Jump to content

Do you agree with the O's "no facial hair" policy?


ChaosLex

Do you agree with the O's "no facial hair" policy?  

281 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you agree with the O's "no facial hair" policy?



Recommended Posts

Did it hurt anyones performance when "Baltimore" wasn't on the front of the jersey? Nope, but the change was made. The team represents the city of Baltimore, and quite frankly... I don't want them looking like a bunch of idiots. As I've stated before, I think limited facial hair is fine -- it's just too much of a slippery slope to say what is or is not considered acceptable. There's no harm in having a well manicured looking team. If they win a few rings, let them do what they want, until then -- the beard has to go.

I voted "no," but would go along your line of thinking and tell the team that if they make the playoffs, then they can sport facial hair if they choose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I voted "no' date='" but would go along your line of thinking and tell the team that if they make the playoffs, then they can sport facial hair if they choose.[/quote']

When you win twenty in The Show, you can let the hair grow all over your face and the press will think you're colorful. Until then, it means you're a slob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did it hurt anyones performance when "Baltimore" wasn't on the front of the jersey? Nope, but the change was made. The team represents the city of Baltimore, and quite frankly... I don't want them looking like a bunch of idiots. As I've stated before, I think limited facial hair is fine -- it's just too much of a slippery slope to say what is or is not considered acceptable. There's no harm in having a well manicured looking team. If they win a few rings, let them do what they want, until then -- the beard has to go.

They represent the city of Baltimore but it'd be ignorant for anyone to assume that they represent the type of people found in Baltimore. It'd be just as ignorant to assume that the scruffy Sox represent the type of people found in Boston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to shave for my job, and so should they.

What kind of ridiculous attitude is that? Who gives a crap what you have to do for your job? And what does your job have to do with ballplayers?

I bet you're not really a doctor. If you were, you wouldn't let anybody boss you around over personal matters like that. What if they told you that you had to keep your pubic hair shaved and wear red toenail polish, would you do that too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since they are professionals, shouldn't they look professional? If I was an owner and had to pay out millions and millions of dollars to these players, the least the players could do is at least look like professional. I could almost live with neatly trimmed facial hair, but the long hair has got to go. I'd personally hold down guys like Manny, Arroyo, and Ronnie Belliard while someone cut their hair with hedge pruners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion has always been to use it as a "carrot". Team over .500, rules relaxed, under rule enforced. I know they are supposed to be "professionals", and are paid good money, but they are human, and a lot of them are young adults, and would want to express their personality. I think a policy like that could be a rallying point for team unity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are grown men, it's not the Army, baseball is supposed to be fun. If I were Angelos I'd give $1000 monthly bonuses to the guy with the coolest facial hair, as voted by his teammates. Seriously. Rollie Fingers - awesome. Al Habrosky - even better. The whole 1890s - rock on! Markakis' Grizzly Adams - keep it all year.

These kind of "you need to be like me" rules make people look little, petty and bitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, never have. You can keep a "well groomed" policy and allow beards. In fact, they have, which is one of the reasons it annoys me: Rick Sutcliffe. Why was it okay for him?

Different ownership; different rules. This one (from what I've heard/read) comes from the top.

I hate the facial hair policy.

I would rather see a uniform policy.

I disagree...if only because a "uniform policy" would almost certainly lead to the entire team dragging themselves around in high socks. Which, come to think of it, is usually the reason most people out there call for a "uniform policy". I hate the high sock look...especially with baggy pants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are grown men, it's not the Army, baseball is supposed to be fun. If I were Angelos I'd give $1000 monthly bonuses to the guy with the coolest facial hair, as voted by his teammates. Seriously. Rollie Fingers - awesome. Al Habrosky - even better. The whole 1890s - rock on! Markakis' Grizzly Adams - keep it all year.

These kind of "you need to be like me" rules make people look little, petty and bitter.

Ok Jon, Markakis' mess should NOT be encouraged! Otherwise I agree 100%!

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a strong opinion, one way or another, but don't care for the unkept, mountainman appearance...I do believe an owner or boss has the right to dictate such a code. You don't see many business men, lawyers, etc without a silly rag around the neck. It is a small sacrifice for players that are playing a game for large sums of money. If it is too much for them to accept some reasonable rules that are associated with it, then join a beer league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • Yeah, the limited IP so far is small.  But it feels like he's not at the right level of competition. Of course it's also as much competing against himself (pitch shape, location, etc. that the team tracks) as against the hitters too.  Like you mentioned elsewhere, he's younger than DeLeon.
    • I think they’d go with 4 lefties before sending Akin to AAA. If everyone is healthy: SP: Burnes, Grayson, Bradish, Kremer, Means/Irvin RP: Kimbrel, Cano, Coulombe, Perez, Akin, Suárez, Webb/Baumann, Irvin/Means Option: Wells, Tate DFA: Ramirez, Baumann/Webb And then if they want Wells, they either DFA the other of Webb/Baumann or option Akin.  They also have the ability to option Kremer, but he’s really have to pitch poorly for that to happen.
    • With Cowser hitting lefties ok so far, not a lot of reason for McKenna. Mateo has already played CF once as well, so they are covered down with defense in CF and Kjerstad brings a much better bat. 
    • The guys been part of the team for a few years now at this point, do you really think his name is Brian?  Hell I'm guessing the story you linked mentioned his first name at least once.   Also who cares what Roch thinks?  If McKenna was coming back up, he would have a couple days ago instead of 'Silent J'.
    • Not his sharpest outing today. Pretty pitch-inefficient. Gave up a series of pretty soft hits. Able to grind thru 4 innings (I assume his day is done) w/ solid results: 7 K, 3 H, 1 BB, 1 R, 86 pitches    Edit: came back out to get 2 outs in the 5th. 94 pitch outing.
    • Not just WS contenders, but most Playoff contenders will be looking for bullpen upgrades as the deadline nears....if we're being honest with ourselves, if 70% of the teams have a shot at the playoffs, and the other 30% only have a handful (combined) of quality arms they might consider dealing, we should expect to have to pay a Kings Ransom to outbid those that are competing with us for the talent.  And, therein lies the problem.....we won't get a fair and reasonable deal by Hangout standards, it will have to be an overpay, or we settle for another Flaherty type.  That's just the reality folks. My point  being, be prepared to be disappointed that we had to give up too much, or we didn't get who we really wanted.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...