OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Smurfy · Post by **Smurfy** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:17 am

I was never happy with Tony George over the IndyCar/CART split, but considering he helped get F1 back to the US for while and played a role in the development of the SAFER barrier I've gotta hand it to him - It was amazing how Martin Truex walked away from that crash at Martinsville today.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 9:46 am

Smurfy wrote:I was never happy with Tony George over the IndyCar/CART split, but considering he helped get F1 back to the US for while and played a role in the development of the SAFER barrier I've gotta hand it to him - It was amazing how Martin Truex walked away from that crash at Martinsville today.

Don't let the NASCAR PR machine snow you: Tony George WAS the development behind the SAFER Barrier. He funded it and drove the development of it from the start in 1999 to the finish in 2002, with the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, after the limitations of the PEDS Barrier installed in 1998 at IMS became evident. NASCAR jumped into the project only after Earnhardt was killed in 2001, as much for PR as for development.

The SAFER Barrier is Tony's legacy to racing, one of the greatest inventions in the history of the sport.

Sorry to be so rankled, but it burns my ass when I hear NASCAR TV commentators and even NASCAR itself talk about the instrumental role NASCAR had in the development of the SAFER Barrier. It's pure bullshit.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 10:42 am

As much as I now dislike NASCAR I can't blame NASCAR for revising history. Thanks to the feud in OWR back in the 90's it allowed NASCAR to get bigger and badder. I'd do the same if I were running NASCAR, I'd spin it too. AOWR is just a blip on the radar today.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:37 am

Rodster wrote:As much as I now dislike NASCAR I can't blame NASCAR for revising history. Thanks to the feud in OWR back in the 90's it allowed NASCAR to get bigger and badder. I'd do the same if I were running NASCAR, I'd spin it too. AOWR is just a blip on the radar today.

True. But NASCAR already was rising fast when the split occurred in 1996. And no incident propelled NASCAR into the stratosphere more than Earnhardt's death. The outpouring of national grief over his death awoke the news media to the national appeal of the sport, and the coverage -- combined with the new TV package that provided all races on network -- drove millions of people to the NASCAR bandwagon.

Those bandwagon riders have since found another fad to follow, which has caused NASCAR's dip in ratings and attendance. NASCAR and tracks inhaled the hubris during the boom years of 2001-08, never once thinking it was a fad and preparing for a cooling or a bubble burst. They're both paying for it now.

The media can point to the COT and endless rules changes as reasons for the decline, but those are minuscule compared to the bandwagon shedding passengers through natural defection. NASCAR is just settling to its customary size. It never was going to rival the NFL as executives in Daytona Beach whispered during the boom, and it never will.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:55 am

That's where we disagree Paul. For me, Nascar was rising up the ranks during the 90's but it wasn't until Cart and the IRL went at it, most of the attention was on CART and the I500. NASCAR became more popular and shot thru the roof with the NEXTEL sponsorship IIRC in 2003. Which is another reason to hate NASCAR. NEXTEL was awesome and after everybody and anybody signed up to NEXTEL their service went into the crapper.

I don't equate Earnhardt's death to the rise of NASCAR. Actually for me that's when I began to lose some interest as he's the reason I began to watch back in the late 80's. I've always felt the cat fight in AOWR created a vacuum and as NASCAR was already rising they pounced on the opportunity.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:07 pm

Oops.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 12:21 pm

Rodster wrote:That's where we disagree Paul. For me, Nascar was rising up the ranks during the 90's but it wasn't until Cart and the IRL went at it, most of the attention was on CART and the I500. NASCAR became more popular and shot thru the roof with the NEXTEL sponsorship IIRC in 2003. Which is another reason to hate NASCAR. NEXTEL was awesome and after everybody and anybody signed up to NEXTEL their service went into the crapper.

That's bunk. R.J. Reynolds did more to promote NASCAR than NEXTEL or Sprint. The most significant part of the NEXTEL deal was the money paid to NASCAR, which helped the sport promote itself more extravagantly than ever.

Rodster wrote:I don't equate Earnhardt's death to the rise of NASCAR. Actually for me that's when I began to lose some interest as he's the reason I began to watch back in the late 80's. I've always felt the cat fight in AOWR created a vacuum and as NASCAR was already rising they pounced on the opportunity.

You're in the vast minority. The open-wheel split helped build a big bandwagon and got it rolling. Earnhardt's death put a turbocharger on it.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 1:21 pm

pk500 wrote:That's bunk. R.J. Reynolds did more to promote NASCAR than NEXTEL or Sprint. The most significant part of the NEXTEL deal was the money paid to NASCAR, which helped the sport promote itself more extravagantly than ever.

