Page 1 of 2

Plan to support Nolan is well-suited for 49ers fans

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 4:38 pm
by jeremyroyce
By Matthew Barrows - Bee Staff Writer
Published 12:00 am PDT Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Story appeared in SPORTS section, Page C1

Print | E-Mail | Comments (3)| Digg it | del.icio.us

SANTA CLARA -- Reebok might be able to prevent Mike Nolan from wearing a suit on the 49ers' sideline, but the sneaker giant is powerless to stop a stadium-load of fans from donning their Sunday best on game day.

Call it the Formalwear Revolution, which was sparked last week by an Internet zealot who read that Nolan wasn't getting anywhere in his quest to permanently return the coat and tie to the NFL sideline. So "Ninerfan21" made a modest proposal: Why don't the 49ers' fans show Reebok where to shove it by showing up to the team's Sept. 10 home opener -- a prime-time affair, mind you -- dressed as businessmen? Since then, the idea has spread like chicken pox at summer camp.

And why not? It's a creative way of sticking it to a faceless, multi-gazillion-dollar corporation that insists grown men coach football games as if they're getting ready to run a 5K. It's a lesson to all the kids out there: You don't need lawsuits to settle disputes.


You just need suits.

And you have to believe that ESPN, which will air the opener, will have a field day with the concept. Every segue to a commercial -- and Lord knows there will be a lot of them -- will involve a throng of dapper Nolanites in button-down suits.

Finally, it's a novel concept.

Back when Y.A. Tittle and Joe Perry were playing, the stands were filled with fans in tweed and fedoras. Since then, the fan look has moved away from Joseph Abboud and toward, say, Kid Rock. The suit and tie could become a San Francisco trademark, like cheeseheads in Green Bay or hog noses in D.C.

Tipped off that there's a revolution afoot, Nolan laughed.

"I'll say this," he said, "I hope they do it for the same reason I'm doing it, which is out of respect for the league, the 49ers and to those who have done it in the past."

Then he let the idea sink in.

"I like it," he finally said. "It shows unity. I like that."

Reebok admittedly pays a lot -- $250 million -- to be the NFL's tailor, but it's hard to imagine the sneaker company continuing to fight this and looking anything but venal and petty.

The suit, after all, is designed to make men look good.

Middle-aged men generally don't belong in clothing designed for younger men, as anyone who witnessed Chicago Cubs manager Lou Piniella spilling out of his uniform last week can attest. (Apparently, the moniker "Sweet Lou" now applies to his favorite food group.) When Nolan and Jacksonville coach Jack Del Rio were permitted to wear Reebok-approved suits for two games last season, the experiment was considered a success. Despite heaps of positive reviews -- and a lot of glowing press for Reebok -- Nolan and his black suit only will be allowed to make two appearances again this year.

Reebok surely wants the issue to die, and despite having what seems to be a small army of public relations specialists, had a devil of a time returning phone calls on Monday.

Last year Nolan, too, seemed a bit embarrassed by all the attention paid to the suit debate. This season, however, he's resolute in his quest.

The reason, he disclosed last week, is that the health of his father, former 49ers coach Dick Nolan, is deteriorating. The elder Nolan suffers from Alzheimer's disease and last month was placed in an assisted living facility for patients suffering dementia. The 75-year-old Nolan also is fighting prostate cancer.

Dick Nolan coached alongside men such as Tom Landry and Hank Stram, in an era in which coaches wore suits on the sideline. The younger Nolan's desire to do the same is an homage -- a tip of the fedora, if you will -- to the men who helped build the league and especially to his father.

It is for that reason that Nolan won't let the issue go. And it is for that reason Reebok should give in.


http://www.sacbee.com/100/story/217523.html

Guys I don't know about you but I think that this is stupid. I mean c'mon can you imagine all NFL coaches wearing suites. Can you imagine baseball managers wearing suites. I think Nolan needs to stop with this whole suite thing and concentrate on winning games.

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:24 pm
by frankcal20
Have to tell you I love this idea.

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:35 pm
by Countertrey
I mean c'mon can you imagine all NFL coaches wearing suites.


Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


Yup... how stupid... :roll:

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 7:15 pm
by Smithian
Image

Image

Image

NBA and College Basketball coaches all look perfectly fine in suits.

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 8:57 pm
by SeanTaylorJr.
I love the idea, the fan thing in suits is like the coolest thing i've ever heard. It's like how penn state does "white-outs" occaisionally where everyone wheres white. If everyone wore suits that be 10 times cooler. It shows class and respect, Reebok should at least allow them to wear suits 4 or 8 games, but two??

On a side note, i'm not sure how much of Nolans "concentation: is actually being spent on this issue as J.Royce said. You can't really tell someone to "concentrate on winning games" when they won more than your team did

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:48 pm
by PulpExposure
Yeah that's really cool actually.

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:19 am
by Irn-Bru
I love this idea. I wonder what Lombardi would be wearing on today's sideline. . .


I think Nolan needs to stop with this whole suite thing and concentrate on winning games.


Why? The guy wants to bring some class to the sideline that he thinks is missing. I'm sure he doesn't spend 8 hours a day worrying about it, so why should we criticize him?

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:45 am
by nuskins
I cannot figure out why there is opposition to this????? :?:

The NFL should be encouraging this and can/should tell Reebok to either provide the suits or void the contract. (BTW, the Reebok suit is pretty sharp IMO)

Suits on the sidelines is a fantastic tradition that should be brought back. If Goodell can rule the league with an iron fist he could/should step in here and make a statement.

Bill Belichik is a disgrace on the sidelines when it comes to appearance, just awful and it is disrespecting the game and the tradition.

It should not be mandatory but what is wrong with allowing coaches to wear suits if they choose to? I guess looking like a slob is more appropriate?

