Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

NBA Dress Code revisted

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    NBA Dress Code revisted

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...402133_pf.html

    I gave this it's own thread because I think it's a well written article, plus I like Wilbon. Any highlighting is my own.





    There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes
    By Michael Wilbon

    Saturday, October 15, 2005; 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.
    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.

    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.



    Okay, it's me again. Just to add a little something. The droopy pants look IS jail culture. Who would be proud of being in jail? Talking about setting low standards for yourself. I went to a gang conference years ago where they talked about the droopy pants. Apparantly in jail you can't have belts, which was said. Also, the best way to show that you weren't going to be someone's, ah, really close cellmate, was to wear your pants droppy, so as to not show your butt very well, hence the baggy boxers to go with them.


    On the other hand, guys who wanted to be someone's bitc...er, good, gooOOood buddy , they would hike their pants up really high, thereby displaying their wares by letting everyone see the outline of their equipment.


    Pretty goofy, huh?


    So, anyways, I thought Wilbon made some really good points. I just thought I'd share the article with you guys.


    Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: NBA Dress Code revisted

    There's No Dressing Up Bad Attitudes
    hmm where have I heard this before.. by another brilliant mind...

    but yes the Stipend comment is way out of line and laughable.. I am not sure though why so many people are so concerned about the attire of the players when .. nobody could list what a player from MLB or the NFL was wearing on any given day if he was out ot uniform.. wonder why that is ..hmmmm

    Originally posted by Frank Slade
    Although I realize now its a mute point but before when there was no dress code there was no harm in wearing street clothes as opposed to an armani suit. It really has no bearing on who you are or the size of your bank account.

    If your place of employment said there was no dress code , honestly what would wear to work every day a suit or jeans and a t-shirt..?

    No doubt the players look more classy IMO in a suit on the sideline, but to imply that the league's image is being hurt by AI and company wearing whatever they want is ridiculous if the league's image is in need of repair it is certainly does not stem from that..

    Keep in mind... It's the Man that makes the suit...The suit does not make the man.....if you know what I mean...


    Originally posted by Frank Slade
    I agree that the dress code if implemented should be followed and no one needs to complain about it, that's life. Get over it everybody has rules that have to be followed.



    My only point is it is a futile attempt at trying to repair what is a self proclaimed image problem for the NBA by David Stern...

    If fans were turned off from certain antics over the last few years from a few players, they are not going to tune back in just because everyone now is dressed up.

    I guess I reallly dont have a side in this . other than the players should follow what rules are put in place , yes, but does not David Stern have bigger fish to fry than to be fashion police as well?

    That's my only question ?

    Why Not Us ?

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: NBA Dress Code revisted

      What's really funny Scott is if these bad boy NBA players actually spent time in prison we wouldn't even need this discussion. The worst place in the WORLD is the pen. No we're not talking local or Putnamville. Just visit the one in Terre Haute or Michigan City to get that Scared Straight appeal. Horrible, horrible way of life....
      You know how hippos are made out to be sweet and silly, like big cows, but are actually extremely dangerous and can kill you with stunning brutality? The Pacers are the NBA's hippos....Matt Moore CBS Sports....

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: NBA Dress Code revisted

        So If we only could get these guys to pull thier pants up..
        The NBA ratings would soar ? All would be right in the NBA ?

        Maybe an Izod shirt and khakis for all ?

        Or are you suggesting that this is one of many steps the league is taking to repair its image and public relation, and if so what are the "other" steps.. Is what I would want to ask Mr. Stern...

        Why Not Us ?

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: NBA Dress Code revisted

          Stern defends new NBA dress code


          By BRIAN MAHONEY, AP Sports Writer
          October 18, 2005
          NEW YORK (AP) -- 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.''

          But, as Stern pointed out, the reputation of the league's players had fallen to a point that was ``not as good as our players are.'' That's why he believes -- and insists -- the players will readily go along with his policy.

          ``We have a minimum standard that we've set that reflects on the professionals in our sport and you're going to do it,'' he said. ``We're certain that it will be complied with.''

