In a pre-draft meeting with Cam Newton, Panthers owner Jerry Richardson laid down the law on what he expected of the prospect.
Richardson asked Newton if he had any tattoos or piercings and Newton said he did not.
"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," Richardson said.
So the debate becomes should owners be able to tell their players what they can and can't do to their personal appearance?
Mike Florio of NBC Sports has a strong opinion about this one. He said the move seemed heavy-handed and troubling.
I personally disagree.
Owners pay players for their abilities and to have those abilities above other teams.
The NFL represents more than a sport--it's a business.
If a franchise owner decides he doesn't want to have posters and billboards with a guy looking like he just left prison, I don't blame him.
Especially for someone who will eventually be the face of a team, appearances are important.
Newton, and the people in the media freaking out, should look at that conversation as more of a compliment than a lecture.
What Richardson meant to say was, "I think you'll do great on my team and I'd like you to be approachable."
While he cannot actually penalize Newton if he disobeys, it probably wouldn't be good for him.
Honestly, Cam should want to maintain his wholesome image as long as he can.
In the public eye, all it takes is one crazy night or one lost temper before the media swarms in.
Newton has a responsibility now more than ever to be a role model for younger fans.
He is obviously one of the most talented athletes to come along in a long time, and little boys all around the country will be watching him on Sunday afternoons.
Newton has shown time and time again how much he loves kids with his visits to elementary schools and service projects.
Kids probably wouldn't run up to him as willfully if he had a couple of sleeves rocking and a Mike Tyson face tattoo.
While some fans (and players) like to say professional athletes are the last legal slaves, the bottom line is they are employees.
Bosses are allowed to enforce a dress code, a code of behavior and ethics and will be prejudicial against someone who looks like a gang member.
With the amount of money these guys are making, I think being asked to avoid the tatoo parlor isn't an unreasonable request.
You don't want to deter white-collar fans with kids in tow because of some ink under your skin.
It's not as though Richardson asks this of all his players.
Many on his team, and the whole league, have dreads and huge tattoos, and that's just fine and dandy.
Quarterbacks are held to a different standard.
They are clean, focused leaders who are friendly and approachable.
They take responsibility for wins and losses and face the brunt of the media circus.
They sell the tickets and bring fans into the merchandise shops.
For that reason, owners reserve the right to be a little heavy-handed.
I don't mind.
QBs are easiest on the eyes.
Do you like this story? The Plainsman doesn't accept money from tuition or student fees, and we don't charge a subscription fee. But you can donate to support The Plainsman.