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:59 am
by BnGhog
In the warmer month of Sep. Might not be all that great. Basketball coaches have an advantage there, they are always indoors. I'm all for the Idea, well I don't see why they can't wear what the hell they want. I mean I know why but it's stupid. The head coach, can't wear what he wants. Look at it this way.

The NFL has a deal with Reebok not the head coach himself. Can you see the NFL telling owners what they can and can't wear??? I don't think so. Sure "thats different he's the owner", but you could say the same about the head coach "thats different he's the head coach".

Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:55 am
by jeremyroyce
Why all the sudden is there so much outcry over suits. This is 2007 not 1967. Coaches haven't warn suits for years until this Nolan had to become a head coach and he is the last person to be granted anything like this. You expect it in basketball because they have been doing it for years. I'm sorry but this is stupid.

Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:59 am
by jeremyroyce
Irn-Bru wrote:I love this idea. I wonder what Lombardi would be wearing on today's sideline. . .


I think Nolan needs to stop with this whole suite thing and concentrate on winning games.


Why? The guy wants to bring some class to the sideline that he thinks is missing. I'm sure he doesn't spend 8 hours a day worrying about it, so why should we criticize him?


Class? Nolan knows nothing about class?

Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2007 1:32 pm
by Countertrey
Class? Nolan knows nothing about class?


Perhaps (though I doubt that you have standing to pass judgement on that)... but it's clear that HE knows something of professionalism.

Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 1:20 am
by jeremyroyce
Countertrey wrote:
Class? Nolan knows nothing about class?


Perhaps (though I doubt that you have standing to pass judgement on that)... but it's clear that HE knows something of professionalism.


Ok. Calling your team out in front of the media after a loss when you have only coached the team for three games in his first year as a headcoach and completly blaming it on your players and not excepting any blame? Your blaming everything on your players in front of the media or just doing it period. Thats professionalism? Class? He never said hey this is my fault we win as a team and we lose as a team I didn't do a very good job coaching my team and I need to do a better job. Then Nolan trades a player and says to the media that he was troublesome in the locker room, but then signs someone who has a troubled past and then releases him because why? He was trouble. Professionalism? Class? You see calling people out to the media is not class nor is it professionalism and I can go on for days about all the things Nolan has done (I gave y'all just a couple of examples) but you get the point Nolan needs to learn about class, professionalism, then he needs to learn about just coaching and not worring about a darn suit to wear on sunday.

Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 12:23 pm
by Countertrey
ROTFALMAO

Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 4:30 pm
by jeremyroyce
Countertrey wrote:ROTFALMAO


Whats that suppose to mean?

Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2007 6:42 pm
by Countertrey
It means that I find your response amusing... Very amusing. Why?

Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 12:09 am
by jeremyroyce
Countertrey wrote:It means that I find your response amusing... Very amusing. Why?


I don't know why. Why don't you tell me why?

Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 10:49 am
by Countertrey
Because, it's clear that your agenda is "I think Nolan sucks, so anything he says is stupid". It's similar to your stance on Arrington, with your "Karma gonna git all bad people" POV.

Suck it up... or continue to entertain... makes no difference to me.

Personally, I have always thought that Nolan has been overated as a coach, whether as DC or head coach. But if he wants to wear a business suit on the field, well, he'll be joining some good company... and the league and Reebok are making a mistake in their stance.

Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 2:41 pm
by BossHog
Countertrey... how can you say Nolan's not an idiot... according to jeremyroyce... the guy wants to wear a suite.

I mean, who wants to wear a suite?

You can check in to a suite at a hotel... you can enjoy a musical suite... some might even still listen to Honeymoon Suite... but whoever heard of a guy trying to wear a suite.

No wonder Reebok is miffed. Why should they have to come up with a whole new designer suite just for this guy?

:wink:

On a serious note, what a ridiculous stance from all involved. A guy wants to wear a suit on the sidelines, not come out in a muscle shirt and daisy dukes. :puke:

Then again, there's no such thing as bad free publicity, so what does Reebok really care? it's not like people are going to stop buying their favorite team's merchandise, so it's all just pop to Rbk.

They should give Nolan a lifetime supply of suites for all the free publicity. :D

Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2007 7:10 pm
by Countertrey
Oh! Well, I 'm still ok with him wearing a business suite too!

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 5:48 pm
by jeremyroyce
Countertrey wrote:Because, it's clear that your agenda is "I think Nolan sucks, so anything he says is stupid". It's similar to your stance on Arrington, with your "Karma gonna git all bad people" POV.

Suck it up... or continue to entertain... makes no difference to me.

Personally, I have always thought that Nolan has been overated as a coach, whether as DC or head coach. But if he wants to wear a business suit on the field, well, he'll be joining some good company... and the league and Reebok are making a mistake in their stance.


What does this have to do with LaVar? Nolan and LaVar are entirely different situations don't compare them two. Nor did I ever say that I was glad that LaVar got hurt, I would never wish that upon anybody. All I said that eventually when people do bad things its comes back to them and maybe I should have explained it better and thats my fault.

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:03 am
by Countertrey
What does this have to do with LaVar?


Nothing. It has to do with your agenda.

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:24 am
by Fios
Play nice fellas

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 11:57 am
by Steve Spurrier III
From a business perspective, I have a hard time understanding why the NFL wouldn't want to encourage this. I know that having coaches wear licensed apparel offers some sort of advertising, but I have a hard time believing that the added benefit of having old men try to sell hip clothing outweighs the benefit of having the coaches display a level of professionalism. If I were the NFL, I would want my coaches wearing suits.

The NFL is a very smart league, but I'm not following their logic on this one.

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:53 pm
by Countertrey
Play nice fellas


The problem is the questions. It would be rude not to respond. :wink: