by Dan Fagella and Rusty Prater

Culture Stew columnists

The wait is over. We bring to you, all of our loyal reader, Punt-Counterpunt...III! Today our two heroes will delve into some very controversial topics that have been debated and analyzed among experts throughout the history of pop culture. For example, which of the major sports has the best All-Star game? How about the most overrated band/singer of the past 50 years? And which activity is more suited to be called a sport -- curling or NASCAR??? The world demands answers, and Rusty and Dan are prepared to give you their humble (or perhaps not that humble at all) opinions ... now!

Rusty: Dan its great to be back, and I know you've been chomping at the bit ever since I pulled that miracle victory in PCP2. So here's your chance for vindication, but know this, I'm cagier than a lap swimming polar bear (inside Toledo Zoo joke sorry). Well, with the cavalcade of mediocre celebrities and ball hogging that was the NBA finals now over, I've come to wonder, what is the best all star event of the major sporting events? I myself have given this some half-witted, drunken thoughts on the subject. These ramblings have led me to believe that it's the darkhorse NASCAR that has the best all star sporting event. What All-Star game brings out the pit crew to fireworks and gives them several minutes to pump up the crowd, do some country-fried antics, and then introduce their personal heroes, the drivers. The race itself is a 600 mile ordeal. For years now drivers have left the second most prestigious race (that's right punks I said it, Indy's behind Daytona), to hop in their jets right after the race and fly to Charlotte. What baseball player would hop in a plane after playing in an event to fly to the all-star game. None that's right. Those money hungry mosters would sit back and watch it in the nearest Radisson they could find.

Dan: Wow Rusty, you've really outdone yourself this time. First you mention a phantom victory from last time, and then you voluntarily say NASCAR is the best all star game? Raise your hands if you knew they had one. Editors note: Dan's arms are placed squarely at his side. I think you put it best when you used the word ordeal to describe it. Also, nobody cares if you think Indy is second to Daytona, in fact I'm sure it'd split 50/50. But who cares. The real issue here is that when you're not a team oriented sport like baseball is, you can't have a real All-Star game. This is like if the Mets and Braves decided to play a 12 inning game that didn't count in the middle of the season. Besides, anything that leads to 80,000 Southerners going wild and consists of the phrase "country-fried antics," well, you know what I'm getting at. As far as the best, I'd have to give the best "other" activities to basketball. The slam dunk contest is a little old but not bad, the three-point contest can still be entertaining, but the best is watching Nelly schooling WNBA players, that just can't be beat. The best game itself however has to be baseball. It's the only game where teams don't slack on defense. Pitchers only pitch a couple innings so they don't have to hold back on their pitches. The game is the most real game of all the all-star games. Plus players can't show off and play me-first baseball if they wanted to.

Rusty: Whoa, Whoa, there Dan, we said one event. You've gone and pooled together two at least for your flimsy argument. The Slam Dunk contest is a joke when you have umpteen tries like Nate Robinson to get the dunk. The home run derby is a creatine induced tee-ball game spiced up only by the constant chatter of Chris Berman. As far as most real, how is an actual race not the most real? NASCAR drivers aren't switching out of their cars 30 laps in to let someone else whose fresher come in. It's all them. It's a competition of wills and endurance. They play for something just like the MLB All Star game. There are not points handed out, but the biggest cash prize of the year is awarded to the winner. Just because baseball is not a person oriented game like basketball can be, (shout out to the Pistons for bucking the system) doesn't mean its the best all star game because of the way its played.

Dan: I just felt I had to mention the weekend activities, I wasn't using them for my argument. And NASCAR isn't being bashed for not being real, it's being bashed because it's not a team game, hence you can't pick stars from each team to play in a game. It's just a logically flawed event. You don't see a tennis all star game do you? Why not? Because it would be ridiculous. And I can't stress this enough: 80,000 hicks going crazy and the term "country-fried antics" can only apply to NASCAR, so it immediately falls behind all the other major sports. In an effort to split up our NASCAR discussions (we've had far too many already, meaning more than zero), let's talk about a part of culture we haven't gotten to yet. Who would you say is the most overrated band/group/singer/artist/whatever since modern music began, say the 1950s-1960s, barring the post late '90s+ boy band era?

