Having won a sixth Winston Cup Grand National title, Jimmie Johnson is now being hailed as the sport's greatest driver. The problem with this argument is it's not true.
The argument for Johnson as NASCAR's greatest stems from the myth that he has competed in NASCAR's most competitive period ever. It's the argument that more cars finish on the lead lap than ever before, and it also includes what are ostensibly massive rule changes in the racecars with the cars changing from the raked aerocoupes of 2002-7 to the COT of 2007-12 and the Generation Six racecar of 2013. Then there are the changes in restart procedures and implementation of NASCAR's ludicrous "Lucky Dog" rule giving back laps to cars rather than having them race to unlap themselves.
It's an easy argument to debunk.
Johnson has competed in NASCAR's Dead Lane Era - the era when passing is rare and the technology arms race has been at its highest. Johnson's racecars have been the most technologically prepared of any racecars the sport has ever seen - nowhere has Johnson ever competed even slightly behind the eight ball. While Daytona and Talladega have routinely broken 50 lead changes year after year, Johnson has won but is usually mediocre or worse at those tracks; everywhere else lead changes are mostly nonexistent, and Johnson has invariably gotten the benefit that aeropush does all the work for him stopping others from passing him. Nowhere has Johnson won because of superior driving technique.
Contrast this with the "bad" old days of the Petty-Earnhardt eras, especially Petty's era, when 40 lead changes a race was not the exception, the cars were physically far harder to drive (this gives Donovan McNabb's dismissal of Johnson as not being an athlete some credibility, because the fact of Danica Patrick's career testifies that the cars are too easy to drive), and Petty had to race against Hall Of Fame-caliber drivers (Pearson, the Allisons, Cale, Isaac, Baker, Lorenzen, Waltrip, Leeroy Yarbrough, Ned Jarrett, Joe Weatherly) year in and year out; even drivers like Bonnett, Parsons, and Dave Marcis showcased real toughness.
Johnson has done nothing but race against mediocre or worse drivers. It is impossible to name a driver he'd raced against who warrants any mention to racing Halls Of Fame. Not Denny Hamlin, not the Busch Brothers, not Earnhardt Jr., not Keselowski, not the Burtons - no one. The utter lack of lead changes in Johnson's era testifies to how much lower the caliber of competition the drivers he'd raced against offered.
Johnson was also from Day One tagged as the Factory Hack, the one chosen to become Chevrolet's designated champion. Herb Fishel, who headed GM's racing efforts and was notoriously myopic in hording effort toward a designated champion team/driver - mostly Hendrick Motorsports, though Junior Johnson briefly held that status and the RCR team was for the most part well assisted, and even RCR had to form an engineering alliance with other Chevy teams in the 1990s (a move first pioneered by Pontiac teams all but bankrupted by Fishel at that time) - played a major role in the latter 1990s putting Johnson into stock cars (first in the ASA) and once Fishel made Johnson his protege there was never any chance Johnson would go anywhere but Hendrick Motorsports (it makes nonsense of the oft-repeated story that Jeff Gordon "discovered" Johnson).
Johnson's run as dynasty has been a nadir for NASCAR and the sport's declining popularity testifies that people see through it and don't want anything to do with a driver who deserves no praise despite his enormous success.
Showing posts with label John Darby. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Darby. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
Friday, March 08, 2013
NASCAR Credibility And The Gen-Six Racecar
NASCAR's Generation Six racecar after just two races seems already to have set a new standard for controversy as NASCAR fined Denny Hamlin some $25,000 for public criticism of the car's lack of passing at Phoenix, this after the disappointing Daytona 500 (and the spectacle of Brian France's bullying dinner date with Brad Keselowski after Keselowski's USA Today interview critical of the sanctioning body). The fine has led drivers to refrain from criticism of the car, and racecaster Dave Moody comments taking both NASCAR and Hamlin to task. Moody takes hamlin to task for saying passing was harder now than before, noting Hamlin started 43rd and finished second at Phoenix. Moody has been a strong defender of the Gen-6 racecar and made valid points noting the car's hurried deployment and lack of parts at Daytona as contributory issues to the car's lack of passing.
But while there were such factors involved, the defenses of the Gen-6 racecar do not overall come across as valid, because the car's promises are familiar from the days of the unmourned Car Of Tomorrow, a vehicle that (much like the Gen-6) was advertised as a design that would reduce or even eliminate aeropush - and failed entirely. NASCAR's inability to deal with the sport's chronic lack of passing has been a running issue from the 2000 season onward. In the John Darby era, which spans the bulk of the last ten to twelve seasons, the sport has mandated multiple changes to tires, swar bars, the cutting of downforce, and now the COT and the Gen-6 - and outside of Daytona and Talladega the racing has been subpar - only in spots at races such as Pocono in 2009-10, at Charlotte's 600-miler in 2011 (also noteworthy were Charlotte's 2005 races with an epidemic of yellows), at Fontana on a hot September night in 2007, and at Dover in 2006 has the sport seen battles up front that live up to the sport's competitive promise.
Discussion within the sport certainly continues, with the softness of the tires a running controversy and also the splitter used on the cars, with advocacy that it be removed to allow air under the car, only to see that idea backfire in preseason testing with exacerbated inability to pass.
