[WVGrandma4Kasey]

I don't know if its just me or is this one of the most boring weeks in the chase. There ain't dit to talk about or dit I want to talk about. Sooo here's Marty.

Last Lap: Thirty-five Alive
By Marty Smith, NASCAR.COM
September 26, 2006
09:42 AM EDT (13:42 GMT)

Boiled down to the nitty gritty, NASCAR's top-35 rule is akin to a frequent flyer program, like Marriott points or Green points -- a method of rewarding faithful customers. Fly often, we'll upgrade your status. Stay often, shop often, reap rewards in return for your loyalty.
Race every weekend, there's a very good chance you'll be in the show.
See, there's no franchising in NASCAR, so team owners face considerable financial risk. If the sponsorship well runs dry, what then? Two decades in the sport and you're left with little to show for it but 25 used racecars that don't draw 40 cents on the dollar and 150,000 square feet full of tools. And, in turn, a severely dented wallet.
Prime example: Robert Yates Racing -- a premiere team for 15 years that's contemplating running but one car in 2007. Why? No sponsorship.
In the attempt to help combat such instances, NASCAR instituted the top 35 rule to offer investment security to dedicated team owners. Though in Yates' case it hasn't yet worked, the ability for team owners to guarantee potential sponsors they'll make the race is invaluable.
Its importance can't be overstated. It can completely alter strategic planning.
"We faced the top-35 rule with the No. 19 team this year, and that's something I never expected," team owner Ray Evernham said. "When that happens and you're looking at the possibility of not making races, you have to change your strategy or change the driver.
"We knew that the team was solid and the cars they were building were good, so we opted to change the driver. That's made a huge difference and it has put this team safely up to 31st in the owners' points. That way, they can focus on running up front and winning races rather than just making races."
When Evernham let Jeremy Mayfield go, many fans were infuriated, and many more perplexed by analysis that the No. 19 team had fallen out of the top 35, when right there in black and white (and red and blue and green) it showed him in 34th?
That was driver point standings, of course, which raised yet another question:
Why would NASCAR determine its championship team by driver points, yet guarantee starting positions based on owner points?
"Because we feel the owners are the ones that support the series," said NASCAR vice president of competition Robin Pemberton. "A driver can get hurt or replaced, and then he's left out of a race or two. The owners field the teams, so top 35 was created for them."
Makes sense to me. But the boss, Duane Cross, made a hilarious, yet poignant, observation: 'If I'm a driver, and I'm entering Turn 3 at Atlanta at 200 mph, I'm thinking, 'Let's see Chip Ganassi qualify this S.O.B.'"
Classic.
Should drivers' or owners' points decide the top 35 for a guaranteed starting spot in points races?
Ninety-five percent of you said "neither," said the fastest 43 cars belong in the field, period. "Go fast or go home!" or "If y'ain't got the horses, enjoy the couch!" That type of deal.
At the core, that rationale make some sense, I suppose, but the prospect of sending a marquee team home on account of a qualifying wreck is only slightly ludicrous. More on that later...
Now, let's delve a bit deeper into top 35. Let me pose to you another angle, by way of a comment from Hendrick Motorsports GM Marshal Carlson. It's heavy.
"Drivers benefit from the top-35 rule, but only so long as they are in the owner's car," Carlson said. "Owners gain to the extent that they can secure longer-term sponsorship, but successful owners are going to spend everything the team generates to win races.
"Team employees are the ones who truly benefit. It allows the vast majority of the people working in the sport to build a career rather than just have a job."
Hold on, it gets better ...
"Owners couldn't make long-term commitments to their people -- like annual salaries, incentive plans, health insurance, and 401(k) contributions -- without the stability this rule provides," Carlson continued.
"If you can sustain a top-35 ranking in the points, you can protect your people whose livelihood ultimately depends on the team making the races and being funded for the course of the year."
Told you it was heavy. Puts a unique perspective on it, no? Evernham echoed the importance of top 35 to sponsors.
"The rule is important to sponsors," Evernham said. "If sponsors know there's a chance that they may not even be in the race on Sunday, that can influence where they place their sponsorship dollars."
In turn, Evernham said, start-up teams could have a harder time finding financial backing.
"I think you're going to see sponsors -- particularly big sponsors -- go with the sure bets for being in the race rather than going with start-up teams or those outside the top 35," Evernham said.
"It's just too important to them to be on TV and in front of the fans for the race."
Roadengineer: This is an interesting question. I think the premise is flawed. The question asks, basically, who is bigger is the world of NASCAR, owners or drivers? The answer is neither.
