Shahab 1

Omer Shahab

Gail Aw

ENWR110 - Fashion and Consumption

7 November 2007

Analyzing the Motives behind the NBA Dress Code

The National Basketball Association (NBA) is a multi-billion dollar sports league

that is among the most watched not only in the United States, but is also televised in over

200 countries internationally. (Stable Context). Even so, the NBA ranks behind the National

Football League (NFL) and Major League Baseball (MLB) in annual revenue and also trails the

other two in American television viewership. (Status Quo). There is still a cloud of distrust and

negativity held by some over the league, part of which has resulted from irresponsible actions

taken by certain individuals, that have caused the American public to make generalizations on

the whole league. The NBA’s fan image is the lowest of the four major professional sports in the

U.S. (Brennan). Thus, in 2005, league commissioner David Stern imposed a dress code in hopes

of ameliorating the American public’s negative perception of its players and in turn leading to a

larger market share and increased revenues. (Destabilizing Condition). The dress code requires

players to wear business casual clothes, such as a suit or sport coat and slacks, and does not

allow for jeans. Players are expected to dress this way when sitting on the bench while out of

uniform and while traveling to and from NBA arenas, as well as on team flights (Eligon). Initial

reaction from critics highlighted that the dress code was a subtle form of racism directed

primarily at the large majority of African-Americans that play in the league (Sheridan),

(Consequence) but with a more logical perspective it can be determined that such is not the case.

When rationally examining the economic and promotional motives behind the NBA dress code,
 Shahab 2

it does not seem as much racist as it does a legitimate attempt to advance the league in the highly

competitive market of professional sports. (Claim).

The NBA dress code is reasonable not because of its importance or effectiveness, but

simply because of the fact that playing in the NBA is a job, and thus the athletes should be

required to conform to the rules of the workplace. Just as office and even grocery store

workers are required to dress up or wear uniforms, an NBA player can be mandated to dress

“professionally” to team events and games. League commissioner Stern states clearly, “The

notion is that if you're a professional, with it are certain protocols. One of them is the way you

dress when you're on business” (Sheridan). It is not beyond the rights of the employer to enforce

such mandates. To be critical of employees and their appearance is entailed within the

framework of running a business. Cleveland Cavaliers’ forward LeBron James understands the

reasoning behind the dress code, professing “…it's a job and we should look like we're going to

work” (“Dress code won’t restrict players”). Similarly, Denver Nuggets’ superstar point guard

Allen Iverson, an eleven year league veteran who was initially opposed to the dress code, now

informatively accommodates the code into his everyday work, “It's my job. I just have to deal

with it. I don't have a problem with it” (“NBA teams look sharp”). Statements like these should

make it apparent that the intent of the dress code is not to perpetuate racist ideology by ordering

black players to comply to certain attire. The athletes themselves understand that they are getting

paid millions for playing in the NBA in a job-like environment. From an alternate perspective,

NBA players are not dissimilar to a product, and must be sold. In order to promote a product

properly they must be presentable and that requires for them to have an outward appearance that

is enticing to the patrons who are viewing them. In our society, aestheticism is essential for the

movement of products. If something is viewed as unappetizing or unappealing, then the product

essentially has no net worth to the consumer. Thus, if entertainment is the very ends or purpose
 Shahab 3

of the NBA players, then they must do everything within their power, respective of the

commissioner’s regulations, to satiate the desires of the consumers. Furthermore, just as players

are required to wear team uniforms on the court, it seems only logical that a separate uniform of

sorts could be placed on NBA related functions off the hardwood. NBA players already willingly

comply to wearing their team uniforms while playing the game. The dress code creates a type of

uniform for basketball players to wear while they are not on the court, but still on the job. Such

regulation cannot be associated with racist intent, but simply with what is accepted in a

workplace environment of which NBA players are a part.

To more clearly understand the mandate of dress given by the NBA commissioner,

one must explore the psychological markers which imply that a shirt and tie represent

semblances of professionalism. Appropriate dress is not the only quality of professionalism, but

it is the most conspicuous (Waters). Clothing is a first-hand presentation of an individual, by

which people consciously or subconsciously formulate a perspective on the wearer’s character

and background. With such process of thought ingrained within the human intellect, it can be

seen why outward appearances projected by clothing are important and should not be

overlooked. Another reason the American public sees business attire as professional is partly

because of the Christian religion, which is followed by a majority in society. Dressing up in your

“Sunday’s best” inadvertently means that one is dressing in some type of suit that they normally

do not wear. Thus in American dogma, if you’re dressing your best in front of your Lord, you are

dressing in a more respectable and presentable way than usual. Therefore an adoption of “church

attire” into the work place became a predominant mainstay throughout the United States.

