress as ridiculously as they wish right up until game time.

Your boss can tell you what to wear at work, but he certainly can't tell you what to wear after hours… unless you boss is the NBA.

As a pro athelete you're considered "on the clock" while at practice, in team meetings, during game time, at team sponsored events and while traveling with the team. That being said I don't think suits and ties are expected by the general public when they see a player walking into the locker room or sitting out a game on the bench. I think a comprimise of wearing something in the area of "casual friday" for NBA players is not too much to ask for.

Originally posted by Xavier Bush, Power Forward:
So the only time an NBA player is on the job is game time?

No, but I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a better analogy for "traveling on a team bus" in our work world then "driving to work." Even if I was sent on a business trip, I cannot imagine them telling me what to wear on the flight.

And this makes no mention that the traditional demographic of the NBA fan has no desire to see the players in collared shirts.

did you all take the poll espn.com has?

i see no problem with it, especially since the players agreed to it before they started complaining.

"The players' union signed off on the dress code during the league's negotiations for the last collective bargaining agreement, which went into effect in August. The players' union, which was consulted in establishing the dress code, has not fought it."

they shouldn't be forced to wear three-piece suits on airplanes, but i don't think that anyone's identity is at stake.

why are basketball shorts so effing long? why are shorts in general so effing long?! alot are so long they are just high-waters. kind of defeats the purpose of wearing shorts.
usually "Yo" idiots wear them. reminds me of the black guy in the news who got caught by the cops bc his pants were hanging off his ass so much he could hardly run. doyyy! …but hey, "yo yo yo".


in fact, i want to extend the trend, have my underwear hang down my legs too. yeah. so far that my wang hangs out. and if ppl say its wrong for my wang to be hanging out i'll just call them a racist, and i'll get away with it and ppl will buy it [bc theyre fakeass pc hypocrits] for i could do no wrong, yo.

With Iverson as one of your ambassadors I don't see any problem at all. BRING ON THE BLING!

..and muschi, they're not shorts any more, they're longs!

While this is a worthy argument. It works both ways. You can still represent whatever you want, whether it be hip-hop culture, redneck culture, etc. and still adhere to any dress code while at work. Regular folks do it all the time. They wear a suit by day, and change into whatever they deem appropriate at night.
So what if Iverson can't put on his bling till after he's done for the day. Do these guys think it'll tarnish their image if, god forbid, they wear a suit when working.
And a clothing allowance? That's even more ridiculous than the racist allogations.

From the si article:
Added Golden State guard Jason Richardson: "They want to sway away from the hip-hop generation. You think of hip-hop right now and think of things that happen like gangs having shootouts in front of radio stations.

Richardson added that nicer clothing wasn't necessarily the best way to determine the character of the players.

"You still wear a suit, you still could be a crook," Richardson said in Oakland, Calif. "You see all what happened with Enron and Martha Stewart. Just because you dress a certain way doesn't mean you're that way.

"Hey, a guy could come in with baggy jeans, a do-rag and have a Ph.D., and a person who comes in with a suit could be a three-time felon. So, it's not what you wear, it's how you present yourself."

"You still wear a suit, you still could be a crook," like "Enron and Martha Stewart"

"Hey, a guy could come in with baggy jeans, a do-rag and have a Ph.D." [and it sometimes snows in miami]

as dr evil wouldve said "riiiiiightttttttttt".

bullshit.

i can usually decern a scumbag and an educated person – both dressed in the same clothes. its the facial look and body mannerisms. if i see the clothes i check for the rest. but the clothes r the first indicator but not completely. i luv these simplistic explanations by the left and the right. ppl dont mock the left esp minorities bc of reverse discrimination. and i hate BS of all kinds. im an equal opportunity hater.

oh and by the way ken lay and martha stewart types never left me for dead on the street. thats the difference. theres a reason they play bball as opposed to something else, they r not known for their brilliance.

my first indicator is whether or not they spell out 'are'

What about how they spell the word "discern"? Or maybe just using that word indicated being educated?

Originally posted by god's shoeshine:
my first indicator is whether or not they spell out 'are'