The NBA announced this week that it will require all players on official team business to conform to a strictly enforced dress code or face fines from the commissioner’s office. League commissioner David Stern announced the guidelines of the plan this week which include the banning of jewelry worn outside of clothing, t-shirts, athletic gear, and sneakers. Players may not dress without a sport coat, dress slacks, and hard shoes while on official NBA business. This includes arriving and departing from games, press conferences, and sitting out games in street clothes on the bench.
The new plan, which is a huge departure from the formerly non-existent dress code, has been met with anger, and defiance by many NBA players. Some have even claimed that the new plan reeks of an underlying racism. Some NBA players have claimed that the new plan is an attack on their culture. Allan Iverson voiced his displeasure by saying that "I feel that this is who I am, I dress to make myself comfortable" and added "I really do have a problem with it. It's not fair". Stephen Jackson the Indiana Pacers guard went even further when he said that he found the ban on jewelry "a racist statement".
Stephen Jackson’s statement on its face is a ludicrous one. There is no cultural reason rich black athletes wear extremely expensive Jewry that has to do with their skin color. The athletes that wear chains, and flaunt expensive jewelry (in all sports) are not representing black culture. They are very blatantly using their affluence to make a statement about their economic class. It may just be that many of today’s NBA stars are black and from poor backgrounds. But many people from lower class backgrounds when they become rich make the same sorts of statements with expensive cars, clothes, food and other symbols of affluence. So the ban on jewelry clearly is not a racist statement as some believe, but in terms of the overall effect of the new dress code there certainly are issues of cultural insensitivity, and the NBA has a credibility problem it is going to have to deal with.
The NBA wants it both ways. They want the athletes to soar through the air dunking’ on each other, then stare mockingly as they run up the court at their vanquished foes. They want NBA stars tattoos to be visible, and they want America’s youth to identify with players like Allan Iverson in the league because of his brash anti-authority persona. Because it makes them money. The NBA sells jerseys, shirts, tickets to games and other merchandise because the youth of America can identify with the way Iverson looks, acts and talks. The problem with the leagues policy is that they have embraced this image of the NBA for so long since the so called good guys of basketball retired, Jordan, Bird, Magic, that this is who the league is now, and forcing a dress code down NBA players throats is going to do nothing to fix the real problems with the league. Additionally to that the NBA has embraced the youthful, in your face attitude for so long by letting high-schoolers come into the league and giving them gigantic contracts without teaching them to be basketball players after learning to become men.
The NBA has a credibility problem with its players for these reasons. On the one hand they encourage the face and attitude of toadies league, while a t the same time handing down restrictive rules of dress that seek to Madison Avenue the players. This is the way they dress, and it is obviously the way they feel comfortable. For the NBA to decide this and hand it down so swiftly is culturally insensitive the cultural backgrounds of many current NBA players. And since the day any of them were drafted they were not encouraged to become smoothed out and acceptable by fans, coaches or marketers. The outlaw baller is part of the feel and allure of the NBA for a lot of America, especially young people. This is a large part of the revenue base for the NBA. Now if on the other hand the league office, and commissioner David stern are truly interested in fixing the flawed NBA produce then that is a different story. Worry more about the on the court product; when and where its televised, the quality of play around the league and think less about what rich, aloof, NBA stars are wearing around their necks to and from games.
The new plan, which is a huge departure from the formerly non-existent dress code, has been met with anger, and defiance by many NBA players. Some have even claimed that the new plan reeks of an underlying racism. Some NBA players have claimed that the new plan is an attack on their culture. Allan Iverson voiced his displeasure by saying that "I feel that this is who I am, I dress to make myself comfortable" and added "I really do have a problem with it. It's not fair". Stephen Jackson the Indiana Pacers guard went even further when he said that he found the ban on jewelry "a racist statement".
Stephen Jackson’s statement on its face is a ludicrous one. There is no cultural reason rich black athletes wear extremely expensive Jewry that has to do with their skin color. The athletes that wear chains, and flaunt expensive jewelry (in all sports) are not representing black culture. They are very blatantly using their affluence to make a statement about their economic class. It may just be that many of today’s NBA stars are black and from poor backgrounds. But many people from lower class backgrounds when they become rich make the same sorts of statements with expensive cars, clothes, food and other symbols of affluence. So the ban on jewelry clearly is not a racist statement as some believe, but in terms of the overall effect of the new dress code there certainly are issues of cultural insensitivity, and the NBA has a credibility problem it is going to have to deal with.
The NBA wants it both ways. They want the athletes to soar through the air dunking’ on each other, then stare mockingly as they run up the court at their vanquished foes. They want NBA stars tattoos to be visible, and they want America’s youth to identify with players like Allan Iverson in the league because of his brash anti-authority persona. Because it makes them money. The NBA sells jerseys, shirts, tickets to games and other merchandise because the youth of America can identify with the way Iverson looks, acts and talks. The problem with the leagues policy is that they have embraced this image of the NBA for so long since the so called good guys of basketball retired, Jordan, Bird, Magic, that this is who the league is now, and forcing a dress code down NBA players throats is going to do nothing to fix the real problems with the league. Additionally to that the NBA has embraced the youthful, in your face attitude for so long by letting high-schoolers come into the league and giving them gigantic contracts without teaching them to be basketball players after learning to become men.
The NBA has a credibility problem with its players for these reasons. On the one hand they encourage the face and attitude of toadies league, while a t the same time handing down restrictive rules of dress that seek to Madison Avenue the players. This is the way they dress, and it is obviously the way they feel comfortable. For the NBA to decide this and hand it down so swiftly is culturally insensitive the cultural backgrounds of many current NBA players. And since the day any of them were drafted they were not encouraged to become smoothed out and acceptable by fans, coaches or marketers. The outlaw baller is part of the feel and allure of the NBA for a lot of America, especially young people. This is a large part of the revenue base for the NBA. Now if on the other hand the league office, and commissioner David stern are truly interested in fixing the flawed NBA produce then that is a different story. Worry more about the on the court product; when and where its televised, the quality of play around the league and think less about what rich, aloof, NBA stars are wearing around their necks to and from games.
