There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

I do not see this article in here, so I apologize if I missed it. I think this is perhaps the best article that I have read on the subject.


There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes

By Michael Wilbon

Saturday, October 15, 2005; Page E01

Being asked by your employer to wear a jacket and slacks when representing the company shouldn't cause this much drama. Not when you make, on average, $4 million a year. The dress code being proposed by the NBA doesn't ask players to wear a suit and tie every day, just to look like working professionals: a jacket with lapels instead of a throwback jersey and a do-rag, a pair of loafers instead of high-top sneaks. And we're talking game days and official public appearances, not eight hours a day, five days a week.

But the sound of the rebellion has been heard from Portland to Miami.


Allen Iverson is emblematic of the modern NBA player that dresses casually and refuses to put on a suit. (Jonathan Newton - The Washington Post)



Don't get me wrong, there are players who not only don't oppose the dress code, but like it. "I know a lot of people will say we're in the entertainment industry, but we represent franchises that are sometimes among the biggest businesses in that city," the Wizards' Antawn Jamison said the other day. "I'm fine with a jacket and shirt with a collar and pants that aren't jeans. We're professionals and we should be putting forth a professional image. I don't see what the problem is."

That's because Jamison has some sense that he's paid a lot of money to represent more than himself. A lot of his peers don't have that sense. Some of them don't have any sense of anything, starting with Marcus Camby, now of the Nuggets, who said he can't see adhering to the dress code "unless every NBA player is given a stipend to buy clothes." Camby makes approximately $8 million a year. And he wants folks to believe he cannot afford a suit. It's too bad a judge can't order Camby to spend the rest of this season in New Orleans's Ninth Ward.

Camby's "stipend" speech is now officially the dumbest and most offensive thing uttered in the last five years, surpassing Latrell Sprewell's "I've-got-to-feed-my-family" speech as a reaction to why he was outraged at not being offered more than $10 million a year by the Timberwolves.

The irony here is that Camby was hurt so often early in his career it seemed all he could do was sit on the Knicks bench in a suit, some of them quite stylish as I recall. But mostly, we're talking about the usual suspects. You didn't think Allen Iverson and Rasheed Wallace were going to just say "okay" to looking anything other than homeless, did you?

Somewhat predictably, Wallace told radio station WOAI: "I can't speak for other teams, but for us, we're definitely trying to voice our objection. I don't have a problem with that dress code if a man is injured and has to be on the bench during games. But it's kind of crazy to sit up there and try to tell us how to dress on the way to work. We're not in that head office in New York. To me, that's crazy."

What Wallace doesn't get, of course, is that the perception of the NBA doesn't come from the head office in New York; it comes from Madison Square Garden and the Palace of Auburn Hills and Staples Center and MCI Center. And right now the league's image isn't good. I'm not talking about the perception of NBA players in a hip-hop universe, which the league married itself to 10 years ago; I'm talking about their image among the people who pay for their lavish professional existence, meaning primarily network partners and corporate sponsors. Hip-hop may be the image of the league; by and large it doesn't fund the league.

If rich people, most of whom get dressed in something other than throwback jerseys every day (say, for example, bankers who make even more money than the players but still have to adhere to a dress code), don't renew their $200,000 luxury suites at NBA arenas, and if sponsors and TV partners don't pay the NBA hundreds of millions of dollars every season, then the generation of ballers after Iverson and Wallace might well be playing in the Rucker League and not a national league, internationally televised. Maybe their agents can remind them of that. :smokin

And maybe their agents can remind them that the popularity of the NBA, which allowed stars to make $13 to $20 million annually, was created not only by what happened on the court, but what happened off it. From 1985 to 2000 or so, most NBA players were the best-dressed men on the planet. Earvin Johnson and Michael Jordan looked so stylish and sophisticated every night that CEOs wanted to buy what they were selling. For every rumpled John Stockton there was an Alonzo Mourning who on his way into or out of the arena made you think he was going or coming from somewhere important. Every night was red-carpet night in the NBA.

