Do It For The Culture
Allen Iverson’s greatest impact isn’t in the record books.
by Quinn Peterson
A lot of people might try to tell you that the most important important person in the League since Mike is LeBron. Or maybe Kobe. DWade, KG, or Melo perhaps? Bottom line is they’d be lying.
No, the most important person to the L post-His Airness is AI — Allen Iverson. And this has nothing to do with stats, or wins and losses, or the fact that he’s the best scorer sub-6-feet ever. Nor is this isn’t about him as a person, his recent demise or possible return. This isn’t about AI vs. The League, per se, either.
This is simply taking a critical look at what Mr. Iverson did to the world.
Quite simply, no player has come close to having the cultural impact AI has had. Looking back on his career after hearing of his possible retirement, as gaudy and impressive as his numbers are, they don’t him the least bit of justice when assessing his true value.
What’s more important is the influence he’s had on the culture — how we act and think everyday. NBA culture and, more significantly, American culture.
On the NBA tip, look at the rule changes he brought about. Namely the attention that began being paid to the crossover — by refs and players. For refs, the carrying call started being enforced more than ever. People had seen supreme crossovers before, of course. Until, Iverson, Tim Hardaway’s version was the deadliest we’ve known to man. But it was AI’s signature, shoulder high edition that caused the League and the Zebras to blow the whistle. From that point on, every other player that used the move in the same way, Steve Francis, Steph, Larry Hughes (remember he was supposed to be the second-coming of AI? Not quite, huh), etc., were all forced to tone it down. Kind of ironic, because for hoopers, Iverson brought a whole new life to the crossover. One that players from Small Fry to the League would try to emulate and master.
So as players were adding a new element to their game, the game was simultaneously attempting to put a cease and desist on it.
See the League was fully aware of the magnitude of his cultural impact. They knew how many people he had a hold on. And they couldn’t just have somebody, with that much power, teaching all these kids and grown men, a move that, when done properly, could leave one on the wrong end of a SportsCenter highlight. It was too flashy. Did it actually break the rule? Sometimes. But the enforcement was more about trying to submerge something before it became an epidemic . And because AI was the leader of the movement, he had to be stopped first before the rest of the people could be expected to do the same.
And don’t forget about the implementation of the zone. Shaq was predominantly responsible for that one, but AI deserves some credit, too. I mean, no one could keep him in fro
nt. Not Mike, not anybody. If that’s not enough proof, Jadakiss said it and he’s top 5 dead or alive. That counts for something, right?
Or how about that dress code? This may be the grandaddy of them all in terms of how he’s affected the League itself. Now AI was not the only player coming to games in throwbacks and chains. That was widespread. But he was certainly the most visible ad, and he damn sure was a main target of the League’s ban on jerseys, jewelry, Timbs, hats, etc. I’m not here to pass judgment on whether “the code” and its origin were right or wrong, or discriminatory or whatever. That’s whole ‘nother article. But the rule was made, end of story, and taking it for what it is, there’s no denying the direct correlation between Iverson and the rule.
See the League was fully aware of the magnitude cultural impact, that’s why they had to tame him. It was like he was too powerful. Kinda Malcolm X-ish. Can’t have somebody inciting people to revolt against The Man. In AI’s case, the NBA just couldn’t have somebody with so much influence on the people doing what he wants. Especially if its unreservedly contrary to their best interests. He was a cult leader to them.
So the Du-rags, baggy clothes, and everything else my man Bryan Crawford touched on (dope article, by the way), had to go.
As he said, one could take a trip to, “Anyhood, USA back then and you could see the impact that he had on the people.”
And this is the most significant mark of AI’s career. His numbers are tangible, his behavior controversial. But Like Mike, the everlasting impact he would have on an entire generation of ballers and general public is too immense to ever be measured. He too, would have millions of people mimicking his every move. Though MJ was, no doubt, a larger global icon, the mere strength of their influ
ences, especially in America, is nearly equal.
