Feb. 25, 2008 - Racing Is A People Sport

I saw a video clip the other night of a recent Darrell Waltrip interview, one which apparently brought him a bit of flak.

In essence, Darrell said that in racing, the cars really don’t matter. This is a people sport, and the promotion always should center on the human beings, not the nuts and bolts. Lots of people took exception, particularly those who greatly enjoy the mechanical aspects of our sport.

Of course, Darrell has made a career of grabbing our attention by saying outrageous things, so we sometimes dismiss the message because of the messenger. But if you can get past the bombastic way in which he said it, I have to say he’s onto something.

There is no doubt that a segment of race fans is keenly interested in the technical side of our sport. They love the nuts and bolts, and they are very knowledgeable about what makes races cars work and how they’re put together. That segment is an enthusiastic and well-informed minority.

On the other side, there are far more people who are drawn to the sport by the personalities. Think about our past 50 years: There have been a few cars that really stand out as memorable, such as Jack Brabham’s little green car at Indy, or Roger Penske’s Mercedes-powered giants in 1994. But when you begin to list memorable characters, the list is vastly larger.

Think about it: Curtis Turner, Joe Weatherly, David Pearson, Cale Yarborough, Darrell Waltrip, Tim Richmond, Dale Earnhardt. A.J. Foyt, Parnelli Jones, Mario Andretti, Bobby Unser, Lloyd Ruby, Rick Mears, Al Unser. Don Garlits, Don Prudhomme, Tommy Ivo, Ronnie Sox, Shirley Muldowney, John Force. Jan Opperman, Doug Wolfgang, Gary Bettenhausen, Rich Vogler, Tom Bigelow, Steve Kinser, Mark Kinser. Larry Moore, Billy Moyer, Scott Bloomquist, Black Jack Boggs, Jeff Purvis, C.J. Rayburn. Bob Tattersall, Mel Kenyon, Sleepy Tripp, Kevin Olson…this could go on a while, couldn’t it?

Like so many things, the key is balance. I don’t think we’re ready for spec cars and spec engines. Diversity, and technical competition, lends an important element to our sport. That said, I think we’re in trouble when the cars themselves are the most intriguing topic. Personally, I’m interested in compelling characters. And, based on the feedback I’ve received from readers through the years, I’m not alone.

By far and away, the greatest feedback I receive is when I’ve penned a “personality” story. Capturing the emotions of people, and conveying their story, seems to really connect with readers. On the other hand, when I write about a particular car, or race, feedback is usually non-existent.

So take it easy on ol’ DW. We might not like to hear it, but he speaks the truth.

Feb. 18, 2008 - In The Mood?

The time comes to sit down and write your column or blog or whatever. So what’ll it be today: positive or negative?

That’s a core decision, you know. As a writer, at lot of what comes through your fingertips is your mood, and your personality. Even when you try to hide it, the real you comes peeking through.

Let’s say you’re in a bad, grumpy mood. The dog puked on the carpet, your neighbor’s old boyfriend got his Chevy stuck in your front yard at 3 a.m., and you just opened your VISA bill. Then you sit down to write, your mind searching for a good topic. That’s when you’re most likely to tee off on some unfortunate official or racer or whatever, and fillet him into multiple syllables and leave him bleeding from both ears right there on the page.

On the other hand, if you’re staring at a beautiful sunset, feeling happy, your mood is going to be much different. That’s when, at least for me, the words come most easily, and when you look at them later there is at least a fair chance you’ll be pleased.

It seems that some people are perpetually unhappy. They see only the dark lining in every silver cloud. For some it’s their nature, but for others, simply a bad habit. Now, I’m not exactly Norman Vincent Peale, and it’s been a lot of years since I read his famous book, “The Power of Positive Thinking.” But I have to agree that we become a product of our thoughts, and if you aren’t careful you become — to borrow a phrase from the late Spiro Agnew — a nattering nabob of negativity.

People like that bring me down. Not just people you rub shoulders with each day, but the people you read, as well. I’ll confess that there have been writers whose work I’ve enjoyed, but I steadily lost interest in reading them because they were constantly negative. Not just racing writers, but sportswriters in general. Sure, nobody can be Pollyanna every day; but cripes, does the doom-and-gloom have to be non-stop? After a while, I find myself looking for something different to read.

That’s why, as a writer, you have to step back and look objectively at your work every so often. Not just if it’s “good” or “bad,” but also the tone. Am I looking at the negative side too often? Am I trying too hard to be positive that I ignore genuine issues? The place you want to be, I think, is objectively down the middle.

Readers expect to be entertained, informed, challenged, and inspired. They’ll forgive the occasional outburst, just like they’ll overlook an occasional reach to sappy melodrama. Too much of either one, however, and they tune you out.

That’s all for today. I think I just heard the dog puke on the carpet, and the postman just delivered the VISA bill. But it’s all right; I wrote this first.

Feb. 11, 2008 - Racing Should Be Wary Of TV Changes

February in Indiana means the sound of racing engines is heard only from far, far away. For many Hoosiers that means it’s time for basketball, and I’ll confess that my longtime passion for hoops actually predates my racing fascination, which came at an early age.

