The Indianapolis 500: The Race Mirrors America's Decline

 First things first: there are still great racing teams and drivers at the Indy 500. It still takes tremendous skill,  endurance, and a little luck to win at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Crowds remain huge at the event. 
 Like other sports, greed and pettiness did get in the way of holding onto the mighty momentum of the event's national popularity, when IRL formed and splintered off from CART. A truce was formed much later, but the damage (like Major League Baseball's 1994 strike) had been done.
 This is the 100th anniversary of the Indy 500. Since there were no races held in 1917, 1918, 1942, 1943, 1944, and 1945 due to world wars (appropriately enough for its Memorial Day date), this is not the 100th running of the event.
 In 1911,  driver Ray Harroun took 6 hours and 42 minutes at an average speed of 74.602 mph to win. The year 1930 saw Billy Arnold break the five-hour  (barely) and 100 mph average speed barriers. Races grew progressively faster with advancing technology,
leading to Jim Clark breaking the 150 mph average barrier in 1965. Clark took just under three hours and 20 minutes to win. 
 The '70s and '80s saw more rapid advances, leading to Arie Luyendyk's fantastic 185.981 mph average and a race time of two hours and 42 minutes in 1990. After Rick Mears' similarly incredible performance in 1991, the Indy 500 has seen times fall back. Sure, there are yellow flags to consider, but winners haven't broken a 170 mph average since. Last year's winner took three hours and five minutes at an average of 161.623 mph.
 This apparent decline in motor racing technology parallels America's decline in manufacturing and space exploration (we're not talking high tech here). For political reasons, NASA's budget has been cut for several years. Our space rockets of today are puny compared to the '60s and '70s Saturn 5's. India, China, or Russia will make it to the moon before we make it back. NASA's nadir came last year when President Obama eradicated the Orion and Constellation programs. So much for engaging the human spirit. Politicians (including the current president) talk about Mars manned missions, but the dates have been constantly pushed further into the future. 
 What else about the Indy 500 mirrors America's decline? While it is true that foreign manufacturers like Mercedes, Peugeot, and Maserati did provide winning drivers with engines as far back as 1913, never has there been such foreign domination as there is now. First, there was the British Cosworth run of 1978-87 winners. However, they had competition then from American companies Ford, GM, and Offenhauser. For about the past nine years, the engines have come from the Toyota or Honda plants across the Pacific. This year all the engines are Honda.
 On the subject of "foreign invasion," one reason the Indy 500 was so massively popular was its superstars of the brickyard. With all due respect to early greats like Wilbur Shaw, Mauri Rose, and Bill Vukovich, the superstar driver era really started with Juan Fangio in Formula One in the '50s. At Indianapolis, the superstar era started with A. J. Foyt's first win in 1961. A.J. was ugly, industrious, and easy to underestimate, just like the USA by its enemies at the beginning of both world wars. Some longtime observers would say the golden age of Indy is framed by A.J.'s first and last victories in '61 and '77. I disagree. 
 When Bobby Unser won his third 500 in 1981, the race was still golden. When Al Unser, Sr. won his fourth Indy in 1987, the race was still golden. Other superstars of the brickyard were also very American if not as ugly: Gordon Johncock, Johnny Rutherford, Danny Sullivan,and Rick Mears among them.
 While there had been an English Invasion of sorts in the '60s at Indy mirroring the music industry, with Jim Clark and Graham Hill winning in consecutive years, that was an anomaly. The great Emerson Fittipaldi of Brazil and his wins in 1989 and 1993 started a foreign invasion of foreign superstar drivers that has not decelerated. It has led to the Indy 500 of 2011, where the two greatest drivers, Helio Castroneves (wins in 01, 02, 09) and Dario Franchitti (wins in 07, 10) are from Brazil and Scotland, respectively. 
 The dearth of American Indy-style racing superstars in 2011 makes one view 1991, the year of Rick Mears' fourth and final victory at a jaw-dropping average speed of 176.457 mph, as the true end of the 500's golden age. Open to debate is the date of the end of America's golden age.
 Yes, it is good that races today are much safer than back in the days of the horrific crashes of '55, '64, and '73, but safety comes at what cost? Back then, American men with the right stuff were in pursuit of excellence. They were not afraid of pushing the envelope or offending somebody due to outright aggression. This winning attitude belonged to owners, engineers, and manufacturers, not just the drivers. In 2011, Americans have air bags and say the right things, but drive on poorly maintained highways built during America's golden age, an interstate system that would be impossible to duplicate today without foreign assistance. When American motorists view the moon, they have a vision of the past, not the future. When American viewers watch the Indianapolis 500 tomorrow, they see the grim but safe future, not the reckless but brilliant and colorful past.
 Enjoy the race!