Mike went bald, stuck his tongue out, shot fadeaways, and people mirrored his every move. AI had his headband and braids, and tried to tap fools every rep and the everybody followed suit. Not to mention the arm sleeve. You know, the one your mans would wear despite having no clue what the hell it actually did.
He single-handedly carried (and probably saved) Reebok.
He’s a large part of the reason we have media outlets like SLAM.
He pioneered the streetball heatwave that took place in the early ’00s. Without his swagged out play, AND 1 mixtapes and Nike Freestyle commercials would have never come to national fruition.
“I ain’t crossover I brought the suburbs to the hood, made ‘em relate to your struggle, told ‘em bout your hustle” – Jay-Z, Come And Get Me.
He completely merged the worlds of basketball and hip-hop. Mike’s career coincided with the rise of hip-hop. But AI embodied it. The man was a living music video – no facades. He could have been saying “I am hip-hop” WAY before Wayne. He even tried his hand at it. Shaq might have been the first, but AI put the parental advisory sign on it.
He made Kobe think he had to rap to be cool, too.
And the tats? C’mon.
If this isn’t enough proof, take a look at the League now. Mike wasn’t tatted up, but LeBron is. Why? Mike didn’t wear headbands, but Melo does. Why? And those arm sleeves are as ubiquitous as ever. Why?
The Answer is The Answer. The guy that, as my man Phil Gary
said best, “made Mike human.”
The League is actually comprised largely of players who grew up seeing, watching, and hearing about AI. His impact is still going strong. Even if he’s done playing, (which he’s not) to a certain extent, it doesn’t matter. His influence is out there. Way out there. Directly or indirectly, and it can’t be curbed. It ‘s too high to get over, to low to get under. And that’s something that will never have to worry about being in a starting lineup or signing a contract. There’s no rule that can stop that.
LATEST NEWS & RUMORS
View all »
- Video: Duke’s Austin Rivers Drains Buzzer-Beater to Beat UNC
- Video: Jeremy Lin Crosses Up John Wall, Throws it Down
- City of Houston to Host 2013 NBA All-Star Weekend
- Meadowlark Lemon to Make Appearance at Fairfield University
- Griffin, Irving, Rubio Highlight Rookie-Sophomore Game Rosters
- Larry Bird: Kobe Better Teammate for Winning, LeBron More Fun to Play With
- Draftstreet’s Free $250 Fantasy Basketball Challenge is Back
- Kobe on Shaq: ‘No Way We Would Have Lasted 15 Years’
- Study Shows UNC Alumni Have Earned the Most Money in the NBA
- View All »
Are you saying no one had tats before aI?
at 34 he can still carve up cats and snipe
the NBA gets its former Poster Boy back Everything is right in the world
Know how big AI’s crossover was? As the author noted, they built an entire shoe campaign around teaching cats that one move.
If you thought the practice rant was about not practicing then you need to work on paying attention better.
Actually watch the full video again. The rant is about the media using the final presser of the year to berate Iverson for missing practices after Larry Brown started feeding the media tidbits to ease his transition out of Philly. Sure Iverson misses practices. Guess which other players were HORRIBLE practice players.
Bill Freaking Russell and Wilt Freaking Chamberlain.
Y’all need to do your damn homework.
The phrase is “my mans and them.” It was made popular by DMX before his tragic descent into crack.
You would have caught the reference if you weren’t 50. Also, young kids call undershirts “wife beaters” just in case you missed that one while chilling at the retirement home in Miami.
lol.
You know who else shot in the low 40′s percentage wise? YOUR MANS KOBE BRYANT, YOUR FAVORITE PLAYER IN THE LEAGUE.
Cause Jason Kidd was a serious MVP candidate shooting sub-40 percent from the field?
Is Elgin Baylor modern enough?
And hell, Iverson put up better numbers in several years besides that MVP year, while shooting a better percentage, but don’t let that affect a good argument.
I think you missed the exit for the Klan meeting. You wanted to get off at ESPN, not SLAM.
Also, by his thirties, Chamberlain was actually going to practice and being a good role model. Not skipping it to eat more turkey.
