[wardfan]

Originally Posted by Nevadastars

Sounds to me like he's nothing more than a never-was, headbanger wannabe, mouth for hire.

He's a musician that apparently is a big fan which is cool. But the only reason he is on is to try and attract that new young fanbase.

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by Nevadastars

Sounds to me like he's nothing more than a never-was, headbanger wannabe, mouth for hire.

That's his positive side.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

Sound good in theory, LSC, but not all of these drivers are created equal. The loss of a Jeff Gordon would most certainly not be equalled by extra David Reutimann fans tuning in, know what I mean? I some ways, I can understand NASCAR's hesitance to suspend any of their biggest name guys, especially with ratings dipping already. But it all comes down to that sport vs. entertainment argument - a sport suspends them no matter what, but entertainment has to consider popularity, ratings and stuff like that.

This gives me a reason to throw out yet another of Bob's Postulates:

NASCAR should make absolutely no rule, or enforce ANY rule based primarily on:
(1) Benefits to the media
(2) Sponsor
(3) Popularity of a driver

Sports v. Entertainment...Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Sports IS entertainment. I can think of no other logical reason why people would spend more than a micro-second watching or following sports if not for the entertainment factor. Basically all sports is, is a diversion to take people's minds off matters that are REALLY important; matters that they either (a) want a break from contemplating or (b) don't want to even think about.

What makes some sports more creditable and more popular than NASCAR might go back to my above postulate. The more popular sports have a long history of adhering more closely to my above postuate than NASCAR does.

[Lefty Noob]

Ah, Bob, once again you're able to put thing together so well. And I agree with what you say. I've also come to realize in my time here and watching on TV that the standards are not equal, and that more than anything NASCAR is all about catering to the groups that put the most money in their pockets and contribute the most to their ratings.

For this purpose, it's hard to compare NASCAR to the NFL or MLB because those are team sports, so I have to look at other individual sports (which, let's face it, NASCAR is - despite the efforts of the crew, most folks don't tune in to see Letarte, they tune in to see Gordon). NASCAR suspending Junior or Gordon for a race would be like the PGA banning Tiger or Lefty, or the tennis organizations barring Federer or Sharapova from competing. There's a considerable audience that would pass on attenting those tournaments or watching on TV, because the people they've come to see aren't participating.

In a perfect world, the spirit of competition would be the most important thing and none of this other stuff would matter much. But alas, this is far from a perfect world, and for an organization that seems to be as desperate to grow and thrive in the mainstream world, these driver-centric fanbases are essential.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

For this purpose, it's hard to compare NASCAR to the NFL or MLB because those are team sports, so I have to look at other individual sports (which, let's face it, NASCAR is - despite the efforts of the crew, most folks don't tune in to see Letarte, they tune in to see Gordon). NASCAR suspending Junior or Gordon for a race would be like the PGA banning Tiger or Lefty, or the tennis organizations barring Federer or Sharapova from competing. There's a considerable audience that would pass on attenting those tournaments or watching on TV, because the people they've come to see aren't participating..

I can rant on and on about this segment of the racing society with as much passion as I debate character and ethics. We don't want to continue down THAT road, do we?

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

In a perfect world, the spirit of competition would be the most important thing and none of this other stuff would matter much. But alas, this is far from a perfect world, and for an organization that seems to be as desperate to grow and thrive in the mainstream world, these driver-centric fanbases are essential.

Hmmm...??? OK, Chuck, based on the statement above, I have a question, if I may...

IF these driver-centric (Damn, I absolutely love that term; consider it stolen) are so essential to NASCAR's success, how in the world did NASCAR ever manage to exist from 1949 to 1994? (I term it the "BG era; Before Gordon) Oh, there were driver-centric (see, I told you!) fans, for sure, but not in the percentages that we see today?

I have a theory but I'd like to see some other points of view. I am always open to learning.

[Lefty Noob]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

IF these driver-centric (Damn, I absolutely love that term; consider it stolen) are so essential to NASCAR's success, how in the world did NASCAR ever manage to exist from 1949 to 1994? (I term it the "BG era; Before Gordon) Oh, there were driver-centric (see, I told you!) fans, for sure, but not in the percentages that we see today?

I have a theory but I'd like to see some other points of view. I am always open to learning.

Please keep in mind I'm just playing devil's advocate here. That said, one could compare the 1949-1994 era of NASCAR to the old days of other sports leagues. That was the era of NASCAR's infancy, much like the days when there were nine-game World Series and pro football didn't even include the forward pass. Those sports grew, changed, matured and emerged as better products (arguably). And all the while, the monetary gains and global popularity of the sports skyrocketed. History is for Halls of Fame. The future is now and no sport can stay tethered to its roots forever.

This is the era of the NASCAR driver as celebrity, and just as baseball and football fans pay money to see their favorite teams play, so do the driver-centric fans lay down good money to see their beloved driver circle the track. If NASCAR takes that driver out of a race, they risk losing most or all of the income from those driver-centric fans. Is that really in the best interest of a sport that is growing from a niche product into a worldwide phenomenon?

[LSC9901]

I do have to disagree to a degree. When I plan my visit to see a Red Sox game I plan on seeing the normal starting line up. Now I get to the famous Rousch/Fenway Park and find out that Manny isn't playing today and Pap is on the DL list so he won't show up in relief. Will I never go to another game ??? Of course I'll go again but I'll just hope that my team is 100% there for me to enjoy. NASCAR could survive a race without Tony, Jr or Kasey. If the rules were made that way and enforced the fans would deal with it. It might even inspire less "Knausing."

