Wednesday, October 15, 2014

What Makes Brad So Bad? Maybe He Wants It More

What's Bad Brad's Problem?
To hear Jeff Gordon, Kevin Harvick, Denny Hamlin, Matt Kenseth, Mark Martin, Danica Patrick and a host of others tell it, Brad Keselowski is a reckless, out-of-control, idiot/ass/jerk.  Take your pick.

So what makes Brad so bad?

Easy.  He wants it more.

It’s been apparent since his first Sprint Cup victory in 2009, when he refused to back off at Talladega and sent Carl Edwards flying, that he wasn’t going to give an inch to the more established NASCAR drivers.  Charlotte and its aftermath was just the latest chapter.

He has repeatedly drawn the ire of NASCAR’s superstars, who complain he is too aggressive on the track and too outspoken off it.

So just how bad does Brad want it?

Perhaps the best indication came in 2011 when he sustained a badly broken ankle, hurt his back and suffered other injuries when his brakes failed and he crashed during a test at Road Atlanta.  His hopes of reaching the Chase appeared over.  But just a few days later he was back in the car and winning at Pocono, finished a slam bang second at Watkins Glen, third at Michigan and then won again at Bristol to make the Chase.  He didn’t win the Chase, but the stage was set for the following year.

He has continued to tangle with Edwards over the years and had multiple run-ins with Hamlin and Busch.  This season the cars of Keselowski and Kenseth seem to be joined together at the bumper.

At Richmond, Kenseth repeatedly blocked Keselowski and cost him a chance at victory, a move BK called “mind boggling” at the time.  The very next week Keselowski spun in front of the field at Talladega while running six laps down, touching off the latest of the “Big Ones” he had contributed to at the track and involving 15 cars, including Kenseth.

“If it was the other way around, if it was anybody else except for him, we’d all be getting lectured," Kenseth said afterward.  "I didn’t know he was that many laps down honestly. He came down in the front of the 10 car early and spun out and was racing pretty aggressively there to try and get it back.”

Others saw it another way.  Even six laps down, he hadn’t given up.

Keselowski also has repeatedly outraced and outsmarted others, especially at Talladega. He made a dramatic last lap pass of Kenseth in 2012 that left everyone shaking their heads and wondering, “how’d he do that?”  Afterwards he displayed the type of brashness that he’s become known for, but doesn’t always sit well with other drivers.

"Hell, it's my job to be good,” Keselowski said.  “That's what I get paid for. I don't get paid to suck at this. If I did, I'm not driving for the right guy."

So it’s no surprise Keselowski has few friends among other NASCAR drivers.  And that’s apparently fine with him.  It’s one reason he lobbied Roger Penske to add Joey Logano to the team.  An outcast after being thrown under Joe Gibbs’s motor coach by Hamlin and Busch, Logano has been resented by many in the garage area ever since joining the NASCAR ranks with his “Sliced Bread” moniker.  In contrast, Keselowski and Logano seem like the perfect fit. 

All of which sets the stage for an interesting Talladega race.  Notice I didn’t say exciting.  Can’t say much of the racing so far in the Chase has been exciting and don’t really expect things to change at Talladega, at least until the last lap or so.

However, you can expect to Dale Earnhardt Jr., as he usually does, to go to the front.  He’s also one of the few friends Keselowski has among the drivers.  BK will go with him, flanked (guarded?) by Logano and Ryan Blaney, who Penske has brought in for the race to serve as Brad’s wingman.   And I wouldn’t be surprised to see Earnhardt teammate Jimmie Johnson break with his past Talladega strategy and run up front as well.  Kenseth, who also may need a win, is more likely to lag behind for much of the race. 

Earnhardt, Johnson and Keselowski all need a win at Talladega to make the Chase and there’s a good chance all three will be near the front at the end.  Only one will make it.

Whoever wants it the most.