We’ve had an interesting phenomenon this winter here in the Midwest, one I hope racing businesspeople are watching closely. At this writing, Purdue and Indiana—the two biggest colleges in Indiana in terms of the number of fans—are in first and second place in the Big Ten Conference, both enjoying their best seasons in quite some time. Yet most fans here in Indiana have seen only a tiny handful of their games on television.

In 2007 the Big Ten announced a new television network, the Big Ten Network (BTN), which would carry the bulk of their sports coverage. These were games formerly on local affiliates, such as Channel 4 in Indianapolis. BTN played hardball with the cable providers, demanding they carry the network only on the basic cable lineup, charging a fairly stiff fee for every cable subscriber.

You can almost picture the suits sitting around the conference table last year, grinning greedily. “We’ve got Big Ten football and basketball…they HAVE to have us on their cable lineup!”

However, the cable networks refused, and since then there has been no end to the impasse. Thus, longtime fans were forced to either purchase a satellite dish, or go to a friendly bar or club to watch their team.

In the process, IU and Purdue have nearly dropped off the radar screen for all but the most devout fans, despite their great seasons. Fans are grumbling, but life has gone on. They’ve found other stuff to do, games to watch, teams to get interested in. The big losers in this deal—by far and away—are the individual schools, because this could dramatically affect both recruiting and revenue, both in a very negative way.

Once basketball season passes, and fans wait for the ramp-up of college football in late summer, demand for BTN will be about the same as the demand for pumpkins on November 1. My guess is that the Big Ten will eventually relent and allow the cable companies to carry the programming on a premium sports band, which will still mean that most viewers won’t have access to the games. The only way the fans win in this situation is if the games get back on “free” TV, like they’ve always been.

The reason I hope racing leaders are watching this drama is simple: this is a case of a sports league getting too greedy, and assuming everybody “HAD” to have their programming. Guess what? They don’t, no matter how big you think you are. I hope nobody in racing will ever take us down that losing road.

Feb. 4, 2008 - 'Hip To Be Square'

It was Sunday evening, and my family and I were attending a friend’s Super Bowl party. A commercial came on — I think it was Pepsi, I’m not sure — which pictured a guy being sucked across town by some mysterious force. When it was finished we all laughed, and I casually observed, “Say, that guy looks familiar…who is he?”

“Justin Timberlake,” someone said. “You know, the guy from the wardrobe malfunction a couple of years ago.”

“Yeah, now I know who it is,” I said. That’s when I noticed a young girl—maybe 16, 17 years old—staring at me with a look of utter disbelief. It was easy to read her mind: “How could ANYBODY not know Justin Timberlake?”

Well, it’s easy: I don’t watch TV. I don’t read People or US magazine. So I am hopelessly, happily out of touch with our nutty celebrity-addicted pop culture.

There was a day, once upon a time, when I was plugged in. I knew the popular TV shows, the top movies, the top stars, all that jazz. But somewhere along the line, maybe in the past 10, 15 years, I drifted away from the whole “hip” scene. Television filled their programming slots with such lame, inane drivel; I just couldn’t sit through it. I mean, I’m a long way from Einstein; but so much of today’s programming is just so utterly stupid, I can only stare at the screen and shake my head.

So I just flipped off the television and found other stuff to do. If I’m in front of the TV, I’m looking at a ball game or maybe an old movie. And—I’m not embarrassed to admit this—I rarely watch racing on television. I guess seeing a hundred live shows a year is enough for me, because in my (very limited) free time I need to unplug from the sport just a bit.

In fact, I watch less television today than at any point in my life. If the weather is nice, I’ll do stuff outside. Or maybe I’ll tinker in the garage with my ’69 Camaro, which is wonderful therapy after a stressful day. My son and I might jump into our car and head to a high school basketball or football game. I might spend some time listening to music. Or crawl into a comfortable chair and enjoy a good book, or catch up on my steadily growing pile of magazines. All of the above seems far more enjoyable than watching some secretly-scripted “reality” show engineered to keep eyeballs glued to the screen, no matter who gets hurt.

I figured I was simply getting more eccentric with the passing of time, but as it turns out I’m not alone. The big networks are scratching their heads because television ratings continue to slide, year after year. There are many factors that are too complex for me to understand, but one element—and I know this in my gut—is that television programming simply isn’t as good as it used to be.

Everybody has different ideas of how to enjoy themselves, which is cool. I try hard not to ridicule somebody else’s idea of fun just because I don’t share it. But I’ll admit: I always feel a sense of sadness when I see someone spending hours and hours in front of the TV, living their life through celebrities and reality shows. There’s a lot of grand, glorious life out there, but you’ll never live it fully when you’re sitting in front of the television.

Oh, by the way: I thought a little more about the young girl who gave me the incredulous look during the Super Bowl. I wonder if she would recognize Steve Kinser, or Billy Moyer, or Bentley Warren, or Jack Hewitt? Or John Force, Harry Gant, Lealand McSpadden, or Pancho Carter? Because as far as I’m concerned, Justin Timberlake’s got a long way to go if he hopes to reach their level.