NASCAR Nation

A recent series looked at NASCAR Nation, with Part One, Part Two, and Part Three.

The series examines several areas of the sport and areas where the sport may be in trouble - in declining TV ratings and race attendence and the alienation of its core fanbase - and also notes that the sport is on much firmer ground than in the early 1970s when RJR Tobacco came in as title sponsor for the Grand National Series in the wake of the loss of factory participation.

The series notes NASCAR efforts at attracting the 18-34 demographic, but curiously does not bother to examine whether that demographic is really as hot as it is often made out to be. It is worth asking, because this demographic seems grossly oversold and also unfocused as a rule. The audience for pro sports does not seem to form until after this demographic ages past 30 - certainly in years of attending races and other sporting events it seems to me that the preponderence of 18-30-year-olds looks very small.

Years of NASCAR attempts to portray itself as a hip, youthful happening show no persuasive evidence of working. That ratings and attendence are declining suggests not only that it isn't working, but that years of neglect of the sport's core audience are taking a toll.

------------------------------------------

Then there is NASCAR's "diversity" effort. Curiously left out of the discussion is whether there should even be any "diversity" at all. No one can say with a straight face that Erin Crocker has a ride in Craftsman Trucks for any reason beyond "diversity." No one can say Deborah Renshaw got a racing gig because she actually deserved one; nor can anyone pretend that being a woman didn't allow her to escape opprobrium for her incompetence behind the wheel. And no one can pretend that Danica Patrick is a talented race driver hired because of her talent.

The point is that no one should even care if NASCAR is not "diverse." If Bill Lester develops the aggression needed to win races, then he'll make it in the sport. If he doesn't, then the sport should not bend over backwards for him or others because of some "need" for "diversity." It works both ways - if a sport isn't "diverse," one way or another, it ought not be an issue.

That NASCAR's inspection brigade is more "diverse" now should not even be worth noticing. They're NASCAR inspectors, not "white NASCAR inspectors" or "black NASCAR inspectors." I remember wandering the garage area at NHIS in 2002, before this "diversity" issue got to the front burner, and seeing how the racial makeup of the inspection squads was anything but monolithic. I also remember John Andretti's 1999 Martinsville win and noticing the biracial makeup of his crew. Did the fact that these racial makeups were not monolithic matter? No, it didn't - they're NASCAR inspectors, they're NASCAR crewmen. Period. Marvin Lewis is coach of the Cincinatti Bengals, Romeo Crennel is coach of the Cleveland Browns, and Colin Powell is a US general. Period. "Diversity" crusades didn't make that possible.

Forcing "diversity" never worked before, and it won't work now.

------------------------------------------

Two other issues are worth examining - racetracks and also the quality of the racing. NASCAR lacks speedways in the New York City area and also in the Pacific Northwest, and heavy opposition to NASCAR proposals for those areas indicates coupled with overall declines in attendence and TV ratings indicate that those markets are not worth penetrating, that shoring up existing markets is far more in the sport's interest than New York City or Seattle.

There is also the strange obsession of late with Canada and Mexico. The Busch Series has raced in Mexico the last two seasons with some success - ironically shown in NHIS' Busch East race with the presence of several Mexican drivers, notably Ruben and Carlos Pardo. That Mexican race, though, has been decidedly mixed in terms of success, because there has been no evidence of any particular sponsor interest from Mexican companies in NASCAR.

Then there is Canada, with a Montreal BGN race supposedly scheduled for the mid-summer weekend when Winston Cup is at Pocono. Though there are Canadian fans at northern NASCAR events, and NASCAR recently bought out the owners of CASCAR, that market has never proven itself to be all that strong.

And of course there is the Toyota onslaught brewing for Winston Cup, an onslaught almost no one wants but which most in the sport seem resigned to have to endure. Toyota's presence in Trucks "has brought more money to the series, and you can see it in new teams," says Brendan Gaughn. But the balance sheet isn't so positive, as the number of competitive teams in the Trucks hasn't improved and the other manufacturers involved have cut back in response to Toyota, leaving a racing field where Toyota all but owns a monopoly on victories.

Again, it shows a myopic approach by NASCAR - going after overrated domestic and foreign markets instead of shoring up the far more important markets it already has.

---------------------------------------------

As for the racing, Kevin Harvick's audacious pass up the middle of a side-by-side battle for the lead was easily the highlight of the New Hampshire 300, but it also was sympomatic of the weakness of the racing. In the Chase, and the season in general, the battle for the lead has been a battle in name only almost everywhere. Michigan saw some spirited racing, Pocono had three lead changes on Lap 75 of the Pocono 500, and the Brickyard saw the lead change twice in a lap on a couple of occassions. But other than that only Daytona and Talladega have seen racing that lives up to the sport's competitive depth.

NASCAR has long needed to address this competitive aridity, yet little has come of it. Too bad, because as much solid ground as the sport has, it still needs to face its troubles and get back the racing that made the sport.