Saturday, September 27, 2014

NASCAR Bans Innovation

Maybe NASCAR should bring back Petty, Superbirds
NASCAR released its 2015 rules package on Tuesday, bragging about more than 60 “enhancements,” primarily aimed at reducing horsepower and downforce and – most of all – saving money.  All in the name of better racing.

One thing NASCAR didn’t mention.  The new rules also ban innovation.

For nearly two years NASCAR had talked about a new “Engine of Tomorrow.” Everything was supposedly being considered, including V6 and even V6 turbo engines.  It was an opportunity to make NASCAR relevant again, to put it at the forefront of the development of not only tomorrow’s racing engines, but also tomorrow’s passenger car engines. 

The auto industry will undergo the biggest changes in its history during the next 10 years as a result of mandated Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards that are set to nearly double by 2025, to 54.5 miles per gallon.  That’s easily the biggest increase in standards since they were first established in the early 1970s.

Currently only the Toyota Prius and similar hybrids, meet the 2025 standards.  The V6-powered Ford Fusion, Toyota Camry and Chevrolet Impala or Malibu will have to nearly double current mileage ratings.  V8 engines such as the one in Chevy SS will disappear.  The manufacturers say they will make extensive use of 4- and 6-cylinder engines and turbocharging to meet the standards.  You may be able to find a V8 engine in a Corvette in 2025, but you’ll pay a huge premium for it.

To meet the new standards, the industry will undertake a decade of development and innovation unmatched in its history.  One Toyota executive says the industry will see more changes in the next 10 years than it has in the previous 100.

But instead of being part of this development and innovation, NASCAR has decided to take a back seat and watch the world pass it by.  The series is going with the “Engine of Yesterday,” taking a page from its truck and Nationwide series by adding a “tapered spacer” to the existing 1970s-era V8 engines to cut horsepower from about 850 to about 725.  If you like restrictor plates, you’ll love “tapered spacers.”  Gear ratio reductions will limit engines to about 9,000 RPM.

We may never see another engine failure.  And that’s good, because the only V8 engines you’ll be able to find 10 years from now may be those running around in circles in NASCAR races.  It will become a form vintage racing.

And just to make sure some team doesn’t get ambitious and actually try to develop an edge on the track, NASCAR banned all testing.  Teams will be hard-pressed to develop something new during one or two test sessions the day before a race.  To enforce the ban the organization put in place its most stringent penalty ever, a loss of 150 points, minimum $150,000 fine and six-week crew chief suspension.

The series made it clear the new rules were developed in collaboration with “the race teams, the drivers, our manufacturer partners and Goodyear” and I don’t doubt that for second.  I was hoping NASCAR, the race teams, drivers, manufacturers and Goodyear might dip into that $8+ billion treasure chest of new TV money in the name of moving the series forward, but I should have known better.  It’s all about maintaining the status quo.

It’s pretty much impossible to find anyone in the garage area who isn’t raving about these “enhancements” for 2015.  Unlike the botched rollout of the Car of Tomorrow, NASCAR obviously did its homework with the teams and had everyone signing from the same hymnal.

Maybe, just maybe, NASCAR is on to something with the retro engine package.  Afterall, vintage racing is the hottest form of motorsports at the moment.  The next step is to bring back the body styles from the ‘70s; the Super Birds, Talladegas and the Chevelles.  Heck, maybe we can even get Petty, Pearson, Allison and Yarborough back in the cars.

Now that would be a race worth watching.

Thursday, September 18, 2014

Time For Tony Stewart To Speak Up

Stewart just days before his world was turned upside down
It’s time for Tony Stewart to step up and tell his side of the story about what happened the night of Aug. 9, 2014, when the race car he was driving struck and killed Kevin Ward Jr. at Canandaigua Motorsports Park in Ontario County, N.Y.

