Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Panthers Owner Jerry Richardson Doesn't Want Cam Newton To Have Tattoos « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3 ... 11

Morgan

User is banned from postingMuted
*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 14658
Offline
« : August 24, 2011, 02:21:27 PM »

Panthers Owner Jerry Richardson Doesn't Want Cam Newton To Have Tattoos

Does an owner of a business have the right?

-------------------
The Panthers made a big investment in Cam Newton by taking him with the first pick in the 2011 NFL Draft, and appear positioned to make their future franchise quarterback a Week 1 starter in 2011. But does that mean Jerry Richardson is right to ask Newton to refrain from getting tattoos or piercings, as he did in a meeting in April?

On one hand, Richardson's obviously overstepping his bounds a bit in asking any player to do something that his contract doesn't require him to do, and he's unfairly singling out Newton in hopes of keeping his young star pristine — Richardson also complimented Newton's attire and haircut in that meeting — despite having dozens of other players with all manner of body alterations.

On the other, Richardson's request is probably sound business advice that could pay off for Newton. Yahoo!'s Chris Chase notes that achievement will be the primary driver of Newton's marketability, but it's not unreasonable to expect that he has a wider range of possible endorsements available to him if he keeps his body free of things that could be objectionable.

The place where these arguments meet and get messy is in the middle, where the concept of tattoos as abnormal and undesirable meets with the idea that asking a player to do something above and beyond play football.

It would also be dishonest to ignore that there is a racial component to this, though Richardson's request seems paternalistic and race-conscious rather than racist. Richardson, Newton, you and I all know people who have complained about NBA players (mostly black, often tarred with the brush that included coded language about "hip-hop") "ruining" their bodies with tattoos, right? Fan perceptions factor into Madison Avenue discussions, and that's at least part of what Richardson has in mind here.

(I could go further and compare this situation to George Steinbrenner's long-standing request that Yankees players remained clean-shaven as a part of his team's ethos, but I'll save that.)

But being smart about that factor doesn't mean Richardson will get his way. If Richardson wants to ask Newton to lay off the body augmentation, he can; it's his right to have that opinion, and consider it "reasonable," as he did when PBS' Charlie Rose told Richardson that his request made him sound like Vince Lombardi. If Newton wants to adhere to it in turn, that's his right.

It would also be fine, however, if Newton exercised his right to ignore a non-contractual request by his employer and got a picture of a panther on his forearm, a cross on his bicep, a "THANK$ FOR EVERYTHING AUBURN" on his torso. Newton's body is his own, and he'll do what he wants to with it, whether Richardson likes it or not, because Richardson not going to have a No. 1 draft pick released over a tattoo.

So we come back to the beginning, with Richardson's request seeming as well-minded and ultimately meaningless as ever. This isn't an easy question. The best answer for all involved, though, is making the question moot with a stunning on-field turnaround. If Newton can do that for the Panthers, my bet is that Richardson's thoughts on tattoos will fade well into the background.


youngone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 12199
Offline
« #1 : August 24, 2011, 02:24:49 PM »

he is richardsons employee if you think about it. most companies everywhere have some kind of appearance policy.

anterrabae33

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4429
Offline
« #2 : August 24, 2011, 02:26:06 PM »

It's crazy that the lockout is over and we are still getting lockout-caliber articles.

buchead

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2437
Offline
« #3 : August 24, 2011, 02:30:59 PM »

First thought was how dare he. But you cant even work at amscot with visible tattoos. If a guy is going to pay you millions then hey...
But still.... Seems a little odd considering the times. Look at all the endorsements nba players get with no problem. From shaq to lebron to kobe. Times are a bit more loose than in the past.
Heck coach rah is tatted

Morgan

User is banned from postingMuted
*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 14658
Offline
« #4 : August 24, 2011, 02:32:19 PM »

he is richardsons employee if you think about it. most companies everywhere have some kind of appearance policy.

what if you're selectively enforcing your rule as the company president - for instance you hire and allow some employees to have tats and piercings - like TE Jeremy Shockey...

isn't that some sort of discrimination unless you have the rule across the board?

Bucs N Beers

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 3773
Offline
« #5 : August 24, 2011, 02:32:44 PM »

The thing about him being Richardson's employer is one thing, and most employers have an appearance policy. BUT those appearance policies are usually written into you employment paperwork (ie. Newton's contract). If it's not in his contract, he isn't bound by it.

Also, if you go by that example it may actually be discriminatory to tell Newton he can't get tattoos but not hold others on the team to the same restriction. I think in the end Richardson can ask it, Newton can still make his own decision.

I hope he gets tattoos. Eff Richardson.


Green Right Slot, Albacore 3 Y Quesadilla

Morgan

User is banned from postingMuted
*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 14658
Offline
« #6 : August 24, 2011, 02:35:43 PM »

That owner reminds me of the Bucs first owner - Hugh Culverhouse. I doubt if Richardson's players feel any loyalty to an owner like him. He just writes the checks, that's all.