NBA Playoffs 2011: Same-o, Same-o

 Has there been any real news associated with the 2011 NBA playoffs? Let's see. . . .athleticism over age, as witnessed in the Celtics-Heat series? See the Pistons-Lakers in 1989. Big-market team over small-market team, as witnessed in the just concluded Dallas-Oklahoma City series? See Sacramento-L.A. Lakers in 2002. Megastar/endorsement-rich/ratings-heavy team roster creating a vast majority of calls and non-calls for it over a less-starry/less mega-advertiser-spokespersoned/ratings-light team roster as being witnessed in the current Bulls-Heat series? See Sacramento-L.A. Lakers in 2002. 
 In the notorious sixth game of the Western Conference Championship series of 2002, the Kings were robbed of victory by a tsunami of calls against them and a deafening silence of non-calls against the Lakers. It broke the Kings' spirit, and the seventh game was somewhat anti-climactic. The officials were following the script: keep the advertisers and television network officials satisfied by insuring the team from the bigger city and/or with the biggest most popular marquee players would advance.
 Oklahoma City has a nice, young athletic team that had a big coach-and-player choke to blow a big 15-point lead the other night. The team will get better. The NBA promotes stars like Russell Westbrook and Kevin Durant. How long will OKC be able to keep them? Youth did not beat age in the Thunder-Mavericks series. The big market over small market concept of Dallas over OKC superceded the concept of athleticism over age, which would have provided a different result.
 Incidentally, OKC did not deserve to win the series for an entirely more valid reason: its fans may be the least intelligent found in any NBA city. Perhaps brainpans have shrunk as a result of tornado fever. How can there be any other explanation for the OKC fans showing up in blue-out clothing both nights the Mavericks were in town? Not any blue, but the blue that matched the Dallas away uniforms? Whose brainchild was that? 
 If it was some rookie promoter's idea, couldn't they have rejected it for the second home game? Couldn't at least ONE fan have noticed how it made the OKC crowd appear to favor the Mavericks? The only logical answer would be if it were found playoff tickets were too expensive for OKC residents and only Dallas fans could afford them.
 The NBA is already salivating at the prospects of a Heat-Mavericks finals. How will it be marketed? Age (Nowitzki/Kidd/Terry) vs. athleticism (James/Wade/Bosh), blue-collar Dallas vs. glamorous Miami, Beyond Primetime Players vs. Primetime Players. All other things being equal, NBA history indicates a slam dunk victory for the Heat. However, all other things are not equal. Far more advertising dollars are tied up in the Heat's marquee players than in the Mavericks'. Key NBA sponsors are married to the Heat's marquee players. There's even a new State Farm commercial featuring James and Wade together. League offices are located in New York City. It's Madison Avenue destiny for the Heat to advance and win the crown. 
  What else makes a Heat-Mavericks series and ultimate Heat victory inevitable? The Heat has more popular players (Wade and James) than Chicago or Dallas. Popularity helps ratings. Ratings help determine next year's playoff ad rates. Greater revenues help a television network or networks carrying the games. Greater revenues lead to larger multi-year television contracts with the NBA. Larger TV contracts help the league weather and survive future labor disputes, one of which is looming for next season. Therefore, the league office wants the Heat to advance and preferably outlast the Mavericks in the finals. 
 If I were the Bulls, I wouldn't even show up tonight. The "force" is against them. Naturally, I favor the Bulls and not because Chicago is farther west than Miami. The Bulls have three former Utah Jazz players on its roster: Carlos Boozer, Ronnie Brewer, and Kyle Korver. Sure, their exodus to Chicago, indirect or directly, underlines the small-market-team-as-farm- club-to-major-market-team problem detrimentally impacting the NBA and Major League Baseball. However, I still like those players for enduring Jerry Sloan and Utah winters.
 Has there been any real news associated with the 2011 NBA playoffs? Well, the Lakers did exit the drama early. On the surface, they are a big-market, superstar-studded team. However, they are aging, bringing the athleticism-over-age factor against them. Yes, L.A. is a huge market, but on closer inspection the Laker superstars are just ordinary stars with nasty marketing issues. 
 Ron Artest might have an endorsement deal for Everlast boxing gloves or a sanitarium, but that's about it. Kobe Bryant's character issues in Colorado and at home, dealing with a hotel receptionist and Shaquille O'Neal, reduced his endorsements to violent video games. Ask Utah Jazz fans about Derek Fisher's character. 
 Then there's physically-blessed, mentally-cursed Lamar Odom and his reality TV persona. Fans saw Odom's and Andrew Bynum's true characters surface at the end of the Mavericks series with cheap shot fouls and stripping-to-the-waist antics.
 Add to the rogue's gallery of players a Men-in-Black alien-faced Pau Gasol and a Zen-spouting arrogant Coach Phil Jackson, and you have a team whose dynasty the NBA was all too happy to terminate, L.A. or not. 
 Again, has there been any real news associated with the 2011 NBA playoffs? No. Same-o, same-o.