After a month-long investigation, the decision by district attorney Michael Tantillo to send the case against Stewart to the grand jury was predictable.  Tantillo could have thrown the case out after receiving the Sherriff’s report, or immediately charged Stewart.  Either action would have been controversial.  Instead, he decided to punt.  By putting the ball in the grand jury's court, the elected official avoided taking a stand on what must be one of the most politically sensitive cases the area has ever seen.

"I have made the determination that it would be appropriate to submit the evidence to a grand jury, for their determination as to what action should be taken in this matter," read Tantillo’s abdication.

The next step is for the evidence to be reviewed by a grand jury, a group of 23 people, something of an expanded trial jury.   There is no timetable for the hearings other than “soon” and they are confidential.  The evidence is presented by someone in the district attorney’s office, expected to be Tantillo himself.  But there is no judge, no defense attorney; no questioning of evidence or witnesses, beyond questions the grand jury itself may submit.  Stewart’s lawyers won’t be present unless Stewart is called to testify.

It’s impossible for me -- and many others -- to believe Stewart meant to hit or hurt Ward Jr. when the young driver darted towards Stewart’s car.  But did Stewart mean to spray a little dirt on the kid as he drove past and things then went horribly wrong?  That’s a legitimate question many others have.  If the grand jury has the same question at the end of the hearing, Stewart could be charged with second-degree manslaughter or even negligent homicide for "recklessly causing the death of another person."

Once the case is presented, if a majority of the grand jury believe the “evidence is legally sufficient and provides reasonable cause to believe that the defendant has committed the crime," an indictment is handed down.  Stewart would be charged with a crime and a date set for trial.

It’s unclear whether Stewart will be called to testify before the grand jury, or if he will ask to testify.  The grand jury is able to call and question witnesses and one would expect Stewart to be one of those witnesses.  But there are no guarantees. 

At this point, I expect the grand jury will do the same thing as the DA and simply pass the buck.  Give it back to the DA for a regular trial by a jury.

Much of the case in a manslaughter trial goes to intent and state-of-mind.  Only Stewart can answer those questions.  That’s why I believe he should come forward now and talk about that night.  Why wait?  He might even influence the grand jury.

Stewart has refused to answer questions, saying he needed to “respect the ongoing investigation process.”  Well the investigation concluded two weeks ago.

But while the grand jury proceedings are confidential, witnesses are free to discuss their testimony outside the courtroom and so there are no legal constraints on Stewart taking questions.

Although the answers would seem obvious, people want to see and hear how Stewart responds.  Stewart’s short, scripted remarks before the Atlanta race didn’t do the trick.

Of course there’s no requirement that Stewart testify before the grand jury or even if the case does go trial.  That’s up for the defense to decide.  But it seems the only way Stewart can convince either jury - or the court of public opinion - that he had no intent to injure Ward or even just spray dirt on him, will be for him to answer the questions himself. 

So why wait?  

Monday, September 15, 2014

NASCAR’S Billy Horschel Nightmare

NASCAR's Billy Horschel?
NASCAR has a Billy Horschel problem.

Who?

Exactly.

Horschel captured the FedEx Cup on Sunday in Atlanta, the Professional Golf Association’s equivalent of NASCAR’s Case, along with the $10 million bonus that goes with it.  The FedEx Cup was born out of an effort by the PGA to give meaning to the final golf tournaments of the season after the last “major” event of the year and the advent of football season.  Sound familiar?  It’s golf’s version of the Chase. 

Three weeks ago Horschel had missed the cut in the opening round of the FedEx Cup and dropped to 82nd in the rankings.  He hadn’t won a tournament all year and had only two top 10 finishes to show for 2014.  Ryder Cup Captain Tom Watson never even considered him for a spot on the team when identifying America’s dozen best golfers. 

Then Horschel got hot, red hot, about as late in the year as possible, winning the final two tournaments of the season and as a result, the FedEx Cup.  In the process he beat Rory McIlroy, everyone’s golfer of the year.  All McIlroy did during the “regular” season was win two of four majors and three straight other big tournaments.  He is the only player to finish in the top 25 in every start for the past two years.

