Sports Centered

I am informed by The American Journalism Review that a survey of almost three hundred broadcast students at three major journalism schools reveals that better than half the males want to go into sports. In particular, among the young American men who aspire to actually be on the air, more than twice as many would rather cover games instead of news.

I suppose I should be delighted at this revelation. After all, as someone who's been a sports journalist for most of my working life, these figures would seem to be affirming of my vocation. But still, proud though I may be of my profession, it never occurred to me that it was meant to be a working majority. That more than half of young men in TV would want to cover sports has the same ring to it as if we learned that more than half the males in medical school wanted to concentrate on cosmetic surgery.

The contrary news, by the way, is that only eight percent of the aspiring female broadcasters want to go into sports — which also means, by process of elimination, that soon most all the anchors and reporters on television will be women.

More important, this is just another example of the sportification of our society. It indicates how so many more young people — young males — are determined to go into sports, even if they can't play sports. For instance, one of the most popular new majors on campus is sports management, wherein you study to be a general manager. Oh my, the nerds are invading sports, too.

But then, it's difficult not to also conclude that as women infiltrate into positions of authority in almost all professions, at least a certain number of frightened and insecure men will turn to sports business as the last mostly-male power refuge.

Another evidence of sportification is that more and more old, terribly rich men seek to cap off their careers by buying sports teams. It's the best way to let people know you're really rich, to buy a team. And for the merely very rich, luxury boxes have become the yachts of the fin de siècle.

Yet still, it never fails to amaze moral custodians that most taxpayers are delighted to pay for stadiums or arenas and donate all sorts of additional financial goodies to the fabulously wealthy men who own the teams. Rationally, of course, it makes no sense that the poorer people in our society will pay for stadiums that benefit the richest people, and newspaper editorialists are always running to professors to absolutely prove how foolish the people are.

But, of course, the voters know very well that they are giving foolishly unto the wealthy owners. They continue to vote that way, though, because that's how the system works — if you want sports in your city. It's very much a medieval arrangement. Back then the serfs contributed crops to the lord of the castle, because he provided protection. Today, the taxpayers contribute to the sports owner, because he provides amusement. It's only a question of what's important in life.

Likewise, why would any American boy want to grow up, to stand in some dangerous war zone, uncomfortable and at risk, shouting news into a microphone over gunfire, when he could be seated comfortably behind home plate at Yankee Stadium or above the 18th green at the U.S. Open, safe and peaceful, telling the guys all about what really concerns them — the fun and games.

What Is a City Worth?

The question that is sooner or later asked in every city in the republic is: What does a new stadium cost?

That, of course, is easy to answer. Everybody will give you a construction estimate. Unfortunately, the question nobody does know the answer to is: What is a new stadium worth?

Like dueling psychologists at a murder trial, you can find totally opposite responses. For example, in Cincinnati a couple of weeks ago, voters passed a sales-tax resolution to pay for new twin baseball and football stadiums, after they were assured that keeping the Reds and Bengals would bring in a quarter of a billion dollars more to the metropolitan economy every year.

But, just as quickly, you can come up with experts who maintain that this is total hogwash, that stadiums and the teams in them supply only a few jobs to a handful of millionaire ballplayers, and that what money is spent at the game is simply being diverted from the mall or the movie theater. By this judgment, new stadiums are indefensible Taj Mahals, their justification all the more suspect since they are more luxurious all the time, with emphasis placed on paying for ornate, cloistered boxes for the wealthy.

Moreover, multipurpose stadiums are now considered déclassé. Like the Romans, with the Coliseum for the lions and the Christians and the Circus Maximus for chariot races, baseball and football both now demand their own custom amphitheaters. Cities without these gorgeous edifices can no longer compete — either to attract new teams or merely to hold onto their old ones. Arenas for basketball and hockey grow larger by the...