The recent catchphrase used is "give it time." While the point on its own is valid, the history of the sport's consistent Darby-era failures in improving the ability to race weighs against everything revolving around this Gen-6 racecar. And NASCAR's draconian reaction to driver criticisms adds more credibility issues because all it is doing is making more graphic that seemingly no one knows what they are doing.
And that is the greatest shame of all - it certainly is true that not every race can see 60 lead changes or anything close to that, but it's also true that 60 lead changes can - and absolutely should - not be the exception for the sport, whether it be the restrictor plate tracks, or the unfairly maligned "cookie cutter" intermediates, or the sport's low-banked superovals like Pocono and Indianapolis.
But while there were such factors involved, the defenses of the Gen-6 racecar do not overall come across as valid, because the car's promises are familiar from the days of the unmourned Car Of Tomorrow, a vehicle that (much like the Gen-6) was advertised as a design that would reduce or even eliminate aeropush - and failed entirely. NASCAR's inability to deal with the sport's chronic lack of passing has been a running issue from the 2000 season onward. In the John Darby era, which spans the bulk of the last ten to twelve seasons, the sport has mandated multiple changes to tires, swar bars, the cutting of downforce, and now the COT and the Gen-6 - and outside of Daytona and Talladega the racing has been subpar - only in spots at races such as Pocono in 2009-10, at Charlotte's 600-miler in 2011 (also noteworthy were Charlotte's 2005 races with an epidemic of yellows), at Fontana on a hot September night in 2007, and at Dover in 2006 has the sport seen battles up front that live up to the sport's competitive promise.
Discussion within the sport certainly continues, with the softness of the tires a running controversy and also the splitter used on the cars, with advocacy that it be removed to allow air under the car, only to see that idea backfire in preseason testing with exacerbated inability to pass.
The recent catchphrase used is "give it time." While the point on its own is valid, the history of the sport's consistent Darby-era failures in improving the ability to race weighs against everything revolving around this Gen-6 racecar. And NASCAR's draconian reaction to driver criticisms adds more credibility issues because all it is doing is making more graphic that seemingly no one knows what they are doing.
And that is the greatest shame of all - it certainly is true that not every race can see 60 lead changes or anything close to that, but it's also true that 60 lead changes can - and absolutely should - not be the exception for the sport, whether it be the restrictor plate tracks, or the unfairly maligned "cookie cutter" intermediates, or the sport's low-banked superovals like Pocono and Indianapolis.
Monday, March 04, 2013
Phoenix Early Bad News For Gen-6
Phoenix has been run and NASCAR's Generation Six racecar got its first test on a track a mile or less, and Carl Edwards grabbed his first win since March 2011, but the result for NASCAR's ballyhooed new racecar was decisively poor.
The Gen-6 was in development for some three years, yet passing was as rare with this car as it was with the COT, and there was literally no sign that this new car has solved any of the sport's competition issues. "Clean air is probably more important than ever," said Brad Keselowski; "It did not race as good as our generation-five cars" (aka the COT, which raced poorly) said Denny Hamlin; Jimmie Johnson half-jokingly recommended leaving the cars alone for 20 years.
Making it worse was another chapter in tire trouble with Goodyear, which brought a harder compound (particularly on left sides) yet saw multiple tire failures, notably right fronts.
It begs the question that has plagued the sport for now over a decade - why can NASCAR not get these racecars to where they WANT to race in dirty air, where passing and repassing are NOT the exception, to where racing like in the Daytona 300 is the norm?
And it begs the question - is John Darby the problem? It has been painfully clear from the start that Darby has grossly misread the sport's competition issues and continues to do so; an ardent supporter of the COT, Darby has been in charge of the garage area yet has curiously gone without criticism from the racing media.
Certainly the high-ups at Daytona have failed again and Darby warrants criticism of his role in NASCAR's continuing failure to redress the sport's competition woes. Phoenix may be one race, but the Gen-6 was unimpressive at Daytona and was even less impressive at Phoenix, with no evidence to believe it can make things better at Vegas or down the line.
The Gen-6 was in development for some three years, yet passing was as rare with this car as it was with the COT, and there was literally no sign that this new car has solved any of the sport's competition issues. "Clean air is probably more important than ever," said Brad Keselowski; "It did not race as good as our generation-five cars" (aka the COT, which raced poorly) said Denny Hamlin; Jimmie Johnson half-jokingly recommended leaving the cars alone for 20 years.
Making it worse was another chapter in tire trouble with Goodyear, which brought a harder compound (particularly on left sides) yet saw multiple tire failures, notably right fronts.
It begs the question that has plagued the sport for now over a decade - why can NASCAR not get these racecars to where they WANT to race in dirty air, where passing and repassing are NOT the exception, to where racing like in the Daytona 300 is the norm?
And it begs the question - is John Darby the problem? It has been painfully clear from the start that Darby has grossly misread the sport's competition issues and continues to do so; an ardent supporter of the COT, Darby has been in charge of the garage area yet has curiously gone without criticism from the racing media.
Certainly the high-ups at Daytona have failed again and Darby warrants criticism of his role in NASCAR's continuing failure to redress the sport's competition woes. Phoenix may be one race, but the Gen-6 was unimpressive at Daytona and was even less impressive at Phoenix, with no evidence to believe it can make things better at Vegas or down the line.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)