          AP Sports Writer Tom Withers in Cleveland contributed to this report.



          Updated on Tuesday, Oct 18, 2005 5:20 pm EDT

          http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slu...v=ap&type=lgns

          Why Not Us ?

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: NBA Dress Code revisted

            http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...510190436/1088
            October 19, 2005


            Wardrobe rules leave players unfazed
            Pacers' Jackson is upset, however, with ban on chains

            By Mark Montieth
            mark.montieth@indystar.com

            The NBA's new dress code has met with general acceptance from the players.

            It's not unanimous, however.

            While most players have no objection to wearing sport coats or suits on the bench when appearing in public, complaints have been raised about the ban against chains.
            "I have no problem dressing up . . . because I know I'm a nice-looking guy," Indiana Pacers guard Stephen Jackson said Tuesday. "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."
            A new policy regarding the players' attire was announced Monday. It permits dress jeans on the bench and allows team warm-up uniforms on flights, but bans T-shirts, retro jerseys and headgear.
            The dress code falls in line with those in other leagues, and is an attempt to upgrade an image that has become tarnished in recent seasons.
            "I think it's a good thing," said Austin Croshere, the Pacers' player representative. "I think there should be some creative expression on the part of the players to dress in a manner that fits them, but at the same time to portray the professionalism the league wants.
            "Guys will fight it at first, but 90 percent of the people in this country go to work every day with a suit on. My dad did it for 40 years."
            Philadelphia guard Allen Iverson has been one of the more vocal critics of the new policy, calling it "something I'll fight for."
            "Just because you put a guy in a tuxedo, it doesn't mean he's a good guy," Iverson said. "It sends a bad message to kids. If you don't have a suit on when you go to school, is the teacher going to think you're a bad kid?"
            Denver's Marcus Camby suggested the players be given a clothing allowance, but the Pacers' Jermaine O'Neal doesn't object to buying new clothes.
            "There's some battles in life that you just can't try to fight," O'Neal said. "Guys make enough money to put on some dress clothes.
            "My plan this year was to dress up anyway. I have 40 to 50 suits already. I should be one of the best-dressed guys this year."
            Ron Artest plans to dress up, too, although in a less conventional manner.
            "I'm not really a suit guy, so I'm going to have some fun with it," he said, smiling. "I'll wear, like, purple shoes, yellow slacks, a burgundy shirt, cut-up tie and a lavender sport coat. I'm going to mix it up."
            Jamaal Tinsley has been the Pacers' most casual dresser, wearing jeans and T-shirts on the bench when injured, but plans to conform to the code.
            "That's the last thing we should be worrying about," he said. "If we're going to sit around and complain and worry about it, we're getting sidetracked."
            Better dress won't necessarily guarantee better behavior, however, as Atlanta's Tony Delk pointed out.
            "They were fighting in suits last year in Detroit, weren't they?" Delk said.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: NBA Dress Code revisted

              Originally posted by Frank Slade

              ``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.''

              And Raja is wrong.

              Raja a business major is he? Captain of industry? I don't think so.

              When they build new stadiums for football or arenas for basketball, the eye is on luring bigger and bigger corporate dollars. The fan base is always going to be there. Kids are always going to buy jerseys. Fans, for the most part, will still attend games.

              The one way to increase revenue is to lure bigger, more profitable companies to buy your skyboxes, use your catering services and underwrite you. How do you affect that? Put a more universally palatable product out there.

              In every walk of life, in every business in the world, looking professional tends to be the smartest way to attract sucessfull businesses. Does one go to a job interview in a baseball cap and slouchy jeans? Do most economic giants present their image as one of a baggy white t-shirt and a rumpled flannel shirt?

              What does Raja Bell know about selling to big business? I suspect the NBA is looking to attract bigger corporate sponsors, which may the difference between having Nike as a sponsors, which is a given, or getting a truly heavyweight company like Pfzer or Merck or Price -Waterhouse.
              Hey! What're you kicking me for? You want me to ask? All right, I'll ask! Ma'am, where do the high school girls hang out in this town?