Because of the prevalence of the Christian religion in American society, one can connect that

those who adorn their “Sunday best” as being morally upright and essentially professional. The

dress provides a means by which the individual can portray oneself as being beyond the confines
 Shahab 4

of immorality and uphold one’s image in a systematic and professional light. They are beyond

the confines of immorality and moral degradation, which is the reason such attire is being

implemented, and uphold them in an extremely systematic, pragmatic, and professional light.

Hence the derived intent of the NBA is based on promoting the NBA players in a better content

according to the Americans’ perception of professionalism.

Through imposing the dress code, the NBA seeks to present a more positive league

image in order to more greatly appeal to its current and potential fan base. The real mission

of the league is to make money. As mentioned before, the NBA is a business. A fundamental

marketing strategy is to increase appeal to the masses, thereby accruing as much viewership as

possible. It is as simple as Adam Smith’s concept of supply and demand detailed in the Wealth of

Nations. However, in this case, demand and supply both take on a more dynamic definition. The

demand is not only for the display of unsurpassed talent and athleticism during game play by the

athletes, but there is also a demand for them to act and present themselves in a certain way in

accordance with the ideology of the American public. Conversely, the supply is not only for the

NBA to provide entertainment for the consumer, but also to uphold supply for the aspect of

professionalism demanded by the audience. The NBA has no choice but to comply with these

demands in order to both maintain its current viewer base and to fulfill its goal of increased

viewership. In a 2003 Sports Illustrated survey, more than 50% of respondents believed the

conduct of NBA players was worse than in other professional sports. Fittingly, 40.1% claimed

they were less interested in the NBA than they were five years ago (“NBA players courting

disaster”). The lagging in gross sales and viewership is related to the misbehaviors and

dissentious etiquette adopted by numerous NBA players. Events such as the brawl at the Palace

of Auburn Hills between the Detroit Pistons and Indiana Pacers in 2004 and the rape trial

involving NBA poster boy Kobe Bryant have deteriorated public perception of the league
 Shahab 5

(Brennan). With that in mind, the NBA had to curtail the image to something more appropriate to

secure the NBA fiscally. By inferring the cause for declining viewership, the commissioner acted

accordingly to negate the bad image that has ravaged the NBA. The dress code seeks to address

the negative image by conforming to the demand for professionalism and an improved outward

appearance dictated by the American public.

Critics who associate the NBA’s dress code as a form of disguised racism on the

league’s behalf generally cite the enforcement of business attire over other styles of apparel

as a promotion of the white man’s dominance in society. (Acknowledgement). It is easy to

misconstrue the real intent of the dress code and to correlate a requirement of business attire with

an imposition of white male culture on the young black males that primarily compose the league.

Those who claim the dress code is racist, players and critics alike, have come to the false

understanding that the commissioner’s goal is simply to force more regulation upon the players

and restrict the hip-hop culture fashion that has been adopted by many African-Americans in the

league. This is however a misconception of the NBA’s motives. As mentioned earlier in the talk

of professionalism and appearance in public perception, the league is not seeking to perpetuate

the ideas of Western white dominance over its players through requiring business attire, but

instead is focused on maintaining a positive image in the American public’s eyes. The

importance of public image cannot be overlooked, especially for an organization such as the

NBA which is desperate to retain its consumer base and even expand viewership to increase

revenue. The league must cater to the whims of the public, whatever they may be, if it seeks to

gain the favor and monies of the public. One cannot change the mindset upheld, either

consciously or subconsciously, by such a large percentage of the populace that Western business

attire is seen as professional. Thus, to accomplish its goal of increasing public perception, the

NBA is simply conforming to societal expectations. The philosophy behind this is that as long as
 Shahab 6

the public is pleased by the appearance of the product, in this case NBA players, it is likely that a

larger number of individuals will be likely to subscribe to it through viewership. (Response).