The Players Championship PGA Tournament: A Socioeconomic Metaphor

 Many sports are great to participate in or watch because they are metaphors for life. In particular, football represents a wonderful analogy for corporate capitalism. First, there is a free market for finding and signing recruits. Then there are business plans that include physical strengthening and conditioning, offensive and defensive schemes, and training camp. Finally, the business opens and each week presents new obstacles to overcome in the form of rival firms. The obstacles require customized strategies and tactics known as game plans. 
 The football game itself is a metaphor for military combat, but that also mirrors corporate competition in a more violent version. A single game is a battle and an entire season is a war. Avoiding injuries and disabilities are as crucial to the success of a team as building improvement, attitude, and teamwork. Football is a beautiful thing. 
 But this little column is not about football. It's about an individual sport, not a team sport. It's about golf, PGA golf, TPC Sawgrass golf: the Players Championship played last weekend in Florida. 
 Like most major popular sports, the PGA has too many events on its calendar. Too many mediocre courses, mediocre purses, and mediocre fields dilute the tour's quality. However, when the course is great, the purse is huge, and the field is strong, PGA golf is a wonder to behold.  A confluence of these elements, a perfect storm, occurred last weekend in Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida, where a great field of European, Asian, Australian, and PGA tour players joined to do battle with one of the most spectacular courses in golf, the TPC Sawgrass Stadium Course. 
 The beautifully ridiculous 17th island-green hole created great drama, with big-name pros dropping shots into the water with greater frequency than one would expect. Of course, many of those shots started decently, landing on firmament. Only after did they roll, bounce, or dribble off the grass and into the lake on the par 3.
 What makes golf so unique and great was on display at the Players Championship: down the stretch on Sunday, the three golfers atop the leaderboard were all over 40 years of age. You won't find three semifinalists over 30 in any big non-exhibition tennis event. Also, Phil Mickelson showed grace, sportsmanship, and charisma in defeat. After a frustrating round where he could never string together consecutive birdies and lingered nine shots behind the leaders, he appeared enthusiastic and friendly with the 17th's rowdy crowd, planting his tee shot only three feet from the pin. That's called charismatic cool.
 And now for the point of this column: the drama of the Players Championship on Sunday illustrated global socioeconomic trends. Only Monday, May 16, did Consumer Reports announce that a Kia sedan made in South Korea beat the Honda Accord in performance. Hyundai automobiles have been surging in reputation and sales recently as well, due to better vehicles and Japan's earthquake/tsunami vehicle and part shortages.
 With South Korea peaking economically, native K.J. Choi made the fewest mistakes to win the Players in a one-hole playoff. He wasn't perfect, just better than the competition. It was an American, David Toms, who wilted under pressure after staging a brief comeback in regulation. Much like the reliability of Dodge vehicles, Toms missed an easy four-foot putt to finish second.  Coincidentally, the United States is expected to drop to the world's second largest economic power to China by 2016.
 In the final threesome in regulation, Graeme McDowell of Northern Ireland totally choked, too, having four splashes en route to an uncharacteristic 79 and a finish well back in the pack. England's Luke Donald didn't have enough to finish higher than a tie for fourth with America's Nick Watney, who had his own mini-collapse, but Donald did have enough to rise in the world rankings to the number two position. Has anybody bragged about the reliability and engineering of their British Jaguars and Land Rovers lately?
 No, Asia is the new economic giant, soon to overtake Europe and America. With that in mind, Choi was a deserving and predictable winner.
 Three more positive PGA comments must be made   before closing. First, NBC's coverage was outstanding, spearheaded by an always candid Johnny Miller. Second, smart and witty American Paul Goydos, who has already had one tragedy this year in the loss of his ex-wife to painkillers, had a solid four rounds of under-par golf to finish in third only two shots back. For that effort, he received a $600,000-plus payday. Third, Sergio Garcia once again showed flashes of brilliance, shooting the lowest score for the fourth round on Sunday of 65. Garcia reminded observers that he remains the most talented golfer of his age yet to win a major. He is due. 