In fairness, McIlroy had his chance.  He was tied with Horschel going into Sunday’s final round.  The season had come down to the final 18 holes for the FedEx Cup.  It was a dream come true for the PGA.  But then the wrong guy won.  Even Horschel left no doubt who he thinks is this year’s best golfer.

"In my mind, he’s (McIlroy) the player of the year,” Horschel said.  “I don’t think there’s anyone who comes close.”

While Horschel was winning in Atlanta, Brad Keselowski was winning in Chicago, his second straight victory and fifth of the season, more than any other driver.  There’s a good chance he’ll win one or two more races before the finale at Homestead.

Yet there’s also a chance Keselowski, and other winners from the NASCAR regular season, could lose the NASCAR championship to someone who doesn’t win a race all year.

Meet Matt Kenseth – NASCAR’s Billy Horschel.

Of course every NASCAR fan knows who Kenseth is.  He won more races than everyone else last year, but has yet to score a victory this season.  Consistent finishes have kept him near the top of the point standings.   And consistent finishes could win him the title this year if everything goes his way, despite NASCAR's emphasis on winning.  Vegas puts his odds at a respectable 12/1.

If Kenseth can parlay a few more consistent finishes into the final race at Homestead, all he has to do is finish ahead of the other in the Final Four.  If he was to finish second to, say, Kyle Larson, with Keselowski (or another finalist) third, Kenseth would be NASCAR’s champion.

Possible?  You bet.

Fair.  No way, and Kenseth would probably be the first to say so.

Of course people won’t be asking “who?” if Kenseth wins the Chase.

But they will be asking “why?”

Saturday, August 30, 2014

What Process Did Tony Stewart Go Through?

Helton created more questions than he answered
From the moment NASCAR released a statement on Thursday announcing: "Tony Stewart has received all necessary clearances required to return to all racing activities, and therefore is eligible to compete this weekend at Atlanta Motor Speedway,” the question has been, what clearances?

We don’t know.

In press briefings on Friday by Stewart, Stewart’s team and NASCAR, we heard plenty of talk about the clearance “process.”  Process?  What process?

Again, we don’t know.  And no one is talking.

As should be expected, Stewart appeared emotional and distressed throughout his brief appearance Friday before the media in Atlanta to read a short statement.  He didn’t take questions, saying, “I need to respect the ongoing investigation process and cannot answer and address the questions at this time." 

Then he added, seemingly offhand, “Emotionally, I’m not sure if I could answer them anyway.”

So, from an emotional standpoint, who says he’s ready to drive?

We don’t know.

NASCAR President Mike Helton and Brett Frood, executive vice president of Stewart-Haas Racing, dodged repeated questions about the process following Stewart’s appearance.

Other than saying the decision to return was “100% Tony’s,” Frood refused to shed any light on the process.

“As you all know, when a driver's out of the car, there is that process (for returning).  I'm not going to get into the medical side of it, but I will say we've been in close contact with them (NASCAR) throughout the process, have gotten from them what he needed to get back in the car right now.”

Helton was even more evasive, being careful that NASCAR didn't take any responsibility. 

“As typical, our process calls for us to rely on third party experts to assure us that a NASCAR driver or a NASCAR member is ready to return.  All those forms of processes were met and we cleared him based on those third party inputs from experts.

Helton was asked if the process including psychological or psychiatric reports.

“We received the ones that we felt were relevant under the circumstances.”

Asked again if the reports were from physiological professionals and how reporters should categorize them, Helton responded, “The ones that were relevant to these circumstances.”

This isn’t the first time NASCAR’s clearance “process” has been clouded in confusion.  It was the last major sport to adopt a procedure for checking competitors for concussions.  That happened only after Dale Earnhardt Jr. admitted driving with a concussion.  