I think we all agree that NASCAR has forgotten about everything but the almighty dollar. With that said, I think if you wait a few years, neither driver points or owner points will matter. I am waiting for the day when "sponsor points" are in thing.
Ridiculous. Made me chuckle, though.
Daleetter: There is no need for a guarantee to get in. I understand NASCAR's thinking in having the guarantee, because if you are first in the points and mess up in qualifying you're screwed.
But I still think there should be no guarantee. The 43 fastest cars get into the race -- period! I hate it when you see a guy like Morgan Shepherd not get into the race when he was faster than Jimmie Johnson or Dale Jr. It is wrong, if you are fast, you make the race.
No disrespect to Morgan, but that happened ... when?
DamonNewman: I believe that you have to have some cushion available to cars who have a wreck, a blown motor or something else happen during qualifying.
To just say that the fastest times during qualifying race on race day sounds good at first, but come on ... if you are 10th in points and a wreck during qualifying at Richmond costs you your entry into the Chase, is that really fair?
Some guy who would have qualified three seconds slower than you takes your spot, you sit at home, lose almost 200 points and your spot in the Chase? No way. I do, however, believe that 35 is an awfully big number.
They should decrease that to at least 20-25, put restrictions on the number of cars a single owner can "guarantee in" and maybe consider an average or total of the owner/driver points.
On second thought, maybe a computer formula like they use in college football for the BCS would be better (just kidding).
Fundamentally, 'go fast or go home' seems cut-and-dried, the basic premise of the whole shebang. But NASCAR isn't basic. It has more levels than the Sears Tower, and each impacts the next.
Martin71a: NASCAR is no longer purely a sport. It is also entertainment, and because of that some of the rules are going to be designed for the benefit of TV and the sponsors. If you want to see the fastest cars make the race go to your local dirt track on Friday night.
Think of it this way: This rule is really no different than the NFL making it tougher for defensive backs, or baseball lowering the pitching mound. Those sports realized that scoring was entertaining to the masses, and that only the purest enjoyed low-scoring games.
NASCAR also realizes that without the top draws the masses are not going to buy tickets or watch the race.
As much as the purist may disagree with the rule, realize that without the mass appeal then you don't have NASCAR on XM, or the SPEED Channel dominated by NASCAR coverage or even this forum.
If you enjoy the fact that you can get NASCAR 24/7 then realize there is a trade off. The trade-off is realizing that at times advertising dollars are going to alter the sport from its purest form.
Best response of the week. By a considerable margin. This, folks, is a realist. NASCAR is indeed entertainment. The Chase is all about entertainment, a method to help temper runaway points races and keep folks interested throughout the season's entirety.
Broadcast times are another example of the entertainment influence. The green flag gets later and later to accommodate network partners, making life more and more difficult for crew members. Hurry up and wait. Story of their lives on race day.
3KillerB's: Neither. Qualifying should be about who is fast, not about points. I could approve of one or two rarely-used provisionals per team, per year as protection against things like undetected oil on the track, sudden rain in Turn 4 and giant oranges.
I could live with one or two provisionals per team, per year for mechanical failures during qualifying. But definitely not more than two, because three mechanical failures in the first lap of qualifying isn't an accident, it's a performance failure. But no provisionals for simply not being fast enough.
This is the happiest medium I could find this week. Fans want speed, but there must be insurance in case of a mishap. The reason, below:
pmars: OK, I've read the first 10-15 responses and realized your all a bunch of idiots. Of course there should be guaranteed spots for the drivers. Why would anyone spend over $100 for a ticket and $100-$200 a night for motel rooms if their favorite driver doesn't make the race?
You would all change your mind if Dale Jr. has a 50-point lead going into Homestead and doesn't make the race, and loses the championship to Jeff Gordon or Jimmie Johnson.
Come on people, think about it. NASCAR needs it top stars in every race, or why else would we watch it?
Now, I could certainly me mistaken, but I'd bet you just nodded your head regardless how staunchly you back the 'go fast or go home' theory. Boil it down, most folks watch races to support a specific driver.
Imagine Blackmon's scenario, though. What if Earnhardt was in the title hunt entering the final weekend and piled it up during qualifying, with no recourse, no security, no manner of backup plan.
The grandstands would be half-empty come Sunday.
The opinions expressed are solely of the writer.

Sure give you something to read for awhile.

[Souporscotty]

Interesting. Although I don't think "Sponsor Points" is all that ridiculous. If the France family thinks it will put some $$$ in their pockets, they'll probably look into it.