Ummm, NASCAR had to unload R.J. Reynolds and the Winston Cup was associated with a southern motorsport. When NASCAR picked up the NEXTEL contract they at that point made the statement we're going mainstream. I have no doubt that picking up NEXTEL before it was Sprint/NEXTEL caught the interest on the TV Networks and as such created the euphoria of the next up and coming sport.

I have no doubt the COT led to the downward trend of NASCAR, why? First of all it alienated their loyal fanbase. The cars look like sh*t and they all look exactly the same. I remember back in the 80's and 90's and how cool the new Thunderbird, Pontiac's and the Monte Carlo's looked and they all looked different. It created fan rivalry and at one point they even used mfg engines. Now it's the same car with decals that make them look different.

I always felt the COT idea was a disaster waiting to happen and it happened. And just like the Chase it was created for TV viewership just like any playoffs in any sport would have.

IMO, all of the above came about not by the higher ups at NASCAR asking 'what can we do to grow the sport and a vision' but rather the higher ups at the networks telling NASCAR we paid you this much, therefore we need these types of ratings to justify the contract so think of something that will excite TV viewership. NASCAR: "Hey we got an idea, first we'll create a shitty playoff system called the Chase and, and if that doesn't work we'll create a Car of Tomorrow!" NBC, what's a COT? NASCAR: oh all the cars will look the same and we'll put wings on the back and it'll make for closer racing. NBC: go on. So you think this will work? NASCAR: Ah yeah !

That's about the time I had it with NASCAR, around 2004-2005. When the COT was added it put the final nail in the coffin. Sure NASCAR gained a lot of bandwagon fans but lost a lot of fans who grew up watching the sport. I also think NASCAR got a little too big headed when they thought they would catch and surpass the NFL.

pk500 wrote:You're in the vast minority. The open-wheel split helped build a big bandwagon and got it rolling. Earnhardt's death put a turbocharger on it.

Agreed except with the Earnhardt part so I guess i'm in the minority.

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 1:27 pm

Earnhardt's death, Harvick's win at Atlanta and Jr winning the July race at Daytona were fairly major news here. There's no way the handling of Dale's crash did anything other than launch NASCAR into the stratosphere for the vast majority.

pk500 wrote:

Oops.

Indeed. I saw that clip last night - between trying to keep up with BTCC, their support races and the Moto GP, I forgot the LMS race was on - and 'oops', or a somewhat less sanitised method of expressing the same thing, came immediately to mind. I wonder how many of the team owners said 'oops' as their Porsches turned to scrap before their eyes.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 1:36 pm

GB_Simo wrote:Earnhardt's death, Harvick's win at Atlanta and Jr winning the July race at Daytona were fairly major news here

Yeah that's when I remembered the line from Arsenio Hall. "Things that make you go hmmm."

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 1:52 pm

Rodster wrote:Ummm, NASCAR had to unload R.J. Reynolds and the Winston Cup was associated with a southern motorsport. When NASCAR picked up the NEXTEL contract they at that point made the statement we're going mainstream. I have no doubt that picking up NEXTEL before it was Sprint/NEXTEL caught the interest on the TV Networks and as such created the euphoria of the next up and coming sport.

NASCAR racing was past its Southern roots before NEXTEL came onboard in 2004. The boom already was underway -- fueled by the network TV deal that debuted in 2001 and the publicity surrounding Earnhardt's death in 2001 -- for more than two seasons before NEXTEL became the series sponsor. That's why NASCAR was able to command $700 million over 10 years for that sponsorship. NASCAR never could have lured a global company for $70 million per year over 10 years if it was still a "Southern sport."

The advantages NEXTEL had over RJR were the ability to advertising on TV and print, and good positioning for the growth of wireless and mobile technology. Otherwise, RJR put NASCAR into the consciousness of more Americans than NEXTEL ever did or could. Rod, I worked around or with RJR's Sports Marketing Enterprises from 1989-2003, and those guys were the KINGS of grassroots sports marketing. SME wrote the book on many sports marketing procedures adopted by every other sport. SME President T. Wayne Robertson -- taken from us far too soon at age 47 in a boating accident -- was a sports marketing GENIUS.

Rodster wrote:I have no doubt the COT led to the downward trend of NASCAR, why? First of all it alienated their loyal fanbase. The cars look like sh*t and they all look exactly the same. I remember back in the 80's and 90's and how cool the new Thunderbird, Pontiac's and the Monte Carlo's looked and they all looked different. It created fan rivalry and at one point they even used mfg engines. Now it's the same car with decals that make them look different.

True on the cars. False on the loyal fanbase. That fanbase largely is still there. The bandwagon riders who left the sport created the bulk of the decline in ratings and attendance. The "loyal fans" who left due to the COT and Chase are just a hell of a lot louder in their disapproval of the sport than the far greater numbers of bandwagon riders who simply drifted away, looking for the next big fad wave to surf. So their volume creates a false impression of being an army of defectors.