Other than Mourning and Ray Allen and a handful of others who understand the art of presentation and what it means to the pocketbook, that's gone now. Too many players now look like bums on the street. I can't figure out whether they're copying today's styles or whether they led the way.

Either way, it's hideous. I'm reminded of a passage in Charles Barkley's book, "Who's Afraid of a Large Black Man?" in which the Rev. Jesse Jackson talks about how annoyed he is with seeing young men (black and white, but mostly black) walk around with jeans hanging around their butts and sneaks without laces.

"In jail," Rev. Jackson said, "you can't wear a belt or a rope around your waist. . . . They take the strings out of your shoes because you might try to hang yourself. . . . That's jail culture. Nobody designed that. It's jail culture, that's all it is."

The NBA, as it turns out, knows now that people don't want to pay $200 a night to see jail culture. If they can't see Magic and Michael, they want to see people who make the attempt to look something like Magic and Michael. This is why the league went from one extreme to the other, from hip-hop to forging a relationship with Matthew Dowd, chief campaign strategist for Bush-Cheney 2004.

It'll be interesting to see whether Commissioner David Stern, who has been carrying a big stick the last 18 months on issues of comportment and image, will back down now that so many players have complained. When Detroit's Richard Hamilton learned of the proposed dress code last week he said to reporters, "Is that for real? Is that for real? Then [the NBA and club executives] are going to have to write a lot of fines."

No doubt, Hamilton is right and some players will simply write checks to pay those fines, perhaps in advance. And certainly the NBA shouldn't require 6-foot-8 men to wear anything other than what I call "comfy clothes" on airplanes. The bigger question is whether the rebels outnumber the players who look back at the previous generation of NBA stars, even some holdovers like Shaq and Mourning, and realize the upside, both short term and long, and see how stupid it is to equate dressing up with selling out.


Michael gets it.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

Actually I disagree with this article all together.

Why do corporations care so much if a player wears a throwback jersey and a chain after a game? How does that damage their rep? Urban, hiphop attire .. or whatever you want to call it doesn't equal thuggery.

Why would corporations pull out sponsor money because Timmy D wears a t-shirt and flipflops instead of a sports coat ... they wouldn't.

I see pulling out money for rape accusations, drug violations, arrests, and idiocy. But not for clothes.

I understand after reading Cuban's blog that this dress code came about because there were issues with a very few players in the league and since the teams of those players didn't want to handle it themselves (i.e. talking to those specific guys and cleaning it up) then it came to this league wide dress code.

It's just silly to me.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

This basically ignores the fact that there is a hip hop "culture" and "business". It's part of what makes the league popular. The real issue is that the league is concerned about losing middle aged, middle-class to upper middle-class fans who don't give a fuck about hip hop. That's where a huge pot of $ lies in sports and you have to cater to that group.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

Unfortunately, the biggest problem with the jail culture image is not the way they dress, it's the fact that they are arrested for things like drugs, drunk driving, spousal abuse, rape, and murder.

No suit is going to fix that.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

It seems like the league was afraid to ask Allen Iverson to wear a long sleeve shirt.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

Haha. That's what I thought when I read it too.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

Well said Kori. The NBA just can't look at this issue from the corporate and business perspective. There is a human element to it where the specific words in the dress code seems to target a section of people and arrive at the conclusion that dressing like them is bad.

AI (although with criminal background), Timmy still endorse big companies while Kobe, Portland potters had trouble because of their conduct off the court.

It's not just about corporates feeding money to NBA - it's beyond that.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

David Stern must love being able to tell all those rich young black guys what they can and can't do.

Too many kids coming from High School? Age Limit
Too many players wearing Hip Hop Clothing? Dress Code
Spurs winning too many games? Defensive Rule Change

Stern must feel like the guy with the big swinging dick.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

There are a lot of men who make a lot more money than Allan Iverson who have to dress according to a code of dress every day.

It is not asking to much to make the league look professional, and not look like thugs or bums.

