Oct 232005
 
Authors:

Once again David Stern has shown no real scope of intelligence with the implementation of the recent NBA dress code. The only real motive for which Stern has instituted this dress code is about control. What's next, hair length restrictions? Restrictions on tattoos? Restrictions on all forms of freedom of expression?

David Stern is trying to repair a tarnished image problem, yet is making the dress code an issue of control? It seems Stern is attempting to exercise legitimate control in order to overhaul this image reconstruction, yet with the racial makeup of the NBA, how can this not be construed as racially motivated?

Another one of the major problems is the fact that the dress code encompasses all NBA functions. This is one of the major problems; NBA players are meant to wear business casual attire while teaching a clinic or making personal appearances; how about during shoot-around or travel time; all of these are considered "team or league business."

Finally Stern has been quoted as saying, "If they are really going to have a problem, they will have to make a decision about how they want to spend their adult life in terms of playing in the NBA or not."

Really David, not adhering to your tyrannical dress code will result in banishment from the league.

That is amazing considering MLB has a three-strike penalty with performance enhancing drugs, which potentially change the outcomes of games.

Oh and to Scott Bondy, Mark Cuban did not make his fortune from selling Yahoo. Cuban co-founded Broadcast.com, and in 1999 sold this to Yahoo. Never at any time did he sell the company Yahoo.

Brody Burns

junior

technical journalism

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.