Fact: Cup cars had common templates for two seasons before the COT. They all looked the same then, too.

Rodster wrote:I always felt the COT idea was a disaster waiting to happen and it happened. And just like the Chase it was created for TV viewership just like any playoffs in any sport would have.

IMO, all of the above came about not by the higher ups at NASCAR asking 'what can we do to grow the sport and a vision' but rather the higher ups at the networks telling NASCAR we paid you this much, therefore we need these types of ratings to justify the contract so think of something that will excite TV viewership. NASCAR: "Hey we got an idea, first we'll create a shitty playoff system called the Chase and, and if that doesn't work we'll create a Car of Tomorrow!" NBC, what's a COT? NASCAR: oh all the cars will look the same and we'll put wings on the back and it'll make for closer racing. NBC: go on. So you think this will work? NASCAR: Ah yeah !

What the hell is NASCAR supposed to do, tell the TV networks to go f*ck themselves? You don't understand the business of sport if that's your answer.

Ratings attract sponsors in EVERY sport, but none more than auto racing. The weekly Nielsen ratings report and Joyce Julius report of sponsor exposure value on TV sit atop the stack on the desk of every marketing executive in a company involved in racing sponsorship.

TV drives decisions in every sport, especially NASCAR. FOX, ABC/ESPN, TNT and SPEED are paying NASCAR $4.48 billion for TV rights from 2005-13. So if TV says "jump," NASCAR says, "How high?"

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 2:02 pm

No, I understand that NASCAR shouldn't tell the networks to go f-themselves but it shows they no longer were or are basing their decisions on their fanbase i.e. those who started watching in the 60's and beyond. Most if not all of their decisions were for the most part out of their control with the siging of mega-contracts. This created a new fanbase and those like myself who had followed it for some time said, whoa, wait, WTF is that you're doing?

NASCAR didn't even look back because they had already moved away from their southern base and expanded to places like out west and the mid-west.

Everything I have stated are the reason I stopped watching NASCAR and i'm sure others who have followed it for sometime may feel the same way.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 2:11 pm

Rodster wrote:No, I understand that NASCAR shouldn't tell the networks to go f-themselves but it shows they no longer were or are basing their decisions on their fanbase i.e. those who started watching in the 60's and beyond. Most if not all of their decisions were for the most part out of their control with the siging of mega-contracts. This created a new fanbase and those like myself who had followed it for some time said, whoa, wait, WTF is that you're doing?

It's the same in every sport. TV timeouts, extended regular seasons, adding teams to the playoffs, three-point lines, splitting the Olympics into two-year cycles -- you name it. TV and sponsorship drive the bus on many of those decisions.

Rodster wrote:NASCAR didn't even look back because they had already moved away from their southern base and expanded to places like out west and the mid-west.

True. The success of the Brickyard 400 in 1994 did more to catapult NASCAR away from its Southern roots than the signing of NEXTEL as series sponsor. It was NASCAR's first race in the Midwest, and it showed the sport could flourish on the hallowed ground of open-wheel racing.

The success, both on track and commercially, of decidedly non-Southerner Jeff Gordon in the 90s also played a huge role.

Rodster wrote:Everything I have stated are the reason I stopped watching NASCAR and i'm sure others who have followed it for sometime may feel the same way.

I respect your reasons, and you're absolutely right that you're not alone. But you and your brethren are a member of that vocal, pissed minority. NASCAR doesn't care about you because your numbers aren't that large. They want the bandwagon people back, since their numbers are much bigger. So that's why you'll see continued tinkering.

Lost in the debate about new fans vs. old fans, COT, the Chase and more is the quality of the racing. It's been excellent since about halfway through last season. This year's racing has been hard and entertaining as hell.

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 2:16 pm

Enjoying the back-and-forth between Rod and PK.

One thing that I think is hurting the ratings is that TV coverage continues to devolve into a gross mess of over-hyped, breathless declarations, too-glossy production, clueless directing, and DW.

Gurantsu · Post by **Gurantsu** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 2:21 pm

Boogity boogity boogity!!!!!

As usual this year I try to catch a NASCAR race to see if it will pull me back. After the whateverthehellitwas in Daytona I can safely say I'll try again next year.

Thank goodness baseball is back! (Along with Indycar, Australian V8 and sports car racing of course!)

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 2:23 pm

A pre-race show of 45 minutes to an hour before EVERY race is overkill, indeed. The NCAA Final tonight will have a shorter pre-game show than a marathon Cup race at Dover or Pocono. That's wrong.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 2:41 pm

pk500 wrote:NASCAR doesn't care about you because your numbers aren't that large. They want the bandwagon people back, since their numbers are much bigger. So that's why you'll see continued tinkering.

