What’s Wrong with NASCAR?

by Michael Bedard

NASCAR held its biggest race of the season last weekend, the Dayton 500. Did anybody watch? Their biggest star, Jimmie Johnson, (Jimmie who?) has won the last 5 NASCAR season championships, known as the Sprint Cup. Would anybody recognize his picture on a cover of a magazine?

Ten years ago NASCAR icon, Dale Earnhardt Sr. was tragically killed at the end of the Dayton 500. At the time of his death, Earnhardt was a seven-time cup champion and had a record $42 million in career earnings. Following his death, NASCAR was on the lips of most sport enthusiasts and a must-watch event on Sundays. Watching the “Good old Boys” (or, as some would affectingly call them, “crash test dummies") bump each other around and, often, off the oval track captured our imagination. It was exciting to see them drive only inches apart at over 200 mph. So what happened? Besides the die-hard redneck fans in the southern United States does anybody follow the sport? Why did people lose interest, stop caring and, more importantly, stop watching.

The answer is easy: the average sports fan wants to be entertained, not confused. To use an analogy- the number one reason people use as an excuse not to watch football (arguably the most popular sport in the United Sates) is that they don’t understand the game, they say that it is “too confusing”. The same holds true for NASCAR. The sport has gotten away from one race driver trying to go faster than the other and if he can’t go faster he will push, bump and sometimes grind his opponents out of the way to win. Today, team “strategy” is the key ingredient to winning. Sure you need a fast car but you also need help from a teammate or buddy to carry you around the track. When you listen to the racing commentary, they talk more about what the “team” has to do to win than what the driver has to do. It's like bicycle racing, where the team protects its best rider for 3/4 of the race, and, lets face it, who watches bicycle racing?

Another confusing aspect of NASCAR is its scoring system to determine an overall season champion. Under the NASCAR point system you get points for winning but you can accumulate more points by leading the greatest number of laps during the race. What?? I always thought that the reason you competed was to win and “to the victor goes the spoils” Isn’t that the American way? How strange would it be to win the Superbowl then not be declared the champion because you didn’t hold the lead the longest during the game? How can you win the most races during the season and not win the overall championship?

The last confusing factor that has hurt the branding of NASCAR is, simply, its cars. It used to be a battle of the “Big Three”- you were a Chevy, a Ford or a Chrysler fan and you cheered for whomever was racing that brand of car. Nowadays it just isn’t the same to cheer for a driver racing a Toyota or Honda. Also, over the last ten years, NASCAR has fiddled with the cars. In 2007 they introduced the "Car of Tomorrow", whatever that is, and some racing teams are still trying to figure how to be competitive in them.

NASCAR has some major repairs to do to regain its former glory in the general sports fan's eye. If the average sport fan was not interested in the Daytona 500- the “Great American Race” and the Superbowl of the NASCAR racing season- then why would they be interested in following any of the other races during the season? Hopefully, it will not require the death of another NASCAR champion to rekindle interest in the sport.

Mario Lemieux Speaks Out... alone.

by Michael Bedard

This past Sunday, former NHL superstar Mario Lemieux spoke up about the growing violence that has gripped the National Hockey League. An NHL Hall of Famer who now owns the Pittsburgh Penguins, Lemieux used the team's website to respond to the NHL disciplinary action (or, as he sees it, lack of disciplinary action) following a fight-filled game between the Penguins and the New York Islanders two days earlier.

He wrote:

“Hockey is a tough, physical game, and it always should be. But what happened Friday night on Long Island wasn’t hockey. It was a travesty. It was painful to watch the game I love turn into a sideshow like that.
.. The NHL had a chance to send a clear and strong message that those kinds of actions are unacceptable and embarrassing to the sport. It failed.
.. We, as a league, must do a better job of protecting the integrity of the game and the safety of our players.  We must make it clear that those kinds of actions will not be tolerated and will be met with meaningful disciplinary action.
.. If the events relating to Friday night reflect the state of the league, I need to re-think whether I want to be a part of it.”

These are strong words from a very influential member of the hockey community. Apart from Wayne Gretsky, Mario Lemieux is probably the most respected hockey player of the last 35 years. So why isn’t anybody listening to what he has to say? Why did his comments fall on deaf ears? Why hasn't there been a flood of current and former hockey players, owners and members of the media speaking out as he did? Is it because of the “code”?

