Pull Your Pants Up!!!

Many teams have dress codes for the members... whether it be college, high school or pro. I can remember back to high school where on game day, football players were walking around the school like they were going to job interviews.  I ran track but on meet days we would just wear our unis/warm ups. Same thing in college. Nothing wrong with either approach. Some teams even go as far as to have restrictions on facial hair. Ehhh... I can understand that it goes along with the business like appearance, but I don't see how it effects how someone plays.

But today a story came out about Carolina Panthers owner Jerry Richardson telling their first round draft pick Cam Newton not to get any tattoos or piercings. I'm not sure how I feel about this, but I'm leaning toward "disagree."

You sign Jeremy Shockey to your team, who has more tattoos than free skin, but your franchise player has to be the clean cut, tat/piercing free person you plan to plaster all over Charlotte to market your organization. Is he saying he doesn't want a black guy looking like some sort of gang member or thug to be the face of the franchise? Is he saying he just doesn't like tattoos and he wants his star employee to ride along with his beliefs because he's paying him? I have no idea. 

 

Can having an altered outward appearance in this day and age have that rough of an effect on how people view your team if you're the franchise player? It didn't affect the Ravens (Ray Lewis). Didn't affect the Skins either when CP was the face. What about the Chicago Bulls circa Dennis Rodman? Some people found his appearance entertaining while others found it scary/repulsive but no one can dispute his play as being one of the best (if not the best) rebounders the game has ever seen. Did it change how people looked at Phil Jackson? Michael or Scottie? No. They were Phil, Michael, And Scottie. Same thing with the Ravens. Ray is Ray. Flacco is Flacco. Ed is still Ed. No one is worried about Ray's appearance because he's one of the best defensive players in the game... period (people were more concerned about him staying on the field after his run-ins with the law). Same with the Skins... CP was CP... Sean was Sean (RIP), Tana was Tana... and so on. No one in the DMV was concerned about CP's sleeves when he was rushing for 1400 yds (or after for that matter). Heck, I can guarantee that people in Philly are less concerned with Mike Vick's tatts and more concerned with him leading them to a Super Bowl victory.

So is Richardson implying that a certain appearance will put more butts in the seats of Bank of America stadium than a winning team? If he is, then he has lost it. He should be more concerned with Cam's performance than what he does with his body.

If you don't want your players to wear a certain color suit on game day, sounds a little extreme, but I'll go with it. If they wear a whole suit, it covers up most of people's tattoos anyway. If you don't want them to wear earrings in piercings anywhere but their ears, still a little extreme, but okay I guess I'll live. But to go as far to tell someone they can't go into a tattoo parlor or get a piercing is way off. There are more important ways to control the appearance of your guys.

Like tell them to pull their friggin pants up. Fruit of the Loom and Hanes will probably be very upset at their free advertising but I don't want to see that crap, and millions of others don't either. Buy them all new belts. Fine them. Do something.You want to change the "face" of a franchise??? Tell them to pull their pants up during practices/team activities. 

It's hard as hell to run like that anyway.





Follow me on Twitter: @NFLHustleBabe