Top paid Athletes: Where does NASCAR rank?

The top paid athlete in the US is Tiger Woods with over 100 million dollars from winnings and endorsements according to sports illustrated. The top NASCAR driver is number 10 on the list. He is Dale Jr. with 27 million dollars with 20 million coming from endorsements. The next is Jeff Gordon who is number 16 on the list with 22 million dollars with 15 coming from endorsements. The last in the top fifty was last years point champion Jimmie Johnson with 17 million dollars with 2 million coming from endorsements. If you get a chance look at the list and you will find some athletes have high salaries and very little from endorsements while others have relatively low salaries and high endorsements. Most are NBA stars.

For a look at the top fifty athletes go to the following link.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/more/specials/fortunate50/2007/index.html

• 0 Comments

Room #5 in the Inn

Good article from Associated Press. Fits in with the Rowdy podcast.

Hendrick stable too full for Earnhardt - right now
Associated Press

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (AP) - Rick Hendrick wasn't lying when he said he has no room on his team for Dale Earnhardt Jr.
Hendrick, the last big-time owner to comment publicly on Earnhardt's free-agent status, has spoken to NASCAR's most popular driver about his future. But with a full stable of drivers under contract, Hendrick didn't have a whole lot to offer.
"I've talked to him about doing motors and cars if he wants to do this himself," Hendrick told The Associated Press. "But that's really all we've discussed.
"Right now, I'm full."
C'mon, Mr. H, are you really claiming there's no room at the inn for a superstar such as Earnhardt?
"There's no room at the inn," he firmly repeated.
He's right. But that doesn't mean things can't change.

Jeff Gordon has a lifetime contract with Hendrick Motorsports, so he's not going anywhere until he retires. With a fifth championship looking very realistic for this season, it doesn't appear Gordon will be turning in his car keys anytime soon.

Jimmie Johnson, the defending Nextel Cup champion, is a car owner's dream and he just signed an extension last season that will keep him in a Hendrick car for a very long time.

So that leaves Kyle Busch and Casey Mears, and conventional wisdom says Mears should be nervous about keeping his cushy Hendrick job.
Mears is having a tough first season with Hendrick and is currently a miserable 35th in the standings. But he was placed with the one team at Hendrick that always has struggled, and walked into a team that was a tad bit behind when he got there in December.

Hendrick made a crew chief change four days before teams reported to Daytona, and it's taking some time for everyone to catch up.
Yes, Mears appears to be the weak link. But it's unfair to judge him after a mere 11 races, and it's doubtful that Hendrick is doing that.

Busch, on the other hand, has had plenty of time to be judged.
Although Busch is under contract through 2008 and Hendrick previously said he's working on an extension, the car owner perhaps should reconsider.
Busch is an excellent driver. He made the Chase for the championship last season, has four career victories and is currently 11th in the points.
But the 22-year-old has made three significant missteps this season that raise questions if the talent is worth the headaches.

Consider:
- After winning the first Car of Tomorrow race at Bristol in March, Busch came off as a spoiled brat when he ripped the car and repeatedly said it "sucked" during his nationally televised Victory Lane interview. When Busch continued the rant in his post-race news conference, Hendrick sat silently next to him, lips pursed and clearly uncomfortable.
- Busch left the track without telling his crew after wrecking in Texas last month. When the team patched up the car to get back on the track for valuable points, Busch was nowhere to be found and they grabbed Earnhardt - of all people - to finish out the race.
- He wrecked his older brother, Kurt, in Saturday night's All-Star race, then gave Kurt the opportunity to be the model of decorum. While Kyle stewed inside his hauler after the accident, Kurt gave a somewhat humorous interview and delivered the line of the race when he said, "I'm not eating any Kellogg's any time soon," in reference to Kyle's sponsor.
The incident spoke volumes to how far Kurt Busch has come. Always a bit quirky, he's made significant strides since joining Penske Racing last season. When he's not trying so hard to be liked, or butchering the English language in an attempt to sound smart, Kurt Busch can be kind of cool.
Kyle Busch? Not so much.