It is widely known that the police have what is referred to as the “Blue Code”. It's not written down anywhere in black and white but it exists, essentially stating that police officers don’t speak out publicly against fellow police officers. Unfortunately, here in Canada, we have seen the “blue code’ in action too frequently in the recent past. The 4 RCMP officers in Vancouver, for example, who coordinated their stories about the death of a “violent” (read: scared) passenger in the airport.  A second incident was in Toronto this past summer at the G20 Summit when a peaceful protester was assaulted by the police. Even though many police officers were videotaped in the area and witnessing the assault not one came forward to testify. It was not until after a huge media and public outcry that the investigating unit looking into this case reopened its investigation and finally brought charges against “one” officer.

There is little doubt that the same type of “code” exists in the National Hockey League. Most of the talk after Lemieux’s comments was not about the content of what he said (that there is too much violence in the game and that the punishment for this violence is not substantial enough) but rather focused on the speaker himself. He was called a hypocrite for denouncing violence in the game when the team he owns has a “goon” of its own whom has been a “serial violent offender” on the ice. They said that as a former player he should not speak so negatively about the game that gave him so much fame and fortune. These, of course, are ridiculous counterarguments and completely ignore the problem. Lemieux is not the problem. The problem is the detrimental mindset of the players, management and owners. It's the attitude that fighting has always been “part of the game” and it's "what the fans want to see”. The problem is the idea that hockey insiders can't speak out about the violence that's turned the sport into little more than UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championship) on ice.

This year, head shots and fighting resulted in countless injuries and suspensions and even threatened the careers of two of the NHL's star players, Sidney Crosby and Marc Savard. But no one is speaking out, except Lemieux. It's difficult to change attitudes and go against the “old boys club”, but change is just plain necessary. If top management and ownership were on board, the culture of hockey would change easily, but they're not. There's no fighting in Olympic hockey, the rules won’t allow it. Even the NFL (the best run sports organization in the world in my opinion) changed their rules this year mid-season to diminish violent head hits.  Where there's a will for change, change will happen.

It's my feeling that hockey, when played fast and aggressively (without illegal head shots, checking and holding) is the most beautifully played game in the world. It doesn't need fighting to draw fans, it needs leadership that allows the game to be played the way it was meant to be played. It took courage for Mario Lemieux to speak out. He knew he'd become the target of ridicule, and as a result he's spoken out alone. Unfortunately his singular voice and message was too faint to be heard.

Spring Training is Fun and A Time for Important Questions to be Answered

by Michael Bedard

The Toronto Blue Jays begin spring training on Monday in preparation for what hopes to be a “successful” 2011 baseball season.

Success for the Jays this year can be defined in many ways. The season will be a success if they simply win more games than they lose or can make it through September without losing any of their fine young pitchers to career-threatening injuries. Success would be finding out that Kyle Drabek is the real deal and can become a close substitute for pitching ace Roy Holiday (who left in the trade that brought Drabek to the Jays). Success would be proving that 2010 was an aberration for Aaron Hill and Adam Lind, who really can hit major league pitching consistently, and wasn't an aberration for Jose Bautista, who hopefully was not a one-season-wonder and can be a consistent power threat who hits over .270 in years to come. Success is Travis Snyder fulfilling his potential and playing an above-average left field, hitting with power/average and staying injury-free. Success would be if J.P. Arencibia can hit major league pitching but, more importantly, can catch and handle a pitching staff at the major league level. If Yunel Escobar can shred the “hot dog” label, utilize his athletic potential and become one of the top fielding and hitting shortstops in the majors. If they can have a top-end bullpen without having “the man” as a closer. If John Farrell can manage an entire ball club as effectively as he coached a pitching staff in Boston. Any and all of these things could make the Blue Jays' 2011 season a true success.

None of these “success” benchmarks will or can be achieved in spring training, that determination begins when they start to play baseball games for real on April 1st. Spring training does, however, begin the process that lays the foundation for their accomplishment. So, what are the key questions, the things we should look for when the Blue Jays spring training camp opens and heats up?

First and foremost is who is in the trainer’s room. The Blue Jays played last year relatively injury-free, especially with respect to their pitching staff. Manager Cito Gaston and pitching coach Bruce Walton went to great lengths to protect their young pitchers from throwing too many pitches during a game or throwing too many innings during the season. Hopefully their efforts will pay off and as the pitchers loosen up, lengthen and strengthen their arms, they are not sidelined with any significant tenderness indicating tendinitis or worse.

