Should The Reds Go Back To The Clean Shaven Look?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chip R

OK, all you guys who want to go back to the clean-shaven look, what would you do if some player - like a pitcher - who was a top caliber player who had facial hair was in negotiations to come here and felt that the clean shaven look was dumb and if the Reds enforced that look, he wouldn't come here?

---

I would be disappointed in the ballplayer and happy with the policy. :D But I admit that you have probably zeroed in on the main reason it will never happen.

Create a consistent winner and it wouldn't be a problem. Nobody has a problem shaving off their beard to play for the Yankees. When it is all said and done, winning, and playing for a winner, gets rid of a lot of those hangups.

The REds in those days had Rose and Bench and then Morgan to help enforce it. HOF superstars that were as big as the game.

You think Griffey cares about doing that?
Or Larkin?

Not that they are not proff. type players but they are not going to enforce something like that....and the rem. Gen X types like Graves and Dunn are sure as heck not going to care.

It works for the Yanks bec. George pays above and beyond what anyone else does .....so the players figure what is the big deal.
Plus they have a Derek Jeter and a Joe Torre to help enforce their way. They are respected and people fall in line.

Just like Morgan did when he was traded to the Reds.

The Reds need talent. Not haircuts.

Quote:

---

The REds in those days had Rose and Bench and then Morgan to help enforce it. HOF superstars that were as big as the game.

---

The Reds in those days had parents that grew up in a different era, in the depression and during jim crow.

Different eras makes different people and a different value system to teach their kids.

Today's Reds grew up in post war suburbia with cable TV and a "Free to be You Free to be Me" soundtrack pounding through pop culture.

Jim Kern began growing a beard in 1982 because he wasn't happy, and he wanted to try to force the Reds' hand. (He was well-known for an Amish-style beard when he played for the Indians and Rangers in the 70's.) The Reds promptly traded him to the White Sox for Wade Rowden and Leo Garcia.

I remember that Dave Parker voluntarily shaved off his beard and moustache before the press conference announcing that he had signed with the Reds. When he was asked about his new look, Parker responded that the club's policy was well-known, and he made the gesture to show that he wanted to be a part of the Reds organization.

The Reds and Rollie Fingers were said to have had a mutual interest some time in the the 80's, but Fingers insisted on keeping his handle-bar moustache. The Reds said no, and the two sides parted ways and never came to an agreement.

When the Reds signed Jeff Reardon in the early 90's, he reluctantly shaved his beard and moustache. He wasn't crazy about it, but he did it because it was a team rule.

Greg Vaughn insisted on keeping his goatee when he joined the Reds, because "his kids had never seen him without it." The Reds relented. (Interestingly enough, Reardon had tried this same argument six years before, with less favorable results.)

Carl Linder has a heck of a head of hair for an old geezer, doesnt he? I wonder if it's real? He'd look great with a Fu-Manchu.
I remember when Naehring played on the Red Sox, he sported the "mullet" look that was popular at the time. Now all of a sudden (two years ago actually) he institutes the short hair/no beards or earrings policy in the minors. I'd say that's either a double standard or just a sign that he grew old. Shame on him, he should worry about more important things.
I agree with those that say the Reds need more talent, not haircuts. Their personal styles aren't our business and shouldnt be the Reds either. They shouldnt be forced to cut hair or shave just like they shouldnt be ordered to grow a beard or long hair. Freel's beard and Larkin's hair arent the way i'd wear mine, but kudos to them for going against the grain. But I kinda like Wily Mo's fro, it's quite stylish. And I wouldnt want to be the one to tell him he needs a haircut.

The idea of trying to enforce a clean-shaven, head-scalped, knee-high pants style is equally as futile and equally as arbitrary as trying to require all players to grow full beards, all grow foot-long hair, or all wear the pants completely down to the shoe tops.

I've seen it tried, and I maintain that it is the attemped imposition by someone who wants to control just for the sake of controlling, and its prime source is a conservative yearning for the way things used to be.

How would those of you who admire, approve of, or want the hair/face/pants rules suggested by Krusty and others like to have the tables turned on you to demand that you adopt the facial whiskers, long hair, long pants look that you disapprove of?

And I don't buy any of the discipline, team-togetherness, winners-dress-this way arguments, particularly for adult athletes.

