He's finally grown some balls!@ ##### Duncan rips dress code as 'basically r****ded' Story Tools: Print Email FOXSports.com Posted: 2 hours ago Spurs superstar Tim Duncan is known to be understated and shy — but not about the NBA's new dress code. Duncan, according to a report in The San Antonio Express-News, joined the Indiana Pacers' Stephen Jackson with not-so-kind words for commissioner David Stern's dress-up policy. Tim Duncan, seen in his sideline attire of choice last season, calls the NBA's new dress code "a load of crap." (Rocky Widner / Getty Images) "I think it's a load of crap," Duncan said. "I understand what they're trying to do with the hats and do-rags and jerseys and stuff. That's fine. But I don't understand why they would take it to this level. I think it's basically r****ded. "I don't like the direction they're going, but who am I?" Duncan, a two-time NBA MVP and three-time NBA Finals MVP, did not play in Tuesday night's 94-81 exhibition loss to the Indiana Pacers at Conseco Fieldhouse. He wore what The Express-News called his typical injured-list wardrobe: jeans and a dress shirt. However, an NBA spokesman said Duncan would have to tuck his shirt in once the regular season starts and the policy goes into effect. In the new policy, players will be allowed to wear "dress jeans" and a collared shirt or sweater to and from the arena, but they must put on a sport coat if they are sitting near the bench and not in uniform. This clearly isn't music to the ears of Duncan, who is thinking of remaining in the locker room on nights he does not play. As for Jackson, his problem lies in the fact that players will not be allowed to wear large chains, pendants or medallions over their clothes when they enter an (NBA) arena. "I have no problem dressing up (business) casual because I know I'm a nice-looking guy," Jackson said. "But as far as chains, I definitely feel that's a racial statement. Almost 100 percent of the guys in the league who are young and black wear big chains. So I definitely don't agree with that at all."
Translation: "I don't wear hats and do-rags and jerseys and stuff, so I don't care if they ban those things. Just don't make players wear suits and ties, because then you're treading on MY toes." It's all about you, Tim.
The real gem in there is Stephen Jackson talking about how he can wear business casual because he's good looking. Anyway, I don't understand why they're even worried about what they wear on the bench. It's when traveling that I'd be annoyed. I wouldn't have any problem wearing professional attire on the bench because I'd understand most Americans do have to adhere to a dress code at work, but when I've got to fly across the country at midnight? I'd be annoyed to say the least.
I'm sure Tim's teammates loved hearing him consider staying in the lockerroom during games he isn't playing rather than to tuck his dress shirt in.
Yeah, I wouldn't like to hear that either if I were a Spurs fan. Is he trying to say that the players who have problem with dressing up, like Iverson and Duncan, are not good looking?
If this is the thing that was so important to Tim Duncan "da man" that it made him open his mouth and prostest it says alot about Tim Duncan.
they are all a bunch of overpaid babies anyway. if i was making what they are making i would wear a diaper and rabbit ears for all i care.
seriously.........most people have dress codes at work.......its not really that much to ask them to look decent for a game. I cant believe how much of a deal they are making about this.......and the networks arent making it any better by reporting about it every day.
Suuuuuuuuuuuure you would. And may I ask why you waste time on a internet message board talking about a bunch of overpaid babies? That's stupid.
There's no such thing as "overpaid". You are not going to fool a multibillion dollar successful business into giving you more money than you deserve.
that would be hilarious. its like the Angels. If I was their annoucer I would call them the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim everytime to drive home how stupid it is.
Every owner and GM makes a decision about how much to pay a player. No agent in the world can convince an owner to pay his player more than he's willing to. It's like buying stock. If it's $50/share you might think it's expensive. However, if the stock goes to $80, it turns out to have been pretty cheap. Allen Houston got hurt, however if he had led the Knicks to a championship his worth to Dolan would have been a lot more. A player's salary is a relative concept. That salary incorporates the risk of a player getting hurt. If Allan Houston had signed a contract that paid him only if he played and he remained healthy, that contract would have been for $25mill/year instead of $15M. So it's all relative. The money that these owners make is incredible. The NBA is a very profitable business, despite the fact that people thing players are getting paid too much. They get paid what their worth to their organization is. Nothing more, nothing less.
So, you believe that "multibillion dollar successful" businesses never make mistakes? Then why do they file bankruptcy so much? Why did the NHL have a strike? Wasn't it because salaries were too high for revenues? Why did the NBA institute a salary cap? I could give you a laundry list of salary mistakes made by my former employer if you had the time. I don't think this is where you are coming from, but too many people think that just because a person or a business has a lot of money, that means they spend it wisely. Not so. Many successful businesses eventually fail because of bad decisions. In sports, the reason some teams are always sorry is because owners are "fooled" into overpaying certain players.
Of course they could make occasional mistakes. However, Bladeage said "all NBA players are overpaid". That's not the case, because the NBA owners just signed the new collective bargaining agreement, which does not change much from the previous CBA. It shows that the previous CBA was very profitable for the owners in order for them to agree to pay the players the same amount. Kwame Brown, Michael Redd, Larry Hughes, Bobby Simmons all signed contracts that are as good/or better than they would have been under the previous CBA. Obviously the owners feel optimistic about past profits and future growth of their business. For most NBA owners, their NBA business is secondary in nature, so they use the NBA for notoriety and personal glory. So even if they do make a mistake, it's not catastrophic. Buss, Paul Allen (Micrsoft), Dolan are billionaires. If the NHL had problems, it's probably because their popularity as a sport declined (I know I don't watch it). THe NBA is becoming global sport which is growing worldwide with attendance at an all-time high. It's such a great sport played globally, it's pure and it's natural. China, India and others are adopting the NBA as their national sport. The NBA is a cash cow whose profits will increase in the next few years compared with 97-04. THe players are the engine that drives the NBA. The owner's investment in the players is as low risk as any other venture you can think of. It's not like investing in the stock market. In the NBA, if you build it, they will come. The revenue generated is a lot more certain than most other forms of business. 82 games a season, huge TV contracts, big worldwide markets. Do the math