And earlier this year it was Earnhardt Jr. who openly questioned NASCAR’s lack of information about the process used when Denny Hamlin was not allowed to race in California with what at first was thought to be a sinus infection. 

Although it was later determined a small piece of metal in Hamlin’s eye caused his blurred vision, Earnhardt Jr.’s comments are as relevant now as they were then.

“NASCAR should put out a release and say, ‘This is the timeline of the events and this is why we made this choice and this is the protocol for going forward,’” Earnhardt said at the time.

“That answers everybody’s questions.  Don’t have questions?  I have questions.  We shouldn’t have questions.  We should all feel pretty comfortable with what happened.

“Why NASCAR did the things they did and the timeline, it would be good to know those things because the drivers are all curious and fans are curious.

“We should all know what happened and know why it happened and be done with it and not have to worry about it.”

Junior was right.  We should all know what happened, why it happened  It's the only way to be done with it.

Monday, August 25, 2014

It’s Time for Earnhardt Jr. To Take a Stand

Washington Quarterback Robert Giffin III and friends
It’s time for Dale Earnhardt Jr. to take a stand.

He needs to stop using the “R” word when referring to his favorite football team.

It’s no secret that Earnhardt Jr. is a lifelong supporter of Washington’s professional football team (as are many NASCAR fans) and is one of team’s most recognizable fans.  He was on the sidelines for a pre-season game last week with his crew chief and girlfriend.  He was interviewed on ESPN during the game to hype the Chase and he even called a touchdown during the radio broadcast. 

He referred to the “’Skins” several times during the broadcast and identified the “Hail to the Redskins” team song following a touchdown.  On Twitter before the Bristol race he wrote to his 752,000 followers about the upcoming “Skins” game, which touched off numerous tweets and retweets about the “Redskins” from his followers.  The NASCAR media even got in on the act. 
And that’s the problem.  Many Native Americans – many Americans for that matter -- find the “Redskins” name and logo offensive and demeaning. 
With the start of the professional football season a little more than a week away, the controversy surrounding the use of the “Redskins” name has reached new heights.  It was touched off in part by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office cancelling the team’s trademark, saying federal law does not permit registration of trademarks that “may disparage” individuals or groups.  Team owner Daniel Snyder says he’ll appeal the ruling, and the trademark remains in place while that’s underway.
But that hasn’t stopped a host of sports figures - including NFL announcers Tony Dungy and Phil Simms - from taking a stance that they will no longer use the word “Redskins” when referring to the Washington football team.  Fifty Senators signed a letter to the NFL asking for a name change.  When’s the last time 50 Senators agreed on anything?   The Washington Post says it will no longer use the “slur” on its editorial pages.
Not everyone is in agreement, however.   Former player and current broadcaster Mike Ditka was especially outspoken in defense of the nickname.
“What’s all the stink over the Redskin name?” he asked.  “It’s so much horse shit it’s incredible. We’re going to let the liberals of the world run this world. It was said out of reverence, out of pride to the American Indian. Even though it was called a Redskin, what are you going to call them, a Brownskin? This is so stupid it’s appalling, and I hope that owner keeps fighting for it and never changes it, because the Redskins are part of American football history, and it should never be anything but the Washington Redskins. That’s the way it is.”
“It’s all the political correct idiots in America, that’s all it is.”
Ditka may have come on stronger than most, but he isn’t alone.  Announcer Jim Nantz says he doesn’t want to take a stance.  Troy Aikman says he will continue to use the term.
So why can’t Earnhardt Jr.?
Because, like it or not, Earnhardt Jr. is the most visible face of NASCAR.  And despite NASCAR’s attempts to diversify, it is still a mostly southern, white, male sport.  To have its most popular and recognizable driver using what many consider to be a racial slur on Twitter and national television is not in the best interest of the sport.  Call it being politically correct if you want, but that’s the way it is.  He’s also a leader and by simply not using the word, will help lead the movement away from it.
I know this position won’t be popular with many NASCAR fans or racing fans in general. Heck, it’s divisive among the general public.   And I’m not for a second saying Earnhardt Jr. or anyone else who uses the nickname is a racist.  I understand and believe people when they say they use the word as a tribute and respect to heritage.  But, to paraphrase the Washington Post, the meaning of words change.  I would never call a Native American a “Redskin” to their face – and I don’t think Earnhardt Jr. would either. I’m saying many Native Americans now find the word insulting and that’s enough for me to try and stop using it.  I hope it’s enough for Dale Jr. too.
He doesn’t need to make a big deal about it, doesn’t need to make any announcement, he just needs to stop using the word.  He seems to use the slang ‘Skins when referring to the team and maybe that’s his way of trying to avoid the “Redskins” reference.  But that’s not enough.  Simply refer to the team as Washington in the future. 
He can follow the lead of former NFL official Mike Carey, who asked the league to stop assigning him to Washington games back in 2006.  Carey, the first African-America official to work a Super Bowl, never said a word about it until a reporter asked him directly last week.  He responded with the most elegant words I’ve heard on the subject.
“Everybody has to look inside themselves and decide what is the right thing for them,” Carey told the Washington Post.
“In America, we’ve learned that respect is the most important thing that you have. I learned it from my parents, my schools, from my faith. And when you learn there’s something that might not be as respectful as you like, when you come to terms with it, you have to do something about it.
“It just became clear to me that to be in the middle of the field, where something disrespectful is happening (the team logo), was probably not the best thing for me.
“Human beings take social stances,” he said. “And if you’re respectful of all human beings, you have to decide what you’re going to do and why you’re going to do it.”
It’s time for Earnhardt Jr. to take a stance. 

