[Phils20]

Another take on this weeks talk about whining!

Seems they all know that they will get ripped if they open their mouth. Pay attention Jr and Gordon fans. Seems these two drivers choke back the truth, while Smoke speaks it!

Are freedom of speech's lessons lost in NASCAR?

THATSRACIN.COM OPINION

DAVID POOLE

The Charlotte Observer

Saturday, Mar. 15, 2008




Dale Jarrett watches from the pits during practice at Bristol Motor Speedway. Wade Payne/The Associated Press

• Lineup | Rules set starting grid
• Late speeds | Kahne, Reutimann lead the way in final practice
• Early speeds | Hamlin, Earnhardt Jr. top Saturday's first practice chart
• Video | Joe Gibbs enjoys being back in NASCAR

BRISTOL, Tenn. – NASCAR fans love it when a driver tells it like it is. Until, of course, one actually does it.
"If you don't say what somebody else likes, they're going to chew you up for it," Dale Jarrett says. "You have to decide how much of that you're ready to bite off. ...You hear all the time everybody likes it when everybody speaks their minds, but when they do they're damned for it. I just don't understand."
That's not Tony Stewart saying that, not one of the Busch brothers or Kevin Harvick or any one of the drivers race fans are too quick to label a "whiner" when he speaks out on a topic he feels strongly about.
That's Jarrett, the well-respected, second-generation veteran who makes his final career Sprint Cup points race start in Sunday's Food City 500 at Bristol Motor Speedway.
Jeff Gordon is a four-time champion in the sport who will start second alongside teammate Jimmie Johnson on Sunday's front row. Gordon also knows what a public relations minefield a driver starts through when he decided to take a stand.
"In my experience, it's better off to stay non-confrontational and stay away from the controversy," Gordon said. "There is so much focus and attention when there is controversy, is it worth it?
" ... Life is tough enough as it is. ... I'm just trying to do my job and do everything I can.
"Trust me, I want more of my personality to come out, but I can't help the fact that when that time comes, in the back of my mind I'm thinking what are the repercussions of that. What am I going to go through?"
It was Stewart's postrace criticism of the tire combination at Atlanta that set off a weeklong discussion, not only about tires and the way Goodyear develops them but also about what role the sport's competitors should rightly play in helping set the sport's policies and influence how NASCAR governs it.
In such discussions, the idea of a drivers' union inevitably comes up. In a culture that has for generations treated "union" an expletive, the point that matters can be lost.
If drivers did have a union, eventually it would wind up fighting for a bigger share of the total revenue in the sport (and rightly so, but that's an argument for another day). There would be a lot of focus, and fans would quickly grow weary of that.
But there should be a more formal, structured way for drivers to have input in the key decisions in NASCAR's top series.
"I would like to see NASCAR have like a quarterly meeting where they bring all the drivers into a room and bring up hot topics," Gordon said. "Talk about things and allow us to vent, or allow us to share our opinions and just listen to us.
"This going up into the trailer one at a time and one guy says the exact opposite of what the next guy comes in, I think all it does is confuse them. I would love to work with them further on that, but I'm out of breath doing it individually. It doesn’t go anywhere."
Dale Earnhardt Jr. sat beside Stewart for much of the postrace discussion at Atlanta. He, too, said the tires should have been better, but never went as far as Stewart did.
"A lot of times you pick the battle," Earnhardt Jr. said. "I felt as bad as Tony did about the tires, but I just couldn't bring myself to be as vocal as he was about it. Maybe because I know what the backlash is going to be."
But Earnhardt Jr. says drivers absolutely do need to have a voice.
"The main situation is that you as a driver, you have a hard time listening and believing someone that has never been behind the wheel trying to tell you what needs to happen out on the race track or how things need to be," Earnhardt Jr. said. " ... Atlanta is just a reminder of that really, that the driver's opinions matter.
"We are paid a lot of money to do what we do and we all do sound off and go push buttons a little too hard sometimes, but for the most part, we don't want to ruin the racing for the sport. We don't want to make it worse for the fans. We want to make it as big as we can make it. We have the same thing at stake."
When a driver with a history of saying critical things about NASCAR or Goodyear speaks up, sometimes his message is overshadowed by the messenger. But for Gordon, Earnhardt Jr. and Jarrett to agree that the drivers' opinions aren't valued as much as they should be, perhaps that's a clearer indication that things need to change.
"So many decisions are being made by people who don't really have the understanding of what it's like to drive these cars," Jarrett said. "They're sitting there expecting you, regardless of the situation, to put on a great show because that's what our sport was built on. Unfortunately, that doesn't always happen.
"I think that the drivers need to be represented and NASCAR needs to understand that it's not that we're telling them how to go about their business, but helping them to understand how we can have better races.
"When we speak out about it, we're speaking not for a personal gain, we're speaking for what's going to make the sport better. Do we always know? No, we don't always know. Some things that we say aren't the very best things, but we have to be able to say those things, too, because a lot of the things we say are, and we are the ones who know."
reprint or license