Sacramento Kings: A Bone Is Tossed to Sacramento

 When the decision was ostensibly made by the Maloof family to keep their NBA franchise in Sacramento for at least one more year, an interesting thing occurred. The city, including its mayor, expressed self-congratulatory words, praising their efforts and the changing attitude of Joe Q. Public in keeping the team in town.
 Indeed, Mayor Kevin Johnson did a fine job of lining up additional corporate sponsors to the tune of about $11 million. More importantly, he found a magic bullet in billionaire Ron Burkle, the man who saved Pittsburgh's NHL franchise, who offered to buy the team. That proposal kept the Maloofs honest in their dealings--for the time being, anyway.
 However, downtown rallies and Color Me Purple days, while impressive in appearance, had little to do with the Maloofs' decision not to file for moving the Kings franchise to Anaheim. It felt good for a city economically beat down, the capital of an economically beat-down state. It meant nothing.
 Why did the Maloofs change their mind? They didn't. They would have filed for the move except for commissioner David Stern's courtesy call which allowed the owners to save face. Simply put, the Maloofs did not have the votes for the move to proceed. Stern told them as much. A simple majority of NBA owners is required for a franchise move to be approved. A majority of owners were opposed to it.
 Why? Can you spell Dr. Jerry Buss? Los Angeles Lakers owner Dr. Buss is as popular with NBA owners as L.A. Clippers owner Donald Sterling is not. On the Kings-move-to-Anaheim issue, they were united in opposition. A third team in Southern California, in the L.A. basin no less, was not in their best interest. Nor was it in the league's. The Lakers new 20-year television deal has a penalty clause costing the team 10% of the contract's value if a third NBA team moves into the broadcasting market. That's roughly a $15 million penalty annually, according to estimates.
 Besides the other logical reasons for opposing a new NBA neighbor, such as the impact on merchandise sales and attendance, television revenue penalties made Dr. Buss' decision easy. He relayed his opposition to other NBA owners. Considering what the Lakers have meant to the league as one of the top four franchises, most of the other owners had no problem siding with him.
 The commissioner's office conducted a straw poll and told the Maloofs that victory was not theirs. Adding insult to injury, they even encouraged the Maloofs to change their public strategy and treat the city of Sacramento as an ally, not an adversary. On May 2, the miffed Kings ownership followed that suggestion by starting a public relations campaign and media blitz to once again attempt to endear the team to the community.
 On that day, a disgruntled and obviously disappointed Joe Maloof told a local Sacramento sports radio station that the Kings would add fire and quality players to the mix, rewarding the community for its loyalty. With the lowest payroll in the NBA, there's nowhere to go but up.
 The Maloofs succeeded in putting a good spin on circumstances. The Kings' diminished fan base is happy. Mayor Johnson is happy. Local sports talk is happy. Arena staffers and team announcers are very happy. Current players are not saying it, but most of them are probably very unhappy. Instead of beaches and the O. C. night life, they still have tule fog and the less glamorous "cowtown" label for eight months of the year.
 What has really changed for Sacramento? The city retains its NBA franchise. Its mayor is more popular than ever. There is still no new arena nor viable arena plan. A new arena will still cost private and public sources about $350 million to build. That means, according to local sources, the Kings will have to pay about $35 million a year in loans and interest for about twenty years. As of May 14, 2011, no financing plan has been announced.
 David Stern wrote an editorial that appeared May 15, 2011 in the Sacramento Bee saying it was the fan base, local government representatives, and the regional business community that saved the Kings for another year. Really? Then he proceeded to lobby for a new entertainment-sports complex to be built through a public-private partnership. One sentence was spent on the Maloofs' potential contribution to the financing of the new arena. 
 Perhaps in the piece, the commissioner is sending two warning shots. First, he is warning the Maloofs to get their own finances in order and input more capital into the franchise or sell a big piece of the team to more solvent individuals or entities eagerly waiting in line. Second, he is warning the Sacramento community and its leaders to establish a realistic plan to build a new arena before the end of next season or the team will move with his blessing. 
 Of course, where the Kings will ultimately wind up if the region does not construct a new arena remains an issue. Perhaps San Jose. Perhaps San Diego. Perhaps Seattle. Perhaps Kansas City. 
 The soap opera continues. In a new showing of unity between ownership and city, Mayor Johnson will be present in New York City representing the Kings next week when the NBA draft lottery order is established.
 Mayor Johnson, government entities, and unspecified private third parties have until the end of March, 2012, to come up with a new arena proposal with validated financing. Good luck,Sacramento!   