And I don't buy any of the discipline, team-togetherness, winners-dress-this way arguments, particularly for adult athletes.
------------------------------------------------

Funny thing is it has worked for the military for how many years? You dress the same and groom the same. No one stands out. Signifies being part of a team. Maybe that is what I'm trying to say......the Reds need to enforce the team concept. One way of doing it would be a dress code.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RANDY IN CHAR NC

Bring back the clean cut look along with the uniforms that signified the most successful period in Reds history (sans the trendy 70's beltless uniform look and striping that was modeled after the very beginning of the "Big Red Machine," 68-71 traditional Reds uniform) and emphasize a "Back to Winning" tradition. Re-enforce it with a front office attitude that matches the look on the field. I think it would be the greatest thing that the organization could do. Get the players of the period involved. Bring 'em to spring training. Let them share the "Reds Way." Promote it! Wouldn't it be great to see the old guys in uniform on the field at the ballpark more often? Not just for show, but as a tool for the players to use. Let the young guys pick their brains. I'm not saying to make these guys manager or coaches, but use them as the winning resources that they are.

I think it would be a signal to players, fans, and all of baseball that the organization is dead serious about getting rid of the lackluster performance of the current period and replacing it with the "Reds Way" that produced consistent winning in the decade of the 70's. I think it all hinges on the willingness of the front office to change it's thinking, the visual change of the uniform and look, an outward sign of the commitment to excellence and winning and a great tribute to the teams of that great period in Reds history.

Get rid of the BLACK eye image that the organization is suffering, and get back to the business of winning. It would be treading on hallowed ground. It would signify a huge step, but it would have to be matched by a tremendous commitment and willingness to follow through. You couldn't take it lightly. Promote it. Work it. Eat drink and sleep it. Create an aura. This organization needs an overhaul.

The Reds organization of the 70's was one of the greatest in all of baseball history. No one involved with the Reds, from the Front office, to the players, to the fans, should be ashamed of saying, this was the way the Reds won. The players should be proud to create the look of the winners of the past. To put on that uniform and look, should be sacred to any player in the organization.

Just spell it out. We want it again. We will attain it again.

---

I like it.

Quote:

---

OK, all you guys who want to go back to the clean-shaven look, what would you do if some player - like a pitcher - who was a top caliber player who had facial hair was in negotiations to come here and felt that the clean shaven look was dumb and if the Reds enforced that look, he wouldn't come here?
I liked the clean shaven look but that was of a different time and place. I even like it in the minor league system. But I don't see any benefit in keeping it at the big league level. If you have a policy of neatly trimmed mushtaches, hair and beards, then I don't see anything wrong with that.

---

Chip, then I don't want that PLAYER on the TEAM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krusty

And I don't buy any of the discipline, team-togetherness, winners-dress-this way arguments, particularly for adult athletes.
------------------------------------------------

Funny thing is it has worked for the military for how many years? You dress the same and groom the same. No one stands out. Signifies being part of a team. Maybe that is what I'm trying to say......the Reds need to enforce the team concept. One way of doing it would be a dress code.

---

Sports are sports.

Sports rookies get 300 K a season

Miltary guys get nothing like that and get to sleep in the same room with all those guys who look just like them, they do it for a reason.

Winning a ballgame isn't one of them.

Military is not sports, never will be.

Seems pretty clear to me.

So why now?

5 games below .500 why not the hair deal last year when they were even worse?

I'll chime in with the "YES" group on this. First off, the players are employed by the Cincinnati Reds. That being said, if the Reds adopt a dress code that includes clean shaven and certain haircut styles, then the players should abide by it the same as if they would in the regular workforce.

The second point I'll make is that if you look sharp, then your competition views you much differently and you make them question how adequate of a foe they are to you. Being in police work for nearly 10 years now, I've read a number of studies on use of force and keeping youself out of hostile situations. The study that most caught my eye was one where it was found that nearly 65% of violators saw that if an officer looked sharp (well pressed uniform, sharp haircut, close shave, shined shoes, good physical dispostion) they were less likely to pick a fight with that officer due to feeling that they were outmatched. This same study also found that several individuals convicted of killing officers on traffic stops saw that the officers presented a disposition that made them fell that they stood a better than average chance of taking that officer down. Of course these studies aren't always what happens when the actual situation comes down.

I make these comparisons because if a team looks like professionals they will be more apt to play like professionals.

When the competition sizes them up, they will think differently.

I voted no. I'd love to see the Reds go back to uniforms similar to the 1968-71 style; I'd really love to see a return to the caliber of play the team had in the 1970s; and I'm fairly conservative myself-but I just don't care whether or not the players are clean shaven and I don't believe it has any effect upon whether or not the team wins.

Those uniforms sure helped in the early 80's didn't they.
Or this year on the weekend trip to Pittsburgh.
Do things to help players feel more comfortable. A more comfortable player is more likely to produce.

Conversely, sometimes being uncomfortable makes a player work harder for fear of losing his place or position on the team.