Stop bringing in other players when talking about AI, for chrissakes.
If you’re going to berate one person for a particular action, but then give another person doing the exact same thing a pass, then you’re a hypocrite. Spin it how you want.
Come on now.
Iverson wasn’t a great practice player. I just read a book that talked about how Bill Russell used to be laughing and joking and resting at practice because he was playing 45-48 minutes most nights for the Celtics.
Wilt told a coach that wanted him to show up for shootaround that he only came to the arena once a day, it was up to the coach to decide which time he wanted him to show up.
Iverson and Larry Brown clashed about some of his practice habits. Iverson went on a televised rant…
If people believe that Iverson’s practice habits were the reasons why Sixers players didn’t develop, or have offensive cohesion, then I really can’t argue with you because you’re living in a fantasy world that is disconnected from reality.
Provide some proof that Iverson’s practice habits caused problems for the Sixers. Provide some proof that failing to practice proves you’re a selfish player who doesn’t care about anyone else.
I provided examples of two of the greatest players of all time who weren’t great in practice, but came to play and played well during games.
I’ve watched the practice video numerous times. Iverson is railing against the media chastising him for practice issues that were overblown by his coach, when he pointed out that the Sixers had the EXACT same team that went the Finals the year before and just didn’t get things done. Practice wasn’t the problem, but the media was making it the problem. Talent was the problem…
If we gonna talk about context then lets talk about the whole picture not quotes taken out of context and used as proof.
These players are practically deified by the NBA (just like Jordan was), so those things are grossly overlooked.
I’ve made your first comment many times to Myles and others.
I’ve acknowledged that Iverson failed to reach his potential, and gotten killed by people who think I’m crazy.
Trust me, I have no illusions about what Iverson failed to do and what he accomplished.
That’s why I consistently refute assertions that he was an unrepentant chucker who sh@tted on his teammates and the game basketball.
Could he have done more? Of course? Did he fall short as far as what he could have accomplished in his career? Yes he did. But, Myles is in the habit of downplaying Iverson’s exploits on the court to “one good year.”
I don’t but that. The stats don’t by that. He built a franchise from the ground up in Philly. That team was nothing when he got there and within three years they were in the playoffs. That says something right there to me. And while they didn’t get out the first round after 2001, they had never failed to get PAST the first round up until that point.
Iverson was a great player. Period.
First, I don’t get down with “luck” anyway. As a Christian, I prefer “blessed.” Iverson is “blessed” to have been given the talent and opportunity to play basketball. He went through a lot of rough stuff during his life to get to this point, but that doesn’t excuse him from proper behavior. Yet, I don’t think his behavior is that much different from the behavior of most NBA players. Kobe is the EXCEPTION he ain’t the rule.
I mean, you telling that Iverson and Shaq couldn’t have made it happen like Wade and Shaq did? First time I saw Wade play I thought “He’s a bigger, stronger version of Iverson.”
Like I said, Iverson could have done more. But, that doesn’t meant that what he got was handed to him out of “luck.” He worked at times and he didn’t work at others.
Hell, Andre Miller doesn’t touch a basketball the entire off-season, yet I’ve never heard anybody accuse him of failing to respect the game, or do what’s necessary to be good. I don’t know how Iverson’s career would have turned out if he had Kobe’s work ethic, but I know how it turned out without it, and dude has had quite the career.
I seriously, seriously doubt it.
Who he is now, was partially imprinted on him growing up in a shack with a teenage mother who liked to get loaded. Sure, 2001 may have made him more stubborn, but I don’t think dude was changing no matter what happened.
He felt like he was right, and with some people, that’s all that matters.
Real talk, Iverson was one of the few people who could have had the success he had with that Philly squad in that city. I don’t think Kobe could have done what Iverson did. I don’t think he could have survived that long in that environment and then had that kind of success. I don’t know, I think dude is crazy unique as a player.
But, I agree with Bryan Crawford that he could have been so much more with a slightly different mindset. Oh well, you can say that about a lot of great people.
Comments