Another argument held by detractors of the dress code is that the league is trying to

restrict individuality and self-expression of its players. (Acknowledgement). It is apparent

that this belief is based on incomplete information and can be nullified by examining the

provisions of the dress code. The dress code still provides for plenty of room for originality and

individuality. Players have a large deal of choice in dressing the way they feel, as long as their

attire meets certain basic requirements. The NBA even goes as far as to highlight individual

players’ expression through a feature on the official NBA.com website that allows fans to vote

for the best dressed player each week. The players available for fans to vote among all display

their own sense of fashion and flashin’, so to speak, through dressing in a broad range of colors

and styles of sport coats, slacks, and jackets that are all deemed permissible under the dress code.

It is foolish to assume that the mandate removes the aspect of originality from a player’s dress,

when there is such room for experimentation and variety in the dress code. It is not as if players

are required to wear a uniform-like combination of a white shirt with a tie and black suit, but in

actuality are just slightly constrained by the general type of attire they must don. Only bolstering

the argument against the dress code’s restraining nature are player reactions to the new rules.

Minnesota Timberwolves’ Kevin Garnett states “I take a lot of pride in how I look,” (“NBA

teams look sharp”) Atlanta's Tony Delk confirms that he believes “it's good to come to the game

dressed up” (Brennan). The players themselves realize that dressing up is a form of self-

expression in itself, and many voluntarily dressed in business attire even before the dress code

was mandated. Even those who are now no longer able to wear the white t-shirt and jeans

combination they were so accustomed to, will come to realize that the new dress code still has

room for them to express themselves through their attire. (Response).

 Shahab 7

Critical thinking of the actions of the NBA is needed to fully understand the motives

behind the dress code. To simply connect such actions as racially motivated proves that those

who are opposed to such regulations lack a discriminating intellect. To put it bluntly, the NBA is

a business and its survival is reliant upon a clientele that is willing to buy into its product. Thus,

to concede to the whims of fancies of the American public is an important part in the nature of

the business. Indeed businesses need to be malleable; they must be able to conform, to change

and to adapt to prosper. The NBA, just like any other successful business, must do all it can to

maintain and extend its viewer base. Economic profits are not achieved by staying static in a

rapidly evolving capitalist economy. If the NBA did not seek to expand its audience and remedy

the league’s public image that has taken a hit from the actions of certain individuals, it would

simply fall behind in the professional sports market and may even go bankrupt. So who can

really blame the NBA for wanting a makeover for its players? In the end, it’s all business.
 Shahab 8

Works Cited

Brennan, Christine. "Stern Rightly Trying to Tailor New NBA Image." USA Today20 Oct. 2005.

2 Nov. 2007 <http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/brennan/2005-10-19-dress-

code_x.htm>.

Eligon, John. "N.B.A. Dress Code Decrees: Clothes Make the Image." The New York Times 21

Oct. 2005. 6 Nov. 2007

<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/19/sports/basketball/19stern.html>.

"NBA Players Courting Disaster: as Highly Paid Athletes Continue to Run Afoul of the Law, the

League Battles to Keep a Wholesome Image. It's Losing." National Post22 Apr. 2003. 2

Nov. 2007 <http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/index.html>.

"NBA; Stern says dress code won't restrict players, owners; Commissioner thinks new policy

'will be embraced'." The Houston Chronicle (Houston, TX) (Oct 19, 2005): 6. General

OneFile. Gale. University of Virginia Library. 6 Nov. 2007

<http://find.galegroup.com/itx/start.do?prodId=ITOF>.

"NBA teams look sharp off the court; Even some critics of new dress code look and feel

better." The Houston Chronicle (Houston, TX) (Nov 27, 2005): 11. General

OneFile. Gale. University of Virginia Library. 6 Nov. 2007

<http://find.galegroup.com/itx/start.do?prodId=ITOF>.

"New NBA dress code draws mixed reaction; Proposed policy has Stern's OK, but others are

skeptical." The Houston Chronicle (Houston, TX) (Oct 9, 2005): 6. General

 Shahab 9

OneFile. Gale. University of Virginia Library. 6 Nov. 2007

<http://find.galegroup.com/itx/start.do?prodId=ITOF>.

Sheridan, Chris. "ESPN NBA." Stern: Dress Code Debate is 'Live, Unscripted Drama' 26 Oct.

2005. 26 Oct. 2007

<http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=sheridan_chris&id=2201231>.

Waters, Ray, and Eileen Elrod. "Should teachers wear business attire to school?." NEA

Today 24.5 (Feb 2006): 45(1). General OneFile. Gale. University of Virginia Library. 8

Nov. 2007

<http://find.galegroup.com/itx/start.do?prodId=ITOF>.