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: NBA Dress Code revisted

                I was really impressed by Tinsleys comments :::sheds tear::: these boys really are growing up.

                Jackson may be right, but he should listen to Jermaine...this battle is NOT worth fighting for. It would do the entire Pacers organization some good for everyone to vocally back up this idea. Who cares if it sucks.

                We want Stern on our side, if that is even remotely possible.

                Everyday one of these nutcases has to say something stupid it seems like. SO what Jack, wear your chains when your not doing NBA stuff. Everyone already knows your a gangster, congratulations.

                I love Sjack, but he needs to pick his battles, as Jermaine said.
                *removed* Just keep politics and religion completely out of it, please.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: NBA Dress Code revisted

                  Originally posted by Tony Delk
                  Better dress won't necessarily guarantee better behavior, however, as Atlanta's Tony Delk pointed out.
                  "They were fighting in suits last year in Detroit, weren't they?" Delk said.


                  You just have to laugh at this.

                  Some guys are just clueless. People who work at gas stations have dress codes, but somehow the NBA is picking on black culture. (Please don't make the connection that only blacks work at gas stations, that's not what I'm saying nor hinting at.) I can't readily think of a profession/job that doesn't require some kind of dress code.
                  “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: NBA Dress Code revisted

                    I lauged at that too then I jus put the paper down for a while...

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: NBA Dress Code revisted

                      If you are walking down the street and see a bunch of young men walking toward you in suits, what do you do? Probably keep walking. Conversely, if you see a bunch of young men dressed in baggy pants, backward facing baseball caps, and twirling jewelry, if you have any sense the latter situation has to give you pause.

                      Of course it's all image, but if you have a business which image to you want to project?

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: NBA Dress Code revisted

                        Here is the problem in a nutshell
                        The Decision at this point to enfoce a certain dress code has massive implifications. more so than the average person is giving credit to.

                        David Stern is embarking on what could turn out be a wise and savvy business venture, To distant his business from the hip hop industry that he and the league have been fused with for the last 8-10 years. The culture that is now so desperatley trying to cut down as "bad image" or at leat the not the right image.
                        Is the one and the same has knowlingly embraced even if it be passively by allowing the syngery of this to merge so tightly that one has to question at times. where does one begin and the other end. The league benefits directly like no other business from the hip hop culture, lifestyle, and revenue.
                        It has turned a blind eye , even if by remaining silent until now. Perhaps its too little too late and hypocritical at best to try and change this image overnight.
                        I think that is a valid observation.

                        Now from a Corporate perspective its makes sense the need to appeal to the masses , and retake the attention of it's lost loyal fans , Who I can only assume , Stern suspects long for the more family oriented days of Bird and Johnson that have long since passed..

                        He realizes that MLB and NFL are certainly more easily packaged and sold to the masses and more directly "middle america" than is the NBA which in certain spots of the country has become more of a niche market itself especially where a team is not located near.

                        I cannot argue and agree with the financial aspect of looking to Diversify you revenue streams and become more mobile in different avenues that in the past you have not had access to .

                        I just wonder why know David ? What has caused this sudden urgency that you have benefited from for years upon end. Many companies like Reebok have an entire division (RBK) committed to players like AI, K-mart, Manny Ramirez, and even 50 Cent, Jay-z all have massive deals that capitalize on the very lucrative hip hop image that is portrayed on and off the court... but now this has become unacepptable. In order to appeal to a more broader spectrum of sponsors

                        Some of your intentions could be right, no harm in wanting a more cleaner image for the League, who can blame you for that...
                        But does this come at time where it's too little to late to change from what you have already allowed ?

                        And is this due in part from a culture you cannot or refuse to begin to understand and thus assume as human nature does.. I cannot understand it.. thus it must be wrong. ?

                        Its probably unfair to paint with such a broad brush that this is just a White Lawyer making a rule against what is majority African American players.

                        On the other hand.. don't allow Stern to skate free of this as the little angel swooping in to help the NBA's image. And had nothing to do with the current state that the NBA is in....

                        Why Not Us ?

                        Comment

                        Previous template Next
                        Working...
                        X