[simple simon]

i voted no limit

just because you can scrape together enough pennies to get a car on the track doesnt mean you deserve a team

if some of the owners with more money could have more drivers i think it could mean some of the poorer owners putting a crappy product out on the track could be avoided

[LSC9901]

Simon we are a capitalistic society. If I can raise the funds through sponsorship to put together at top rated team and you can't, then it is too bad for you. Big bucks begats big bucks. It takes money to make money. You certainly are not going to get a top rated driver when you can't get a top rated sponsor. I again refer to drivers like Kevin Lepage. He is not a top rated driver and he has driven for more different sponsors than you can count. Because the owners have revolving sponsorships they also have revolving drivers. That makes you the "poorer" team owner. Sorry !!!

[vicfirth5150]

I said 5 cars, only because in reality, There shouldn't be a limit. If you can group around a bunch of guys who can work together, no limit needed. The only problem i see in that is if you have people in the team who are not getting along, Don't feel like they belong in the group, etc. But thats totally off subject.

[lilsexy08]

As long as they don't have over 4 cars per owner I don't see the problem. I believe people make to much of this subject. I understand the owners who don't have alot of money and only have 1 team but hey their racing! But seriously, people make too much out of this subject. Something the broadcasters started last year so they had something to talk about.

[vicfirth5150]

The only problem you have, would be an issue for the owner themselves.

[wingkey1]

Oh that it were that simple. Things change.

I say it has to be variable at the appropriate descretion of the sanctioning body to insure the integrity and success of the sport. Huh!? What did he say?

OK, you are now Mr. Joe Sanctioningbody. Other than the fact ya ought to be seeking a name change, you've got another issue. Seems couple years ago ya made this executive decision. "No owner may own/enter more than 3 vehicles". Times were great, the economy strong, media and fan interest at an all time high, sponsers literally beating down the door. As a result you had more teams than you could handle vying for a starting position at each weeks event. Then ----

Something(s) bad happened. Some number or all of the following - Times weren't great, the economy wasn't strong, media and fan interest at an all time low, sponsers literally running out the door. Few were in a position to field vehicles for your events.

Now what are ya stuck with? - Few, too few, owners with the resources to field even one vehicle. Some number (pick 5 for arguments sake) owners who can afford to play but your previous decision, while appropriate at the time, now flat out sucks. The few media and fans who have hung with you will most certainly leave just as soon as it is clear the field for your events will only contain 15 vehicles.

Don't think it could ever happen? Gotta be just beautiful there in that rosey little world. Enjoy it whilst ya can.

[lilsexy08]

Originally Posted by vicfirth5150

The only problem you have, would be an issue for the owner themselves.

True enough.

[jks812]

I said 3. If you go unlimited it's just a matter of time before the big teams buy out the small ones and you end up with maybe 10 owners running nascar. I know the limit now is 4 and they say Roush has to 2010 to get rid of a team. But legally, he's not even up to the limit yet with the ones "he" owns.

[lilsexy08]

Originally Posted by jks812

I said 3. If you go unlimited it's just a matter of time before the big teams buy out the small ones and you end up with maybe 10 owners running nascar. I know the limit now is 4 and they say Roush has to 2010 to get rid of a team. But legally, he's not even up to the limit yet with the ones "he" owns.

If unlimited that would pose as a MAJOR problem! I voted for 3.

[Racer Duck]

two is right.

but how do you police "ownership" when a wife, kid, business partner, next door neighbor, etc. can own teams and utilize the primary owner's resources? is it fair to require the wife, kid, business partner, next door neighbor, etc. to have separate facilities?

and how do you, or would you even want to, police "coopetition" (about the only memorable utterance from Dim in the recent past) where something like DEI and RCR combining resources on engines, or Roush and Yates trading chassis for engines?

[Racer Duck]

thought I'd tack on an addition...

in the spirit of capitalism, I also believe if you can afford and have the wherewithall to manage bigger numbers of teams, you ought to be able to do that. yes, I know the arguments against (only 3 owners represented in the race, no small teams, etc.), but that's what capitalism's about.

then comes someone like Toyota or Benz with enough bucks to field 7 or 8 teams and suddenly those 3 owners are scrambling 'cause there's outside forces threatening their empires and they go crying to the Joe Sanctioningbody (good one Wingkey) to do something .. now Joe has a legal and political problem of significant magnitude and no way to satisfy everybody....

why would Joe want to ever get himself into such a predicament?

two gives rich and poor alike equal opportunities. that's my choice.

[BringBackWilkesboro]

Just to give an idea about how big money teams have taken over, who remembers team owners like Harry Ranier, Harry Melling, L.G. Dewitt, John Holman and Ralph Moody or even Bud Moore? Those were some houshold names in the sport at one time or another, and now very few fans have even heard the names.

[lilsexy08]

Originally Posted by BringBackWilkesboro

Just to give an idea about how big money teams have taken over, who remembers team owners like Harry Ranier, Harry Melling, L.G. Dewitt, John Holman and Ralph Moody or even Bud Moore? Those were some houshold names in the sport at one time or another, and now very few fans have even heard the names.

I've heard of the last two! LOL!

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by BringBackWilkesboro

Just to give an idea about how big money teams have taken over, who remembers team owners like Harry Ranier, Harry Melling, L.G. Dewitt, John Holman and Ralph Moody or even Bud Moore? Those were some houshold names in the sport at one time or another, and now very few fans have even heard the names.

Holman-Moody is still making chassis .. but don't think John & Ralph are doing much except a few rounds of golf and a visit to the 19th hole every once in a while. Saw Bud Moore on a TV commercial the other day .. good to see he's still AG (Above Ground). I'm sure the others are long retired or even BG.

still, if you listed their drivers, they'd be a veritable who's who of stock car racing. for instance, Harry Ranier. these are the drivers who drove for him:

• Buddy Baker
• Gary Bettenhausen
• Andy Hampton
• Bobby Watson
• Jim Vandiver
• Lenny Pond
• Bobby Allison
• Benny Parsons
• Joe Ruttman
• Cale Yarborough
• Davey Allison
• Elton Sawyer (married Patty Moise)
• Lance Hooper
• Greg Sacks

if you've been around NASCAR for even a short time, you've heard some of these names...

[PettyBlue]

Seems three full time teams would be the correct order for any one owner. Top two teams and a good test team to try new things out.