And THAT right there is why NASCAR will now continue to flounder. And the reason I decided to bail when I realised NASCAR didn't give a crap about me or their Southern fans. It was about the huge TV contracts.

What NASCAR needs now are Conferences for the Chase, dammit

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 2:45 pm

Dave wrote:One thing that I think is hurting the ratings is that TV coverage continues to devolve into a gross mess of over-hyped, breathless declarations, too-glossy production, clueless directing, and DW.

It's what I call selling your visionary soul for the big payout. NASCAR has evolved into a sterilized, homogenized racing series with storylines that would make Vince McMahon smile. The WWE on four wheels.

miget33 · Post by **miget33** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 3:12 pm

Maybe this has been answered already, but PK do you know any reason why Chicagoland was dropped from the Indy schedule?

GB_Simo · Post by **GB_Simo** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 3:36 pm

I'm not PK - no, really - and I can't get into any depth for you, but I can offer a salient fact...:

miget33 wrote:Maybe this has been answered already, but PK do you know any reason why Chicagoland was dropped from the Indy schedule?

Chicagoland, Kansas, Homestead and Watkins Glen are all missing from the 2011 IndyCar Series. Chicagoland, Kansas, Homestead and Watkins Glen are all International Speedway Corporation tracks. ISC are controlled by the France family, who run NASCAR, which isn't the IndyCar Series.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 3:52 pm

miget33 wrote:Maybe this has been answered already, but PK do you know any reason why Chicagoland was dropped from the Indy schedule?

Adam nailed it, mig.

ISC and INDYCAR divorced after 2010 because of a difference of opinion on the sanctioning fee for INDYCAR races at ISC tracks in 2011 and because INDYCAR didn't think ISC was promoting its INDYCAR shows aggressively enough.

toonarmy · Post by **toonarmy** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 4:14 pm

There's a number of reasons why I do not take NASCAR as serious as I once did. Rodster hit on a few of them. The sanitizing of the sport is probably the biggest reason for me. All the drivers seem to have the same robotic personalities for the most part, saying what's PC and trying to not say anything that would upset the sponsors. I understand that's what they feel is good for business, and I can appreciate that fact, but it still leaves me with a saccharin taste in my mouth. Another thing that I know has driven people away to a certain extent in recent years is the dominance of Hendrick. People get tired of seeing the same guy win the Cup every year. If Johnson were a villain and easy to hate then people may watch just to cheer against him, however he is definitely no Jeff Gordon in getting people to watch a race to see him lose. There are a lot of good drivers in NASCAR, but there are no big time feuds like there used to be. These guys hang out with each other, play cards together, drink together, etc. Sure there are some little tiffs here and there, but there are no long-term feuds that capture the public's attention. One more reason I think NASCAR has lost some of its viewership is that the sport is so much safer than it used to be. Let's be honest here: a certain segment of the population watches races to see the wrecks and the possibility of someone getting badly hurt or dying. As macabre as that may sound it is the truth.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 4:29 pm

Toon reminded me of something else. The cars are the SAME the drivers act the SAME way and the freakin tracks all look the SAME with the exception of Martinsville, Bristol and 2 road courses. There's way too much SAME in NASCAR.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 6:23 pm

You guys are both correct about the sanitizing of the sport, on every level. It is too clean, but that's what attracts Fortune 500 companies as sponsors.

I don't think it would hurt NASCAR to add two more road course races to its 36-race schedule, including one in the Chase. The Infineon and Glen races are among the best all year.

Gordon only was a villain because he was the anti-Earnhardt and ended The Intimidator's reign as Winston Cup champion. Gordon was the first prototypical robotic driver in Cup, with his squeaky-clean, clean-shaven, vanilla personality and roots from outside the South. He was the first guy to really upset the Good Old Boys' order in NASCAR, and the mainly Southern fan base at the time hated him for that.

It says a lot about the vanilla nature of driver personalities that Gordon is considered somewhat of an outspoken elder statesman in the garage today. Jeff has loosened up quite a bit and is more secure in speaking his mind, but he's not Dale Sr., no Tim Richmond, no Jaws at his most boisterous peak, no Cale or no Fireball.

Even Kyle Busch is toning it down this year and is almost likable. Almost. It's disappointing. Now Steroid Carl is becoming the top villain in NASCAR, and he's a clean-cut Missouri boy. Again, telling about the state of today's villains.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 6:23 pm

Rodster wrote:Toon reminded me of something else. The cars are the SAME the drivers act the SAME way and the freakin tracks all look the SAME with the exception of Martinsville, Bristol and 2 road courses. There's way too much SAME in NASCAR.

Wait -- there's another track that looks like Indianapolis? It's the only oval in the world with four actual turns, dude!

Digital Sportspage

OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)

Re: OT: Racing 2011 (Spoiler Alert)