Apparently tired of watching grown men wear jeans while boarding airplane flights (I guess it offends some in the NBA's league office), the NBA will institute a strict dress code this season for all team-related activities, including air travel, entering the stadium, and public appearances. Players will have to wear "business casual," meaning a sports coat and slacks; jeans are outright prohibited. Violation of the dress code will trigger unspecified monetary fines. The dress code has not yet been formalized, although that is expected in the coming weeks.
As a product of over 12 years of Catholic schooling, I understand that "proper attire" is something valued by many in society. But aren't NBA players adults, and not children? Can't they decide to wear jeans, on their own, and not be loathed by those around them? And isn't it demeaning to institute a "dress code" for adults? And, perhaps most importantly, isn't it a tad troubling that NBA players--77 percent of whom are African-American--"need supervision" on what they wear -- does that not risk striking a very pernicious message?
Of course, many pro sports teams already impose a dress code, and there is historical tradition for such imposition. Vince Lombardi was renowned for mandating that his Packers' players adhere to a strict dress code. And since the 1972 Reds instituted a dress code, a number of Major League Baseball teams have done so (although the 2004 Boston Red Sox--"The Idiots"--seemed to do okay without one). Even the American Pool Players' Assocation requires a dress code (although, amusingly, the picture featured on the American Pool Players' Association dress code page shows a guy wearing jeans, with his shirt untucked and his top three buttons not buttoned, while standing next to a woman also dressed leisurely).
Not surprisingly, the new NBA dress code has already generated opposition from some NBA players. The Hawks' Josh Childress says it is "too much" for the NBA "to ask us to wear suits everywhere, even at a hotel at 2 a.m." Similarly, the 76ers' Allen Iverson laments, "I dress to make myself comfortable. I really do have a problem with [the dress code]. It's just not right. it's something I'll fight for." Despite such opposition, Players' Association president Antonio Davis will not apparently contest the new dress code.
The NBA's desire to control the appearance of NBA players appears consistent with underlying paternalism among NBA officials. This is best detected by Commissioner David Stern's comments to justify an elevated age floor for the NBA Draft. He has repeatedly claimed that prep-to-pro players lack maturity and are ill-prepared for the pressures of NBA life:
"[Stern] saying players need to have 'more life experience to better enable them to adjust.'" From: Rocky Mountain News (Feb. 18, 2005)
"[Stern] said an age limit would 'allow kids another reason to have another year or two to grow, to deal with the stress, the discipline and, really, the life experience that would be helpful. I'd like to think that somebody would react better at 20 than 19.'" Washington Post (May 10, 2005)
"'Because even if they might not get the same intense training from a basketball perspective … they will get a year of experience, a year of life experience, a year of education,' said Stern." Roanoke Times (July 6, 2005)
Interestingly, as we discovered in July, there appears to be an inverse correlation between arrest propensity among NBA players and their age and level of education. That point, of course, turns Stern's argument on its head. Both on and off the court, the evidence shows that the players best suited for the NBA are those who skip college.
Nevertheless, Stern will likely justify the dress code on grounds that it improves the league image, and perhaps he has a point. Then again, a dress code won't remove large tattoos, and that seems to be a more salient concern than whether players wear jeans or khakis on team flights. Moreover, I can't help but think his efforts to improve the league are ignoring the obvious: to the extent the game isn't as good as it was 20 years ago, league expasion--and not player attire or prep-to-pro players (who have done exceptionally well)--seems more explanatory: in 1985, there were 23 teams and many had fewer than 15 players under contract, meaning that with 30 teams today and 15 person rosters, the sheer number of players in the NBA has increased by over 25 percent over the last 20 years. On a practical, this means that a player who was the 8th or 9th guy on the bench in 1985 would likely be a starter today. No wonder why the quality of play has declined: Lesser players are expected to play greater roles. And that has nothing to do with attire or prep-to-pro players.
File under: Another Red Herring Propagated by the NBA.
**UPDATE January 2006**: I have a forthcoming law review article on this topic: The Reckless Pursuit of Dominion: A Situational Analysis of the NBA and Diminishing Player Autonomy, 8 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor and Employment Law
0 comments:
Post a Comment