Ohio State Tattoogate and Junking the Fiesta Bowl: Converging Storylines

 There is no breaking news in the John Junker-Fiesta Bowl scandal, but the news twelve days ago in Columbus from the NCAA on The Ohio State's Tattoogate has bowl overtones. A similar theme over-rides both storylines: power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
 Apparently, there are many individuals who can speak well of Jim Tressel's and John Junker's characters early in their careers. We know how powerful and successful they became; we know how much honor and integrity they have in 2011. Does E. Gordon "Bowtie" Gee, president of The Ohio State, have any early character witness supporters as well?
 Dr. Gee followed his own wildly successful career arc. We don't know what kind of person he was in the beginning, but the sports world is getting a good picture of the type of man he is today.  One must read between the lines to understand what Dr. Gee is all about. 
 Of course, being president of the biggest of the big-time universities based on dollars spent and generated in its athletic department, Dr. Gee is all about power, arrogance, selfishness, and ridicule. He ridicules programs he believes are athletically beneath his school. He's not afraid to wield his power with NCAA and BCS committees. He's selfish in the sense that he will do anything to preserve the lop-sided, inequitable BCS bowl system which rewards schools like Ohio State and USC and penalizes deserving-of-better mid-majors like TCU and Boise State.
 One must recall Dr. Gee's interview with the AP around November 24, 2010, when he said in reference to Boise State and TCU, "I do know having been both a Southeastern Conference president and a Big Ten president, that it's like murderer's row every week for these schools. We do not play the Little Sisters of the Poor. We play very fine schools on any given day. So I think until a university runs through that gauntlet that there's some reason to believe that they not be the best team to [be] in the big [title] ballgame." He seemed to overlook the fact that his own Buckeyes had played such non-powerhouse creampuffs as Marshall, Eastern Michigan, and Ohio U.
 Dr. Gee continued to explain his position: "If you put a gun to my head and said, 'What are you going to do about a playoff system [if] this BCS system as it now exists goes away?' I would vote immediately to go back to the [original] bowl system." Has Dr. Gee been greased by any bowl non-profit, or is his stance only the result of cash-cow revenues heavily weighted in favor of the Buckeyes through the existing BCS system?
 During the same interview, Dr. Gee was capable of being contradictory. In dismissing a playoff, he said, "It's not about this incessant drive to have a national championship because I think that's a slippery slope to professionalism. I'm a fan of the bowl system, and I think that by and large it's worked very, very well. " Certainly it has worked very well for his Buckeyes. Should we assume that all other major college sports are too professional because they have a postseason playoff system in place? Isn't it possible that the bowl system itself, with kickbacks, payoffs, alleged wire fraud, alleged tax evasion, and meet-and-greet golf and vacation junkets, is further along in developing its own brand of professionalism than any playoff system could ever possibly be?
 Dr. Gee's arrogance goes beyond endorsing the renaming of Ohio State as The Ohio State University. His false modesty when discussing Jim Tressel ("I just hope he doesn't fire me") belies his over-weening power-brokering of the NCAA. His lieutenants, such as Buckeye athletic director Gene Smith and Big 10 commissioner Jim Delaney, oversee or are members of every important committee that the NCAA and BCA field. The Big 10 has its own television network and lucrative deals with ABC/ESPN. The Big 10 also has its very sweet bowl deals, from the Rose Bowl to the non-BCS bowls.
 This is another source of confluence: the John Junker Fiesta Bowl scandal has unveiled several layers of misconduct and general climate of corruption within Arizona's BCS nonprofit bowl organizations. It came out that the Orange Bowl runs similar vacation junkets under the pretext of meetings between bowl reps, sponsors, media reps, athletic conference reps, NCAA reps, and school reps. Since the Fiesta Bowl and Orange Bowl have such junkets on public file, is it a stretch to believe that fellow BCS sibling Sugar Bowl also does its share of greasing, or should I say entertaining?
 When Tattoogate broke last December, the Sugar Bowl organization was insistent that the Ohio State stars involved be eligible for its game. Commissioner Delaney, President Gee, and athletic director Smith did their part to influence the NCAA and BCS committees to hold off on suspensions until the 2011 regular season. The Sugar Bowl got its wish, ratings were good, and ad revenues will remain high for the 2012 edition. While ratings were good, was the ruling for the good of the game?