Madison avenue and corporate America is where the NBA makes it's money, not from ticket sales, that is the money that AI gets in his paycheck.


The league has been going down a steady decline since MJ retired and they are trying to clean up their image like they had to do in the 70's when the NBA had the image a coke addicted group of black men.

You have the right to express your displeasure to this dictum, but you have to abide by the rules set forth if you want to work for this industry. This was a collective bargained rule change...if the NBA players have a problem with this, tell them to talk to their player reps.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

Also, look at the college players when they go to NY on draft day. They look more professional than 70% of the NBA players that they are joining as collegues.

If college kids can look nice and professional, then NBA players can too.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

Jim .. here's my post from another thread so that I don't have to repeat myself ...

Bottom line is that this dress code was supposedly part of the CBA negotiations, so there's nothing to do about it at this point.

I personally would have made the dress code a little more relaxed - buttondown shirt, tucked in, no sportcoat if you are inactive on the bench. And probably no restrictions on what you are wearing when you coming in and out of the arena, etc.

If the league is hell bent on cleaning up the NBA image that is supposedly upsetting the corporations, then how about getting a little more strict on other things .. steeper fines/suspensions for arrests, drug violations, etc. I mean really .. how often do vets get tested for drugs? Once a season? And if it's a marijuana violation, what happens? Nothing but being put on private probationary period til the next time?

It's funny that a player can get arrested and not miss any playing time or get a fine, but God forbid Tim Duncan wear a Sean John T-Shirt and Timberlands.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

That sounds reasonable....go call up Stern. I will back you up.

:)

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

I didn't think the dress code was as bad as it was made out to be, but I can agree on the sports coats. Its unneccessary. Collared shirts and jeans, fine. closed toed shoes, fine. Kori also raises a good point and myself and others have echoed it in previous posts. If the NBA wants to clean up their image, start with policing the behavior of its players. Does wearing an Armani suit instead of a Sean John shirt make you a better person? no..just better dressed. If a player is a bad person, no amount of high fashion will change that.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

He is that guy. For all the stuff Stern does to upset many people, he is easily the best Commish of all the professional sports.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

If I made as much coin as Iverson or Wallace was making..I'd be wearing only the finest suits to and from the game.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

Which is what I was trying to say when this first came out.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthre...ght=dress+code

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

But, I think as long as middle class American does not see a player firing up a doobie, they are ok with it. But, they do see the players on the sidelines and in the hotels and airports, so that is why they are taking this action.

I admit, when I see a black man in a nice suit or nice clothing, I assume that he is an upstanding citizen just like if I see a white man dressed like that. On the flip side, if I see someone dressed like AI, then I have a different opinion of them, until I find out first hand that they are a fine young person.

First impressions are a strong human trait.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

This is incredibly stupid. For 2 and a half hours most nights you have guys on the court wearing headbands, sporting tattoos, cornrows, etc...and you're telling me that it's oh so important that they are wearing business casual to the game? WTF?

:spin

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

Maybe Jim will give you a clothing allowance . . .

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

Bottomline is that the owners and player reps agreed to it, and there's nothing to do now except comply (or face the penalties). But I still think that if you are trying to take the "thug" image out of the league, then deal with the actual thugs (which there are very very few of), not how people dress.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

There is no bling bling allowed on the court and all players have to tuck in their jerseys. Yes, they have tats, but tats are not what they are talking about.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

Funny.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

I'd at least want the players who are not okay with this dress code to wear a black ribbon as a protest.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

I completely agree with 95% of the article. He loses me a little by trying to tie in jail culture but he's bang on with most of it.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

So what? If they are afraid that the look of players is going to make the public believe the players are a bunch of thugs then how they look on the court would seem to matter.

Re: There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes-Michael Wilbon
 

I for one, dont want the players looking like inmates, and agree with Wilbon on that matter. If you want to dress like an inmate then get yourself thrown in jail cause that's the only place people should dress like that. It's basically common sense and if you dont have it then you need to grow up.