[Bob Tanner]

I don't like the way this is heading, at all.

Sorry. This is going to rub most of you the wrong way but, unlike Jeffie Pooh and his generation, making confrontational statements doesn't bother me a bit.

This idea of "The drivers need a voice," is mostly, but not all, just so much BS! Give them some type of organization to "represent them and you'll have instant MLB and NFL... "If you don't do it our way we'll strike!" Screw the fans, screw the sponsors and the Hell with the car makers.

Think a minute, please. Pretend that you are the head of a large and profitable multi-million dollar corporation. You put your butt on the line to get the operation started and you've done pretty well. The people who work for you are paid way above the average wage for any worker doing the same job in another venue.

Now, your workers come to you and demand that you do things their way? In fact they are telling you how to run your business. How's that strike you, Bucko?

This subject inspired me to do some research on the 1961 Teamster fiasco. On Aug. 9th, 1961, at Bowman Grey Stadium, Bill France Sr. met with the drivers and said. "Gentlemen, before I have this union stuffed down my throat, I will plow up my two-and-a-half-mile track at Daytona Beach and plant corn in the infield."

Big Bill had it right.

Yeah, last weeks race on a tire that almost sparked, wasn't one of NA__AR's best races. Yeah, Goodyear messed up. It was also good for Tony to stand up and bring attention to the fact. Let the chips fall where they may, some will see it as whining and some will agree. That's just the way life is.

But when you start talking union, and I personally think that word is an expletive and shouldn't be used in mixed company so I apologize for its use, you're talking about allowing an entire organization, which has different goals, ideals and ethics from your own, having major input into how you conduct business.

Here is what the FPA (Federation of Professional Athletes) wanted in 1961:
(1) Prize money - A bigger slice of the purse
In 1961 this might have had some validity but no one was forcing the drivers and team owners to compete. Their demands broke down to around a average guaranteed wage for each driver and team member of $22,400. This was in 1961 when the average household wage was $4086.76! (National Average Wage Index)
(2) Pensions - An idea which was a holdover from the post WWII years but is rapidly becoming outmoded today but was entrenched in the '60's. If the drivers get a representative, you can bet the farm this will rank high on the list of things they demand.
(3) Death Benefits - This is what they have life insurance policies for. At the rate the drivers and crew today are paid, they can well afford the exorbitant rates charges for people in their profession.
(4) Health and Welfare - See #3
(5) Scholarship Fund - This was for any kids of deceased members. Bill Sr. and the same question I had; why is it NASCAR's responsibility to care for someone else's kids?
(6) Complaint Procedures - I can see this one being OK, as long as everything is kept in perspective and everyone keeps in mind that it is NASCAR's game and they have all final decisions.
(7) Safety - Many strides have been made here. I don't think the current drivers and teams have many complaints here.

