Turn 3

Best outcomes, story-wise

By DAVID GREEN

Just another day-and-a-half, and another season will be over. We all know how it's very likely going to come out.

I'm OK with that. I like watching history in the making. I enjoyed the five-year domination of F1 by Michael Schumacher and Ferrari, just because Schumi in the red car was so amazingly fast and bulletproof. Jimmie Johnson and the 48 team haven't dominated to the extent Schumacher did, but in the Chase events, they've been close to that level.

So, the first four-times-straight championship will make a good story. But -- in my opinion, anyway -- another one would be better.

It's probably easy to guess that my choice for best story would be if Mark Martin were to steal this one. No offense to Jimmie, but Mark has been so close, so many times. I would love to see him get the big prize.

That's the great thing about dynasties. There's no better example than the New York Yankees. Picking a side is easy for everybody. You either root for the dynasty or against it. When David upsets Goliath, it makes a great story, either way. One side is disappointed and the other ecstatic, but it's a compelling story either way.

Next best option would be for Jimmie to win the championship, but with a bang instead of a whimper. He has teased us with this potential scenario by winning the pole. Now, if he goes out tomorrow and lays a thrashing on the field, or -- even better -- if he wins a stirring race to the checkered flag -- or even if he comes out second-best in a race to the checkered flag -- that would be great stuff.

That, to me, would be as dramatic as an orchestrated close decision, which is what the Chase was designed to produce -- and, in its first season, did produce.

But to see Johnson grabbing the fourth Cup, not meekly and carefully cruising to it, would be great. Fans would be torn between cheering him on and fearing that the "go for it" strategy might backfire and cost him the championship -- as, indeed, it did for the late Fireball Roberts in the 1950 season finale.

That one was a kind of reverse of this year's characters. Points leader Bill Rexford had already dropped out and Fireball needed only to finish fifth or better to win the title. Instead, he raced for the win and blew his engine.

No JR Motorsports ride for me, either

By DAVID GREEN

This just in, from home offices in North Carolina and Kentucky: My people have not spoken to Dale Jr.'s people -- no phone calls, no text messages, no tweets -- and at this point in time, I have no plans to race at Daytona in February.

That puts me squarely within a group including several million other folks -- including Danica Patrick.

Stop the presses!

Am I the only one who's way past tired of the obsession with Danica (not) coming to NASCAR?

The whole circus reminds me of a time when I worked for a small newspaper, and every time there was a local election, this one fellow would drop by the newsroom and deliver a "news release" stating that he would not run for office this time.

I suppose our judgment was wrong when we politely thanked him for letting us know, and then quickly spiked this non-story.

Yes, yes, I know -- Danica is a much hotter property than my example of the non-candidate. And she's so much hotter than I am (in so many ways). And some reporting of contact between Patrick and anybody in the NASCAR world is appropriate.

But, come on. How many times do we need to be told that there's nothing done yet?

Personally, I don't care whether Patrick comes to NASCAR -- part-time, full-time, now or whenever. My opinion is that it would be a huge mistake as far as her career as a racing driver is concerned, although it might surely be financially lucrative.

I believe it would be detrimental to the Indy Racing League, but if the IRL never rises above gimmick-driven popularity and develops some drivers who are stars because of their on-track exploits and in spite of things such as gender and sex appeal, it is doomed to a less-than-stratospheric future, anyway. Danica can help, in fact has helped, the IRL get where it wants to be, but she can do only so much.

She has already had to deal with the "when is she ever gonna win?" questions, and finally got a victory to answer them -- for the time being.

However, one race victory at Motegi did not represent the realization of her perceived potential. She has yet to establish herself as a winner beyond that one race, or even as a consistent contender to become a winner.

When (if) she checks that objective off her to-do list, she and the IRL will be hugely better off for it.

When (if) she decides to come to NASCAR, yes -- it will be news. For awhile, every turn of the wheels of her stock car will be newsworthy, although coverage of each of those turns will probably be over the top.

But until there's something substantial to report, I suggest to the motor sports press -- give it a rest.

Even the more-than-once-a-day Brett Favre stories had more merit than this, and the old "Saturday Night Live" line by Chevy Chase ("This just in -- Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead") was a lot funnier.

If we have to monitor this on a minute-by-minute basis, may I suggest the military formula for "sit reps," or situation reports. We can sum it up in five words from the phonetic alphabet: "Alpha Sierra, Sierra Romeo Sierra."

It means, "All secure, situation remains (the) same."

It's a little less hysterical than, "Nobody is shooting at us! Nobody is shooting at us! Nobody is shooting at us!"

Bad times, bad racing, or flawed perceptions?

By DAVID GREEN

One of the hardest questions to answer these days would have to be: What is the state of the sport of auto racing?

Fan dissatisfaction is a recurrent theme. The quality of competition is constantly under scrutiny. The sagging economy is a pervasive issue.

And, as I have suggested in this space before, there's not a whole lot of confidence in the leaders of major-league auto racing. Brian France is the butt of every NASCAR joke. Tony George never got as much respect as fellow Hoosier Dan Quayle. In Formula One, the antagonistic Max Mosley is gone, but the selection of Jean Todt as his successor represents anything but a regime change.

So, how much of it is real, valid gloom and doom and how much, as NASCAR's Tony Stewart recently suggested, is perception?

Far be it from this observer to claim knowledge of the truth that we all seek. But it does seem to be an unusually turbulent and unstable time. And that probably affects perceptions as much as, if not more than, it impacts empirically quantifiable reality.

In NASCAR's case, I have to say that much of the sport's image problem is the result of its own doing, with some media complicity. My assessment is that on-track competition is clearly better with regard to numbers -- of different race winners, of drivers with legitimate chances to win races, of full-time participating teams, of prize money and championship value -- than it was three or four decades ago.

But it's not quite as breathtaking -- for mass audiences, anyway -- as NASCAR has hyped itself.

For the most part, the media played along with that -- not merely with the things that reporters wrote, but with the frenzy over television rights and speculation about overtaking the NFL in popularity and the gluttonous obsession with stealing everybody else's toys (Juan Pablo Montoya, Sam Hornish Jr., Dario Franchitti, and recently the mindless obsession with Danica Patrick).

NASCAR further does itself a disservice with its micromanagement of rules and public castigation of competitors for the most miniscule offenses. In this, the media are also complicit, in reporting these "crimes" as if they were of any consequence. Conversely, Formula One appears to have real problems of serious import -- technical espionage and race-fixing. It all has a chilling effect on the confidence of fans.

Ironically, F1 -- historically dismissed by hard-core NASCAR fans as boring -- is now being condemned by its own ranks. Fans, pundits and competitors alike bemoan the pristine new circuits which lack the soul of older, traditional tracks, and criticize the sanitized high-tech but low-excitement racing.

Bad times, bad racing, or just flawed perceptions?

It's up to each individual to decide. But for sure, there's no consensus that this is any sort of golden age of motor sport.