Rusty: Ha, Ha, for someone who believes in social equality as much as you, that was pretty mean spirited to an entire region of the country you know nothing about. But, anywho, back to the topic at hand. I will go out on a limb here and take on Ace of Base. Yah, we all love that crazy techno euro-pop beat. But do we love it enough for it to be used on every one of their songs. I have been known to criticize rap artists for their lack of music originality, but these Swedish cupcakes take the cake (sorry, it's getting close to lunchtime). The early '90s were a time we were looking for a new music identity. Metal had been dead for several years, Nirvana was still a few years off, and we were stuck with the likes of Delight, Milli Vanilli, and most notably Ace of Base. While this was all part of our childhood, I myself must have heard "All That She Wants", "I Saw the Sign," and "Don't Turn Around" at every elementary school skating party I went to. We grew up while sadly the music didn't. Luckily for us, Cobain, Veder, and Weiland came along and salvaged the situation. But for many of us, crappy beats formed what we took to be good music.

Dan: The answer is clear, and it's not Ace of Base for several reasons. First of all, who besides your diabetic brother thinks highly of Ace of Base? They're rated right where they should be: some flash in the pan Swedish band. Plus your logic is completely flawed since the grunge scene was big locally in the mid to late '80s and big nationally in the early '90s. The band is, without question, The Rolling Stones. Here's the story of the Stones' career: they rode the Beatles' coat tails to the states, had like five really big songs, then the Beatles broke up at around 1970, and the Stones began their 36 year, and counting, run at mediocrity. They're like an above average athlete who compiles numbers over a 20-year career and all of a sudden he looks like an all time great (see Palmiero), assuming you think they're even above average, which personally I don't. The Beatles on the other hand had something like 12 albums in 8-10 years and every one was quality. The Rolling Stones have just hung around so long they've become complete trash. Don't believe me? Well watch a replay of the Super Bowl halftime show this year. It was universally known to be awful. In summation, as Neil Young said, "It's better to burn out than to fade away." The Rolling Stones have been fading away for over 30 years.

Rusty: Were not comparing the Beatles to The Stones here Dan. I will give you that The Beatles are up there with Elvis and Chuck Berry in the most influential rock acts of all time. But the Stones are something different. The Beatles are the original boy band, and in a way there's something to be said for this. They had the screaming teeny-boppers. No self respecting music fan every called Keith Richards a pretty boy, you could grate cheese on the man's face. What they had was the attitude that the Beatles were missing. Sadly it's been a staple of music for the last 50 years that whatever hits it big gets copied into oblivion (see Brittany, Christina, Mandy...). Mick took a couple of ugly looking bastards and turned out some of the greatest rock for decades. How many rock bands can say this? The new album is getting good reviews. Granted the Super Bowl performance was not the best, but to still be rocking the fans for 40 years is an accomplishment. I'd go see them if I got the chance. As a veteran of many concerts I am willing to wager they still sounds better than Van Halen and Motley Crue did when I worked those concerts last year.

Dan: I was using the Beatles as a frame of reference. Granted, they were the first boy band, but their pop stuff was only a small portion. Ever listen to Sgt. Pepper and the White Album? Anyway, sure, the Rolling Stones are ugly, not pretty boys, and have been going for 40 years. Where you're wrong is when you call their songs "some of the greatest rock." You can put them up against so many bands, Led Zeppelin, The Who, The Velvet Underground, just to name a couple, and the Stones don't hold a candle to them. But this debate can rage on forever. Let's just let it stand that The Rolling Stones are trash and move on. Watching the Olympics and seeing curling en masse has gotten me to thinking: this is extremely entertaining and, dare I say it, more of a sport than NASCAR. I'm sure you'll disagree, but lay out your argument so I can stomp you.

Rusty: I'll tell you what's trash, that you think curling's a sport. Have you seen these guys? I've seen more physically fit people at a lifestyles gym. Granted the old school NASCAR guys are not all athletes, but the young crowd is, and they are the ones who are winning. I'm sure I'll have to defend the usual "left turn left turn" jokes here, but have you ever seen the driver get out after a race. He can hardly speak he's so exhausted, on average they lose over five pounds in sweat. I don't see John Lunch Pail Curler working that hard. Tell me how brushing ice while walking is any more strenuous than turning a car. Let alone the thrower who just yells. Whoa, don't pull a vocal cord there. Man, that would be devastating. You tell me a major sporting event and I'll show you injuries happening. The worst one of these tubs of goo are going to do is fall down. NASCAR drivers get killed doing their sport. The fact this is an Olympic event is insanity. Coming up next "flower growing" on NBC Olympic coverage.