Friday, August 22, 2014

The Media War Surrounding Tony Stewart

Harvick has been the most vocal in support of Stewart
Nothing has been more divisive in the aftermath of the accident at Canandaigua Motorsports Park two weeks ago that took the life of Kevin Ward Jr. than the ongoing news media coverage.  The drumbeat of media reports and opinions surrounding the story has not subsided.  In fact, it is picking up again with Stewart’s decision not to race this weekend at Bristol.

It has been open season on the mainstream media – stick-and-ball general sports types and news reporters alike – who have often been criticized in the past for covering auto racing only when someone is killed or there is a bad accident.  The criticism has been deserved in some cases, especially those painting Stewart with hairline trigger, ready to explode at the slightest provocation.

On the other side of the story are the regular NASCAR and auto racing reporters, who have been solidly in Stewart’s corner.  They have rallied around the driver with stories “about the real Tony Stewart only we know.”

Marty Smith at ESPN, the Charlotte newspaper reporters and USA Today’s racing writers have all been very vocal in their defense of Stewart.  But then it was just a month ago that USA Today nominated Stewart to run the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, stopping just short of anointing him auto racing’s savior.

"With major-league auto racing engaged in a desperate struggle for relevance across every series, Stewart, 43, is among the sport's brightest hopes as an emerging kingmaker…” Nate Ryan wrote in a July 23 column.  “…There is no one better suited for ensuring another century of success at the Brickyard than Stewart, who uniquely blends an appreciation for its heritage and history with a sharply honed business acumen…”

The regular NASCAR reporters are deeply invested in Stewart, along with the other star drivers of the sport.  The reporters walk a fine line between getting the story and upsetting or alienating drivers such as Stewart or Kyle Busch and often treat them with kid gloves.  Be critical of a driver or upset him – and it may be awhile before you get another interview.

The drivers themselves, for the most part, have been reserved, refusing to comment or saying they don’t know what happened.  Stewart isn’t talking with anyone outside his inner circle and that includes other drivers.  As a result, most have taken a position similar to Carl Edwards.