I hope cooler heads will prevail in this matter but I'm afraid the Delaware newspaper article has opened a Pandora's Box of problems which has a lid which might not fit too tight again. IF that happens, take a good hard look at the prices you pay to go to a race, buy trinkets & thrash and the like. If the drivers and teams actually organize, the prices you see today will look like absolute bargains!

But, I could be very, very wrong...

[Quality88]

I'm all for "Screw the sponsors"....... but that's as far as I would go.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Quality88

I'm all for "Screw the sponsors"....... but that's as far as I would go.

Some sponsors are like Washington D. C. (District of Criminals) lobbyists. I won't go as global as you did but I do see where you're coming from, Dustin.

[simple simon]

Originally Posted by Quality88

I'm all for "Screw the sponsors"....... but that's as far as I would go.

sorry dude ..... but then no one could race

here's an example from 1989 ..... Ricky Craven drove for EJP in the ACT (American - Canadian Tour) ..... a guy i worked for ended up joining the team and building Ricky's cars ..... the cars cost $60,000 ..... $30,000 for the car and $30,000 for the Buick engine ..... keep in mind, these are 1989 $'s

without sponsorship no one would be able to race .... ask Travis Kvapil

[Phils20]

My only point I wanted to take from that article was how the drivers are scared to talk, and be themselves.

And how it seems that they would like to. The next time folks want to rip Tony, that is all I will remember from this article. Maybe if some of them would just stop being so soft and PC, they could just speak for themselves. Who's to say it has to be organized, or that they need NASCARS permission to have a couple of drivers ask to talk about issues???

Is it really that much of a dictatorship there now?

I really don't think Brian France or Mike Helton command the fear and respect that the Big Bill and Bill Jr did.

But the first step is to not be afraid of their own shadows.

[Quality88]

Originally Posted by simple simon

sorry dude ..... but then no one could race

here's an example from 1989 ..... Ricky Craven drove for EJP in the ACT (American - Canadian Tour) ..... a guy i worked for ended up joining the team and building Ricky's cars ..... the cars cost $60,000 ..... $30,000 for the car and $30,000 for the Buick engine ..... keep in mind, these are 1989 $'s

without sponsorship no one would be able to race .... ask Travis Kvapil

That's not what I'm talkin about Simon.... Although I know why everyone would think that givin my stance with corporate sponsorship. I mainly mean, the sponsors need to let the drivers do their thing and watch what happens. They can probably get more out of a driver and team if they step aside and don't do a damn thing.... Can anyone follow where I'm goin with this?

[jks812]

Originally Posted by Quality88

That's not what I'm talkin about Simon.... Although I know why everyone would think that givin my stance with corporate sponsorship. I mainly mean, the sponsors need to let the drivers do their thing and watch what happens. They can probably get more out of a driver and team if they step aside and don't do a damn thing.... Can anyone follow where I'm goin with this?

I think so. I'll use Tony as an example. He was upset about the way the tires were. He shouldn't be scared that if he speaks up about it, Home Depot is gonna get upset and talk about pulling out.

[Quality88]

Originally Posted by jks812

I think so. I'll use Tony as an example. He was upset about the way the tires were. He shouldn't be scared that if he speaks up about it, Home Depot is gonna get upset and talk about pulling out.

You get the idea. Home Depot has already fined/docked Tony I think 50K for an incident last year or year before. In this day and age alot (not all mind you) of fans world revolve around there driver. Their driver has Home Depot as a sponsor they do all shoppin at Home Depot. Should said sponsor do somethin to cross their driver in which they feel is wrong, the fan/s stop shoppin/doin business with said sponsor. Granted mind you, business would not drop drastically for Home Depot, but smaller companies may not be so lucky.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Phils20

My only point I wanted to take from that article was how the drivers are scared to talk, and be themselves.

And how it seems that they would like to. The next time folks want to rip Tony, that is all I will remember from this article. Maybe if some of them would just stop being so soft and PC, they could just speak for themselves. Who's to say it has to be organized, or that they need NASCARS permission to have a couple of drivers ask to talk about issues???