[Lefty Noob]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

I do have to disagree to a degree. When I plan my visit to see a Red Sox game I plan on seeing the normal starting line up. Now I get to the famous Rousch/Fenway Park and find out that Manny isn't playing today and Pap is on the DL list so he won't show up in relief. Will I never go to another game ??? Of course I'll go again but I'll just hope that my team is 100% there for me to enjoy. NASCAR could survive a race without Tony, Jr or Kasey. If the rules were made that way and enforced the fans would deal with it. It might even inspire less "Knausing."

True, but let's say the event you're attending isn't a team contest, because the situation is a little different. Say instead that you're going to the Masters to see Tiger Woods play, only for some reason his caddie makes an illegal tweak to his sand wedge (hypothetical, bear with me). He gets banned. Do you still plunk down the big bucks to go to the Masters, even though Tiger's not going to be there? I'd bet most people would answer no.

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

True, but let's say the event you're attending isn't a team contest, because the situation is a little different. Say instead that you're going to the Masters to see Tiger Woods play, only for some reason his caddie makes an illegal tweak to his sand wedge (hypothetical, bear with me). He gets banned. Do you still plunk down the big bucks to go to the Masters, even though Tiger's not going to be there? I'd bet most people would answer no.

why would that be any different from Tiger missing the cut? would that be the PGA's fault also? would you stay away because he missed the cut? some would, but did that harm the PGA?

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

True, but let's say the event you're attending isn't a team contest, because the situation is a little different. Say instead that you're going to the Masters to see Tiger Woods play, only for some reason his caddie makes an illegal tweak to his sand wedge (hypothetical, bear with me). He gets banned. Do you still plunk down the big bucks to go to the Masters, even though Tiger's not going to be there? I'd bet most people would answer no.

I see your point but .... as a sports fan I do not necessarily go to an event to see a player/driver. All competitive sporting events have more than one star. I do understand what you are saying but in my case, as a sports fan, I do not agree.

[Lefty Noob]

Originally Posted by Racer Duck

why would that be any different from Tiger missing the cut? would that be the PGA's fault also? would you stay away because he missed the cut? some would, but did that harm the PGA?

Yep, you're right... it'd be exactly the same thing. Good answer!

So then the obvious question is: why can Tiger Woods, the most recognizable athlete in the world, not make the final rounds of a competition in his sport but certain NASCAR competitors are guaranteed a free ride into the race? No one's going to give the Indianapolis Colts or the Florida Gators a free pass because they were champions this past season. If NASCAR really wants to be like "other sports" they need to pay attention to this kind of stuff and take note. No other sport ever gives anyone a free pass - they make them earn their keep day in and day out, or week in and week out.

[Lefty Noob]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

I see your point but .... as a sports fan I do not necessarily go to an event to see a player/driver. All competitive sporting events have more than one star. I do understand what you are saying but in my case, as a sports fan, I do not agree.

Neither do I. Like I told Bob, I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

If you really like the sport, you can watch anyone play it. I'm that way with baseball.

[LSC9901]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

Yep, you're right... it'd be exactly the same thing. Good answer!

So then the obvious question is: why can Tiger Woods, the most recognizable athlete in the world, not make the final rounds of a competition in his sport but certain NASCAR competitors are guaranteed a free ride into the race? No one's going to give the Indianapolis Colts or the Florida Gators a free pass because they were champions this past season. If NASCAR really wants to be like "other sports" they need to pay attention to this kind of stuff and take note. No other sport ever gives anyone a free pass - they make them earn their keep day in and day out, or week in and week out.

Careful now Lefty .... you're getting close to an area that I will get all wound up about. I hate the free passes (AKA top 35), the playoffs (chase). The chase would be OK if it involved 12 teams instead of 43 and was done after the regular 36 race season.

Happy ??? You got me going !!!!

[Lefty Noob]

Originally Posted by LSC9901

Careful now Lefty .... you're getting close to an area that I will get all wound up about. I hate the free passes (AKA top 35), the playoffs (chase). The chase would be OK if it involved 12 teams instead of 43 and was done after the regular 36 race season.

Happy ??? You got me going !!!!

Couldn't agree with you more on that. It's absolutely absurd that teams that can't win the Cup are allowed to compete in the Chase.

[Racer Duck]

Originally Posted by Lefty Noob

Couldn't agree with you more on that. It's absolutely absurd that teams that can't win the Cup are allowed to compete in the Chase.

NA$CAR has the "non-Chasers" in those races for a several reasons:

1. $$$ - the most important reason, without the non-Chasers a lot their sponsors won't "contribute" to NA$CAR's coffers, who'll buy all those tires from Goodyear, what about all the souvenir trailers and will all the seats be sold? ;
2. the Chasers need a punching bag - somebody to blame their stupid moves on and somebody to take their anger out on;
3. like in paintball, the Chasers need objects to hide behind, or to put between themselves and other Chasers for protection;
4. who wants to watch a 12 car race? not nearly enough people on pit road before the race, not enough noise during the race, hardly any chance of a pit road accident, and finally 500 miles X 10 of this? how boring - what will the TV people talk about?
5. and finally, it's the politically correct thing to do.