"I have been around racing my whole life," Edwards said in Michigan. "I don't know what happened. It's not right for me to discuss what happened because I don't know.”

Only a few drivers have stepped up to support Stewart in the press, one being Jimmie Johnson.

“I know what I believe happened,” Johnson said.  “I think it was completely an accident. In time, we'll see when Tony's able to talk and where things go from there."

Most outspoken on Stewarts's behalf has been his friend and teammate, Kevin Harvick.

“You have just a lot of unknowledgeable people reporting on a situation that know absolutely nothing about racing,” Harvick said before the Michigan race. “It's just really unfortunate, the perception that has been given to him. I know he'll stay strong and fight, and he'll get the right people and do all the right things.  That's the part that's bothered me the most, is just the poor misrepresentation on the media side for him.”

After the race, in which he finished second, an increasingly frustrated Harvick had more to say.

“I think the hardest part for me has been the way the whole media thing has shaken down.  It's an absolute tragic accident that has happened on both sides of the fence. You have one young man who is dead.

“You've got a guy that we know and are part of an organization that is just getting a lot of just crazy press."

There’s a danger, however, in simply writing off all the media coverage as “crazy press.”  Sure, there’s been some of that, especially by the broadcast media in the days immediately following the accident.  But much of the coverage in the past week has come from some of the country’s leading sports columnists.  They may not cover racing on a daily basis, but they’re knowledgeable about the sport and provide an insight on what many people are thinking.  They shouldn’t be ignored by Stewart and his confidants - or anyone else who cares about racing.

For instance, some might consider the following “crazy.”  But it is from respected Chicago Sun-Times sports columnist Rick Telander.

"…Could Stewart have avoided Ward? Did he want to? Was he trying to teach the kid a little ‘‘attitude’’ lesson? Not kill him but scare him? Maybe a little sideswipe and some face grit?  We may never know...

"…Sports are all about pushing rules to the limit, hitting the corners, tiptoeing down the line, timing the starter’s gun, grabbing, pushing, hitting, intimidating. And doing it all without getting called for a penalty or harming your team. And taking your medicine when you do get flagged by the refs.

"That’s how sports have to be played at the highest levels because the edges of the game are where victory lies, where beauty lies.

"But there’s something else that has to be at work. It’s called morality. There is a point beyond which you don’t go. It has nothing to do with the written rules of the game. It has nothing to do with penalties or fines. It has to do with the fact you’re human, and there are things known as sportsmanship and, yes, empathy.

"It was probably inevitable that something such as this tragic death would occur sooner or later. As Ward’s father said coldly after the race, Stewart was by far the best driver on the little-town track, and he could have prevented the mess. Right?

"Call it a perfect storm, if you like. An arrogant, 43-year-old star chillin’ in a small-time race, doing it like a hobby, teaching an upstart local kid a big lesson.

"Oh, what a lesson.  For Stewart most of all.

Strong words, but a long way from crazy.  And many in the mainstream media are now saying Stewart shouldn’t be allowed to race until he tells his side of the story.  This is from noted Associated Press sports columnist Paul Newberry.

"Until he (Stewart) talks openly and honestly about what was going through his mind when he came around a turn and saw – or maybe didn't see – 20-year-old Kevin Ward Jr. standing in the track, NASCAR officials should not allow Stewart back into the ride that pays his bills.

“Stewart very plausibly could have been trying to avoid Ward.  Now, it's time to confront the truth.

“Smoke, tell us what happened.”

A logical request.  And there’s the conundrum. 

It makes no legal sense for Stewart to speak publicly until the ongoing criminal investigation is concluded.  Then there is the very real possibility of a civil case being brought against Stewart by the Ward family, something that could drag out for several years.  If Stewart’s legal team has its way, he would probably never address the events of that night at Canandaigua Motorsports Park.

At some point, however, Stewart will have to start to fight back as Harvick says.  He'll have to overrule his legal team and speak to the media.  Crazy or not.