Do Analysts Give Their Take, Or Are They On The Take?

(Originally published on March 30, 2008)

Jimmy Spencer says a lot of memorable things, but in this case it was what was on his chest and not what came out of his mouth that stuck with me.
Sunday on NASCAR RaceDay, Spencer was talking about the controversy surrounding Michael Waltrip Racing having a sway bar that belonged to Roush/Fenway, and the ensuing battle between the Toyota and Ford camps over the alleged theft of a proprietary part.
Spencer, for the record, took Roush's side. But I couldn't help but notice the "Dodge" that was affixed on Spencer's windbreaker.
It's nothing new. Many SPEED analysts display something on their shirts or jackets highlighting a company they have some relationship with. In a NASCAR world where it's unusual to see any garment sans 12 corporate entities, that is for the most part a rather blasé plug.
But it does make one wonder what Spencer would have said had the supposed robber been under the Dodge umbrella. Is it not a blatant conflict of interest to have analysts in bed with the companies where such disputes originate?
Or, on the other hand, is SPEED not providing a rather responsible full disclosure by making it clear that these guys have allegiances? After all, it's not entirely a bad thing that NASCAR analysts often still have a hand in the sport. Jeff Hammond, for example, is part-owner of a Craftsman Truck Series team, Red Horse Racing, that fields Toyotas. So it's no big surprise when he shows up for an edition of Trackside with an oxford or polo that pays homage to his manufacturer.
Not long ago, I spoke with a top-flight Sprint Cup driver who said that many of today's analysts don't really know what they're talking about. He said that the sport has changed so much in the last few years that those not fully entrenched haven't caught up with all the advances.
There isn't a right or wrong answer to this one, so to indict folks of playing favorites in their commentary thanks to a check they're receiving would be unfair. But as a learned colleague told me a couple of days ago, there are some situations where it's more crucial to turn up your "B.S. meter" than others. And if guys choose to ride the edge of journalism while still trying to partake of the corporate spoils, they can't be upset if people question their honesty.
* When equating an athlete to the greatest in other sports, often people forget to throw the NASCAR greats into the comparison. That made "Stone Cold" Steve Austin's comments on wwe.com following Ric Flair's enshrinement into the World Wrestling Entertainment Hall of Fame Saturday night--which preceded Sunday's WrestleMania--all the more cool. In acknowledging Flair's achievements through the years, Austin said he was pro wrestling's Michael Jordan, Babe Ruth, and...Dale Earnhardt. Nice!