Dan: You seem to equate sweat and injury with being a sport. You know what else is a sport then? Riding your bike on the expressway in 100 degree heat. Curling is one of those sports that looks boring and uncomplicated to the untrained eye. However, it's involves teamwork, strategy, skill, and finesse. NASCAR is a race, that's it. Do you call the 100 meter dash a sport? OK, fine, they're just running. Well how about horse racing? I'm sure NASCAR is a grueling activity, but it's not a sport. Sure, it's dangerous, but it's not a sport. A sport requires two teams in direct competition with one another where the other team's latest move directly affects your strategy. Just because you don't understand all aspects of curling and how to play the game, doesn't mean it's not a sport. I understand how a car race works: you try and go around the track 500 times faster than everybody else. Besides Rusty, curling is sweeping the world while brushing with history!

Rusty: Corny taglines aside, this is going to be easier than Mike Long's mom. Horse racing not a sport? It's in the title for god's sake: "The Sport of Kings." Last time I checked your definition of a sport is exactly what NASCAR is. The team is the driver, pit crew, and crew chief. Every decision they make affects their chance of winning. They are in direct competition with one another. Let's say in the final laps of the race the Crew chief decides to put two fresh tires on instead of four. This gets his driver to the front of the line. While a better car and driver opted for four tires for improved handling. It comes down to timing and handling and the crew chief who guessed right is the winner. NASCAR is all those things you mentioned combined with the physical skill. If an entire retirement home can play a game in between shots of Metamucil, it's not a sport. It's an activity. While you're at it why don't we call canasta and bridge sports since they require teamwork, strategy, skill, and finesse? Maybe if we go real nuts we could get some grandma's to form a sewing circle, I saw that on TV yesterday, so that must mean its a sport.

Dan: Let's not fool ourselves into calling the driver, pit crew, and crew chief a team. And let's not fool ourselves even more by saying that NASCAR are teams that are in direct competition. They are about 30 individuals in competition. Not two teams going against each other. Of course what they do affects their chances of winning, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that what you do doesn't affect what the other people do in any real way. For example, if you have a pitcher who throws a nasty pitch, the other guy isn't going to hit it. Or if the other team throws up a blocker you can't put your stone where you want. In NASCAR, if you go faster than the other guy, it doesn't mean he's going any slower than he normally would. You can use all of your technical jargon all you want to make it sound like I don't know what I'm talking about, but the fact remains, it's just something where you do it faster than everybody else. And I don't care what the title of horse racing is, no race is a sport. Finally, your comparisons of canasta, bridge, and sewing are just awful and will not be dignified with a response. Just face it, NASCAR is not a sport, just like no racing is a sport, and that curling is a team oriented sport that uses the mind as well as the body. And if this were a face-to-face argument I'd have just walked away satisfied.

Rusty: Well Dan I'm sorry, but your own lack of knowledge is showing through here. The fastest car is not often the one that wins the race. So I will use my technical jargon because it makes me correct. If I have the fastest car and put the pedal to the floor I'm going to hit the wall before I finish the first lap. It's the balance of the different parts of the car. The track bar, the wedge, the pressure, the list goes on and on. What I do in and too my car affects everyone out there. Like you unsuccessfully managed to dodge in my first point, if I make decisions in the pits I get out farther ahead or back of where I started. If you ever watch a race instead of hating something because you don't like it you would find out. It usually comes down to two or three guys at the end of a race blocking and pushing for the checkered flag. So go ahead and walk away thinking yourself superior, but realize those that stayed behind are laughing at your foolishness and false egotism.

Well kids this wraps up Punt-Counterpunt three. I'm sure Dan will try and convince you all of his knowledge with old Carney quotes and other what-not-igins. But for those of you who think rationally and not resentment for something you never gave a chance, feel free to write Dan or I with your views. Keep your stick on the ice.

Dan: Always a pleasure Rusty, even though your last retort in no way countered my point. But that's OK. As Rusty said, comment down below or e-mail me at dan@culturestew.com or Rusty as rusty@culturestew.com. Hopefully Dave's coattails are long enough for us to latch onto and get some of you people to read this.

Article courtesy of Culture Stew (www.culturestew.com).