Is it really that much of a dictatorship there now?

I really don't think Brian France or Mike Helton command the fear and respect that the Big Bill and Bill Jr did.

But the first step is to not be afraid of their own shadows.

I see your point, Phil. Well taken. The thing which jumped out at me was the "I think it's best to not be confrontive" statement made by Jeff. It re-enforces my contention that there is a generation or two or three out there where confronting someone about a perceived wrong might be considered rude, boorish and even non-productive.

Bill Sr. commanded a lot of respect and maybe even some tinge of fear. Bill Jr. is vastly over rated. I know I'm kicking a sacred cow here but I blame Bill Jr. directly for many of NA__AR current woes.

Bri9an gets recognition for his name only. Mike Helton is another matter entirely. He is a very powerful and forceful individual. Don't underestimate him.

[WestCoast]

Hmmmm…. Unions, Drivers, Nascar Dictatorships, I’m thinking none of the above.
The people that make the rules and drive the sport are "Sponsors". They are the ones that pull the strings as far as Nascar and Driver’s WORTH is concerned.
Very simple, "No Sponsor = No Race"… period.
Nascar knows it, the Drivers know it, so should we.
Kudos to TS for speaking out, more should take his lead to make the sport more entertaining for the ones that the "sponsors" care about (us).

[Phils20]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

I see your point, Phil. Well taken. The thing which jumped out at me was the "I think it's best to not be confrontive" statement made by Jeff. It re-enforces my contention that there is a generation or two or three out there where confronting someone about a perceived wrong might be considered rude, boorish and even non-productive.

Bill Sr. commanded a lot of respect and maybe even some tinge of fear. Bill Jr. is vastly over rated. I know I'm kicking a sacred cow here but I blame Bill Jr. directly for many of NA__AR current woes.

Bri9an gets recognition for his name only. Mike Helton is another matter entirely. He is a very powerful and forceful individual. Don't underestimate him.

I'll take your word for it on Mike!

I felt the same way about Jeffs words. It is dissappointing to hear him say that. And Jr's words aren't much better.

[Bob Tanner]

Originally Posted by Phils20

I'll take your word for it on Mike!

I felt the same way about Jeffs words. It is dissappointing to hear him say that. And Jr's words aren't much better.

We are talking about a couple of generations of people being exposed to classical conditioning as overt as Pavlov's dogs. They have been conditioned to believe that time outs, talking things out, and diplomacy will cure any ill. To be confrontive, and risk offending someone is considered a mortal sin.

Luckily some manage to slip through the cracks and do the correct thing, damn the consequences.

[Phils20]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

We are talking about a couple of generations of people being exposed to classical conditioning as overt as Pavlov's dogs. They have been conditioned to believe that time outs, talking things out, and diplomacy will cure any ill. To be confrontive, and risk offending someone is considered a mortal sin.

Luckily some manage to slip through the cracks and do the correct thing, damn the consequences.

Maybe that is why I like Tony, he reminds me of, well, me!

I'm just a lot thinner, and have a lot less talent and money!

But I do have better hair!

[SpaceCadet]

Originally Posted by Bob Tanner

We are talking about a couple of generations of people being exposed to classical conditioning as overt as Pavlov's dogs. They have been conditioned to believe that time outs, talking things out, and diplomacy will cure any ill. To be confrontive, and risk offending someone is considered a mortal sin.

Luckily some manage to slip through the cracks and do the correct thing, damn the consequences.

What if all this speaking out and damning of consequences gets you a pink slip? Been there, done that. Don't condemn those who choose to think before they speak. Like it or not, opening up your mouth a little too widely can bring a world o' hurt down on ya. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with diplomacy. If someone comes at me with temper's blazin', the first thing I do is tell them to go rotate on a fence post. I get defensive and nothing gets accomplished. Diplomacy first, and then if that doesn't work, have at it. I guess that's where Tony's at right now.