When he first was signed by Hendrick to drive the No. 5 Chevrolet, Kyle Busch vowed to use everything he'd seen his brother struggle through as a lesson on what not to do. He's instead done just the opposite.
He comes off as arrogant and entitled, and veterans repeatedly gripe Busch never wants to listen to their advice. Two-time champion Tony Stewart felt like he was talking to a wall when he tried to counsel Busch after their 2006 tangles.
And after Busch and Mears had issues last season, Busch immaturely said he didn't know how to get in touch with Mears to discuss it. Never mind that these guys live inches apart in the motorhome lot 38 weekends a year.
Hendrick is a patient man who can put up with an awful lot. And there's no reason to believe that enough time in the Hendrick organization won't eventually make Busch grow up and start behaving the way a good Hendrick driver is expected to.
But with Dale Earnhardt Jr. sitting on the open market, wanting desperately to fit in with an organization committed to helping him win championships, one has to wonder if Hendrick should take a long hard look at making it happen.

Who knows? Maybe room No. 5 at the Hendrick inn suddenly could open.

• 0 Comments

Dale Junior and Wall Street

The following article makes the case that individuals in business (even family run)need to be forward looking and Dale Jr made the right decision.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/hjenkins/?id=110010081

• 0 Comments

From the Sports Economics Blog

I read a sports economics blog http://www.thesportseconomist.com/ a few days ago the commented on Tony Stewarts view of to many cautions. Here is their post. Thought you all might find it interesting.

Thursday, April 26, 2007
NASCAR, Wrestling, & Managing
In the wake of frustrating performances, Tony Stewart ripped NASCAR officials for manipulating caution flags to generate more competitive races (from SI.com):

"It's like playing God. They can almost dictate the race instead of the drivers doing it. It's happened too many times this year." Stewart went on to say fans are complaining about debris cautions and NASCAR isn't listening. "I guess NASCAR thinks 'Hey, wrestling worked, and it was for the most part staged, so I guess it's going to work in racing, too,"' he said. "I can't understand how long the fans are going to let NASCAR treat them like they're stupid before the fans finally turn on NASCAR. I don't know that they've run a fair race all year."

That's pretty strong stuff. NASCAR first responded with "disappointment" over the comments, highlighting safety as the only concern behind cautions. Later, they issued a real counterpunch saying that if Stewart doesn't like things, there are lots of drivers who would like his spot.

Whether Stewart beefs are legit or not, I haven't paid close enough attention to tell. Beyond the specifics in this situation, the question at issue is a thorny one for sports leagues and organizations. Obviously, sports entities should try to make adjustments in their product to enhance fan interest including trying to get the optimal amount of competitive balance (a multi-sided subject by itself).

Yet, how this balance is achieved may also matter to fans as Stewart is getting at. Adjusting on-the-field rules, officiating standards, or other levers prior to the season or even making small adjustments during the season is one thing. Altering rules or practices from game to game, event to event, or minute by minute can cross a line into "manipulating" outcomes to the point of almost choreographing them. Handicapped horse races explicitly seek competitiveness through means much like NASCAR's car restrictions, but they don't make up the rules on the fly just before or during the race. The Jordan Rules pointed out how the NBA was making officiating decisions in the NBA Finals on a game by game basis in a none-too-veiled attempt to make things more "competitive." Last year's NBA Finals reeked of this kind of mid-stream adjustment. As a fan, I don't like that kind of stuff -- it is too much like pro wrestling. It gets awfully close to putting a lid over one basket for a while to promote a closer outcome.

But, hey, I'm only one fan -- the optimal amount of tweaking isn't based on my preferences. One could hardly argue with NASCAR's success, and they have done a lot of race-to-race tweaking that get's awfully close to pressing a button to make one guy's car slow down. Nonetheless, I do suspect that any sports organization or association needs to be careful about getting too close to "staging" outcomes a la the WWF. posted by Brian Goff 12:05 PM

• 0 Comments

Franchise a la NASCAR

"I think the only thing in my mind that keeps NASCAR from becoming a completely legitimate, major league with golfing or football or baseball or whatever is being franchised." -Richard Petty

When Cutler asked my opinion on franchising in NASCAR I was a little surprised. I have always thought of NASCAR as franchise of race tracks. Back in the ancient history of NASCAR, Bill France and others wanting to bring order to the sport, developed a league of stock car racing and developed a circuit of tracks and race dates. This is essentially the same history of the NFL, Major League Baseball and the NBA. Once the league is set, there is expansion and contraction of the number of teams as well as movement between locations. This is a good definition of a franchise. If I have a track and want into the league I need to negotiate a race date with NASCAR or buy a track and move the race date (poor North Wilkesboro). I can't just build a race track and the drivers would come. Of course I could also sue for a race date using anti-trust laws by making the case that NASCAR is a monopoly (Kentucky speedway).

