NASCAR falls handily short of “sport” criteria

I returned home a week ago after a long day of class with the hopes of relaxing in front of… I returned home a week ago after a long day of class with the hopes of relaxing in front of the television by watching ESPN’s SportsCenter. Unfortunately, the network was giving a lengthy report on the previous week’s NASCAR race – something that could not interest me less. I didn’t panic, however, not with the ESPN News channel a click away. After changing the channel, I realized, much to my horror, that ESPN News was also reporting on NASCAR.

Now, I realize that NASCAR’s popularity has been on the rise, but ESPN, as a sports network, should only be reporting on actual sports. That’s right Tony Stewart fans, NASCAR is NOT a sport. Sure, one could argue that ESPN’s increased coverage is indicative of NASCAR’s sports-worthiness, however, it also has increased its coverage of the World Series of Poker, and last time I checked, poker is not a sport either.

The National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing was founded by Bill France on Feb. 21, 1948. Although its growth was initially slow, NASCAR has exploded in recent years in terms of its fan base, number of races and overall wealth. Today, it is the largest sanctioning body of motor sports in the United States and includes the Nextel Cup, the Busch Series and the Craftsman Truck Series.

NASCAR is sometimes perceived as requiring less driving skill to race, compared with the complicated twists and turns seen in the typical Formula One course that puts up to five or six G’s of stress on the driver’s body. To me, however, it is all equally boring. I have only chosen to rant against NASCAR because it is the most popular.

Webster’s Dictionary defines sport as a source of diversion or a physical activity engaged in for pleasure. A NASCAR fan might argue that auto racing is indeed a sport based upon this definition, and they would have an argument. The problem is that this definition is too broad to be applied to modern sports. Under this definition, the world of sports would include every activity from basketball to Rock Paper Scissors. Some fans claim it takes a lot of skill to maintain focus for such a long time, but so does playing video games – again, not a sport.

Another problem I have with this “sport” is that it is about as exciting as watching grass grow. I just don’t understand how anyone could sit for three hours and enjoy watching cars drive around in circles. NASCAR’s saving grace is its potential for crashes, which can add some excitement, but can also greatly harm the drivers. That would be like attending a hockey game with the hopes of witnessing an incident reminiscent of Todd Bertuzzi.

Furthermore, I thought that sports necessitated athletic ability from their participants. Though I don’t doubt that some drivers are athletes, the “sport” itself does not require it. How much possible athletic ability does it take to drive? Unlike athletes in any other sport, NASCAR drivers do not need to work out during the season or in the off-season, which again weakens the argument for NASCAR’s sport candidacy. To that assertion, many NASCAR fans would respond that there are other accepted sports such as golf that also don’t require athletic ability. Yet, even the John Dalys of the world have to be able to swing a club and walk 18 holes. Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure it helps to be in good shape as a driver, yet it also helps to be in good shape as a surgeon, and I don’t see anyone calling them athletes.

It seems to me that the measure of these “athletes” is their ability to remain alert for three hours while withholding all urges to go to the bathroom. Sure, the sport requires exertion, but it is of a mental nature – not a physical one. In actuality, drivers really only need to be in good enough shape to fit in the car and maintain consciousness behind the wheel. For good reason, you would never see the likes of Jeff Gordon, Tony Stewart or Dale Earnhardt Jr. on a list of the world’s greatest athletes.

According to Tim Calkins, a clinical associate professor of marketing at Northwestern University, the appeal of NASCAR is the fact that people can identify with their stars.

“What draws people to NASCAR is the experience of the sport, following the teams and the drivers, and that’s the part people identify with and relate to,” Calkins said on foxsports.com. “People immerse themselves in the culture of NASCAR, and it comes to define a little bit of who they are.”

Calkin’s quotation brings me to my next point – the NASCAR culture. If Calkins is right, that NASCAR comes to “define a little bit of who [fans] are,” then that could explain the reason why I abhor the “sport.” The NASCAR culture, which can be summed up symbolically through its unofficial banner, the Confederate flag, epitomizes almost everything I am not. The waving of the Confederate flag, which decorates the clothing and vehicle of many die-hard NASCAR fans, is ironically flown during races of the “sport” which consists of nearly all Anglo-Saxon men. The severe lack of diversity in all aspects of NASCAR is another issue in and of itself.

Aside from the flag, however, there are other repellent aspects of the racing culture. A NASCAR man drives a pickup truck, loves to hunt and drink, and is a die-hard country music fan. This description is sure to make every “Yankee” envious.

Calkin also implies that NASCAR’s drivers and management are more or less commoners. Like the Griffeys of baseball and the Mannings of football, he would argue, NASCAR has its storied families of people just like us who were born to be great drivers. Unlike them, however, the Earnhardts, Labontes and others don’t have racing in their genes like the Mannings have quarterbacking. Nor are they more superior behind the wheel than the rest of the world’s experienced drivers. The reason why NASCAR has its family dynasties comes down to one word: money. Simply put, NASCAR is all about who has enough money to fund a racing team first. The driver is of a secondary concern.

That’s not all, either. For those readers who are environmentally conscious, consider the following facts: about 6,000 gallons of the United States’ fuel are consumed during a typical Nextel Cup weekend. After the conclusion of the 2006 season (which includes 36 points races), the total fuel consumption will be about 216,000 gallons. One environmental critic recently estimated NASCAR’s total fuel consumption across all series at 2 million gallons of gas per season. If you ask me, non-renewable natural resources are not exactly something we should be squandering so that people can watch cars drive around in circles for hours on end.

What’s more is that these consumption figures provide no insight on environmental impact in terms of emissions. According to NASCAR’s Web site, its vehicles are generally unregulated by the Environmental Protection Agency and, in particular, have no mufflers, catalytic converters or other emissions control devices. However, some local short tracks, which run under NASCAR sanction, require certain emissions control devices.

Although I understand the reasoning behind extending TV coverage of races, it still saddens me that ESPN and other respected sports networks have sold out to the NASCAR constituency. I don’t care if Ricky Bobby and his Wonder Bread car participate; I will never degrade myself by watching or attending a NASCAR event.