GameTime

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 19242
Online
« #7 : August 24, 2011, 02:39:09 PM »

im sure the glazers dont want freeman tatted and peirced up, nor does benson want brees getting "sleeves", same with blank and ryan.  its not as marketable to the masses.

\"Lets put the O back in Country\"

youngone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 12199
Offline
« #8 : August 24, 2011, 02:39:58 PM »

he is richardsons employee if you think about it. most companies everywhere have some kind of appearance policy.

what if you're selectively enforcing your rule as the company president - for instance you hire and allow some employees to have tats and piercings - like TE Jeremy Shockey...

isn't that some sort of discrimination unless you have the rule across the board?
i think it might be more that he sees newton as the face of HIS franchise and he has to be able to sell this guy to his fanbase and whoever he does business with but most ppl wont care as long as he can score TD's. it sounds like more of a request than a mandate

Morgan

User is banned from postingMuted
*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 14658
Offline
« #9 : August 24, 2011, 02:44:58 PM »

Yes - I think it was a request. Nothing wrong w/ that.

Wonder if Richardson would have had a problem w/ this guy......


youngone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 12199
Offline
« #10 : August 24, 2011, 02:46:33 PM »

Yes - I think it was a request. Nothing wrong w/ that.

Wonder if Richardson would have had a problem w/ this guy......


he cant be his franchise QB but he would love to have him at TE

GameTime

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 19242
Online
« #11 : August 24, 2011, 02:55:43 PM »

its hard to market a guy wearing a dress with an actual rainbow wig hairstyle.

\"Lets put the O back in Country\"

Morgan

User is banned from postingMuted
*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 14658
Offline
« #12 : August 24, 2011, 03:02:33 PM »

Mike Florio's two cents.....from his blog

Jerry Richardson to Cam Newton: No tattoos, no piercings
Posted by Mike Florio on August 24, 2011, 4:54 AM EDT
 
APAppearing as guests on PBS’s Charlie Rose (thanks for the head’s up, SportsBusiness Daily), Cowboys owner Jerry Jones and Panthers owner Jerry Richardson talked about a variety of issues.  I’ll be posting some of the most interesting aspects of their discussion right here.

The first one relates to the pre-draft meeting between Richardson and quarterback Cam Newton.  Though the topic was addressed by Tom Sorensen of the Charlotte Observer in April, it’s worth repeating.

Richardson, who said that Newton “was dressed perfectly” for their meeting, was blunt.  “I said, ‘Do you have any tattoos?’” Richardson told Rose.  “He said, ‘No, sir.  I don’t have any.’  I said, ‘Do you have any piercings?’  He said, ‘No, sir.  I don’t have any.’  I said, ‘We want to keep it that way.’ . . . .

“We want to keep no tattoos, no piercings, and I think you’ve got a very nice haircut.”

Interjected the host:  “You sound like a Lombardi.”

Said Richardson, “No, I just sound reasonable to me.”

The fact is that, over the years, Richardson has drafted and signed plenty of players who have tattoos and piercings, including tight end Jeremy Shockey.  Apparently, Richardson is willing to tolerate those things when it comes to men who won’t become the face of the franchise.  For someone like Newton, whom Richardson said has “athletic ability unlike anything that I have seen in quite a few years,” Richardson presumably wants him to do nothing that would potentially alienate the mainstream paying customers.

Regardless of the motivation, there’s something troubling about Richardson’s position.  Though Newton can’t be disciplined for getting a tattoo or a piercing or multiple of either, Richardson has made his wishes clear — and he’d likely be unhappy if Newton defies them.

But Richardson isn’t Newton’s father.  Newton is a grown man, and he can do whatever he wants by way of decorating his body with ink or ice, or by growing his hair as long as he pleases.  The notion that teams would try to make players into non-threatening billboards seems more than a little heavy-handed, even if it’s done in the name of “growing the pie” to the benefit of teams and players alike.
« : August 24, 2011, 03:05:08 PM morgan »

BucsFTW

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3206
Offline
« #13 : August 24, 2011, 03:19:59 PM »

"Richardson's request seems paternalistic and race-conscious rather than racist."

I have no idea what race had to to do with the concept at all.


Morgan

User is banned from postingMuted
*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 14658
Offline
« #14 : August 24, 2011, 03:58:25 PM »

"Pittsburgh Steelers: Rashard Mendenhall Says NFL 'Parallels' Slavery - now I know what he was talking about.

Richardson = Slave owner in Medenhall's eyes?
  Page: 1 2 3 ... 11
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Panthers Owner Jerry Richardson Doesn't Want Cam Newton To Have Tattoos « previous next »
:  

Hide Tools Show Tools