After googling "NASCAR franchise" I found that the current debate was about a franchise for car owners. I also found the above quote by Richard Petty. It seems that cars in the 35 to 43 position are looking for a way to guarantee a spot in the show. I can understand the concern that Petty raises. A race team is costly. They need cars, shops, pit crews, engineers and money to pay for their expenses. Sponsors who put their name on the car want to be in the race every Sunday. Franchising may be a way to provide competitive balance in the league. But I have my doubts.

First, how do we assign who gets the car franchises. Do we assign them to the current top 43? Auction them off to the highest bidder? What about part time drivers? If I want to start a race team how do I get a franchise, buy a franchise? Second, if I have a car franchise and don't invest to make the car good, it doesn't matter I am in the race anyway. Can NASCAR revoke my franchise? Third I think NASCAR already has a monopoly problem in the courts with tracks, they may be opening a can of worms with being sued for franchise disputes with race teams.

• 0 Comments

American Idol, Sanjaya and Voting Theory

Buck asked "Why does Sanjaya not get voted off American idol when he clearly has the least talent? The answer comes from voting theory. Notice that in last week's voting Sanjaya wasn't even in the bottom three. He was in the middle three. What's going on? Is there a conspiracy? No---this is how voting works when we vote for our favorite from a group.

For the sake of argument suppose Buck is correct and Sanjaya is clearly the least talented. Also suppose most voters base their vote on talent but some voters base their vote on some other personal preference (such as looks of contestant, anti-Simon vote, or some other characteristic of the singer). Now in a head to head competition such as Sanjaya vs. LaKisha or Sanjaya vs. Chris, Sanjaya will lose to every other contestant.

But this is not true when we vote for our favorite from a group, when everyone votes for their favorite the talent vote gets split between all contestants and Sanjaya who has many voters who like him for some other reason does not receive the least votes. The good news is that if Buck is right and Sanjaya has the least talent and most voters vote on talent, then Sanjaya will be gone before too long. As fewer contestants are left, the talent vote will not get split as much as when there are many contestants.

By the way if NASCAR were run like American Idol and the last place finisher were sent home after every race, not to return for the rest of the season. NASCAR would have some strange racing. People would just want to make sure they were not last. And who do you think is the Sanjaya of NASCAR?

• 0 Comments

Social Science at 190 MPH

When I teach my sports economics class, I like to talk about game theory. Here are two good examples of game theory applied to NASCAR. The first is from Slate magazine the second covers the same topic but is more technical. The thrust of the article is how does cooperation arise in a competitive environment. It focuses on drafting at super speedways.

http://www.slate.com/id/2078672/

http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue5_2/ronfeldt/

Although these are not my articles, I think both are good examples of sports economics and give an intersting way to view NASCAR.

• 0 Comments

A Question from a Sports Economist

I have been identified as a sports economist. So I thought I ask a sports economics question dealing with tournament theory to the Rowdy blog. Many sports competitions have been set up as tourneys: golf, NASCAR, tennis, marathon racing, and even March madness in basketball. In professional sports tournament payment generally follow a common pattern. The winner receives the largest payment and payments then fall off quickly-- with the exception of NASCAR.

For comparison I will look at two events last year-- the Wachovia PGA event that took place in Charlotte North Carolina and the Bank of America 500 at Lowe's Motor Speedway also in Charlotte. First place at the PGA event was $1,134,000, second place $680, third place $428 thousand, tenth place $163 thousand, 20th place $75 thousand and 40th place $24 thousand While in NASCAR first place was $305 thousand, second place $221 thousand, third place was $176 thousand, tenth place was $91 thousand, 20th place $81 thousand and 40th place $80. In golf the winners take the lion share of the winnings while those back in the pack make very little in comparision. In NASCAR the winners share is the largest but not the lion share. Looking at the 40th place finisher we find that in golf the winnings are only 2% of the first place finisher's winnings, in NASCAR the 40th place finisher makes 26% of the first place finisher's winnings. Why the difference? (Sports economists have our ideas what are yours?)

• 0 Comments

Bristol or Bust

My wife enjoys Blogging on Rowdy.com so I decided to join the fun. Friday we head to Bristol to take a peek at the COT. Not sure what to think yet. My brother-in-law is a engineer at Ford and we have discussed the role of engineering and testing. Through these discussions I have come to believe that engineering is a major part of racing. Not sure if I want them to level the playing field.

• 0 Comments