Second, can Adam Lind move his feet well enough to play first base? A big part of a pitcher's game is how well the team plays defence behind them. If Adam Lind makes the conversion from DH to 1st base effortlessly that will allow him to focus better at the plate. If he slumps at the plate, as he did last year, that, in turn, could affect his fielding and we could see a lot more of Edwin Encarnacion playing first base, a position that he has not played before on the major league level.

Third, which of the three newly acquired, “back of the bull pen” relievers will take charge and try to become “the man”? Jon Rouch, Octavio Dotel and Frank Francisco will all be given a chance to show that they can fulfill this role. If they don’t, then it could be closer-by-committee, which often leads to inconsistency and blown games. This would not be good for the emotional confidence and stability of the young starting pitching.

Fourth, can “small ball” replace “long ball” effectively so the Jays have a more consistent offense? Replacing the 72 homers produced by Vernon Wells, Lyle Overbay and John Buck collectively last year will not be easy, even if acquired-centre-fielder Rajai Davis steals 50 bases like he did last year. To be productive, the team will have to acquire a new offensive mindset and polish up on the fundamental skills of bunting, hitting behind the runner and taking the extra base. These are the skills that they haven't shown to be very proficient at in the last few years.

Fifth, who will become the new “in the club house” leader? For the most part, baseball players govern and manage themselves. Usually one or two veteran players will step up and set the tone and atmosphere in the club house. They lead by example on how the players will prepare and handle themselves as the season unfolds. By trading away Shawn Marcum and Vernon Wells, a huge leadership void has been created, and over the course of 162 games that void can swallow up and destroy an entire ball club. Aaron Hill and Ricky Romero are the two obvious choices to fill these leadership roles, but that just adds additional stress/responsibility to a player who is trying to rebound from a sub par offensive season and another who is beginning only his third full season as a major league pitcher.

These questions illustrate what spring training is all about: getting in shape but staying healthy; learning new skills; finding out who will step forward and fill in the gaps in the lineup; developing team cohesiveness offensively, defensively and, most importantly, in the club house. You don’t win the World Series in the spring, but you certainly can start putting the pieces together effectively so, when the “boys of summer” begin to play for real, they can make a legitimate run for the playoffs. For this reason alone, spring training is always fun and an important time to watch.

Green Bay Should Have a Super Bowl

by Michael Bedard

Green Bay should have a Super Bowl. I don't mean that they need to win a Super Bowl (they've done that already, 3 times), I'm saying they need to host one. That's right, the biggest spectacle in sports should be held in tiny Green Bay Wisconsin, population 98,476. This year, Super Bowl XLV is being held in Dallas, Texas (population 1,187,603), in the brand new 1.2 billion dollar Cowboy Stadium (capacity over 100,000). In comparison, Lambeau Field, where the Green Bay Packers have made their home since 1957, has a seating capacity of only 73,128 (after its 2003 renovation). However, it's hard to ignore the significance of a #1 rating, something Lambeau Field earned in both 2008 and 2009 for best “Game Day” experience from both ESPN and Sports Illustrated.

Unfortunately, the Super Bowl isn’t about “the game” but more about “the event”. This means that the decision on where the Super Bowl is held is not based on stadium conditions or size or even weather conditions (the weather forecast for Green Bay on Super Bowl Sunday is 30ᵒ F with 20% chance of snow showers), but on infrastructure. Does the host city have enough hotel rooms? Are the airport and transit system (I am not even sure Green Bay has these) equipped to handle the hundreds of thousands of visitors who come, not to see the game in person, but to be part of the pre and post game festivities. Because of this, Green Bay, even with its rich NFL history (Green Bay played in and won the first two Super Bowls ever and the trophy is named after legendary Green Bay coach Vince Lombardi), will never host the Super Bowl.

This is a shame for not just the faithful Green Bay fans (of whom there are tons- all season tickets have been sold out since 1960 and there is a waiting list of 81, 000 with an estimated waiting time of 30 years) but to all die-hard, purist football fans. Lambeau Field is to football what Yankee Stadium is to baseball. It deserves to host a Super Bowl. Many of the infrastructure concerns could be accommodated by twining “the event” with the city of Milwaukee, which is only 186 Km away. Where there's a will there's a way to make it work, it's just a matter of putting “the game” ahead of “the event”. If the city of Green Bay is good enough to host the NFC title game, it's good enough to host the Super Bowl. The only difference is that you'll need your goose feathered winter parka rather than your golf shorts to enjoy it. But who cares, we're football fans.