Shape Up Or Step Down Brian France

The DWI-drug possession arrest of NASCAR CEO Brian France serves as a vindication of the late Jack Flowers.   Before his death in 2009 Flowers had covered NASCAR for Grand National Scene and from 1980 to 2005 he covered racing for Speedway Scene.  He became very critical of NASCAR and the France family in that time and before his death he published a slim book called The Dirt Under The Asphalt where he examined how NASCAR had wronged him and several others - his primary target was Brian France and Flowers went into some detail about Brian France's drug use and how the France family covered it up.   Brian worked at Tuscon Raceway Park in the early 1990s but was moved, and Flowers' reportage indicates it was to prevent arrest.   France also had a DUI in Daytona in 2006 where police were unable to prosecute.  Years back France supposedly was also checked into the Mayo Clinic under an assumed name.

So Brian France's drug use and drinking have been an open secret effectively ignored by the Race-Stream Media outside of the late Jack Flowers.   The immediate question one should ask is - why was the France family enabling a relative they knew was a drunk and essentially an addict to take over the racing sanctioning body they'd run so well for decades?

The other question to ask is - how can anyone justify letting Brian France keep his job?  As more than one wag has observed, Brian France should be getting the Jeremy Mayfield treatment, yet instead he is getting the Harvey Weinstein treatment - "rehab" and eventual return to normality, albeit without the loss of fortune Harvey Weinstein is now suffering.

Dave Moody notes the crossroad the sanctioning body now faces. That the sanctioning body faces this crossroad stems from the widespread coverup of France's drinking and drug use and resultant enabling of such behavior, and from the utter lack of credible debate as to whether Brian France ever should have been considered for the job - his successor, his uncle Jim France, by all evidence has far greater grasp of the nuances of racing than Brian ever has.

It is no accident that next to Roger Goodell, Brian France is the most hated CEO of a major sports sanctioning body in the US, and the hatred of both is for essentially the same reason - they are PR hacks lacking credible understanding of the inner workings of teams or the sport.   Brian France's ignorance of the inner workings of racing has shown in his hands-off approach, his lack of interaction with racing people (his blow-off of Martin Truex at the 2017 awards banquet was the most egregious example), and in his bad decisions -


The top-heavy TV deal has not worked - Brian was a key in the centralization of NASCAR's TV deals beginning in 2001; the two deals negotiated over the last seventeen seasons amounted to billions of dollars, yet the net result is the sport is poorer relative to everything else than it was before centralized TV deals - "if there is such thing as too much money, we had it," the late Robert Yates noted of the dodgy business economics of DiGard Racing, and it's obvious Brian France's TV deals have made for the same result - more money, but far more overspending.  

The reality was the old "hodgepodge" system where the tracks themselves negotiated their own media deals was fundamentally more effective for racing and was already netting ever-more money for tracks and teams.   Brian's approach has kept out networks the sport now needs more than ever - notably CBS, once the strongest network covering racing.   A revamped TV deal that decentralizes back to giving the tracks some more negotiating autonomy would allow CBS, MAVTV, and others into the sport, not limit it to just FOX and NBC.

This also relates to the absurd lack of TV money spent on NASCAR's lower touring series like Xfinity, Trucks, the Mod Tour, etc.   Allowing more networks in will allow more money to go to the lower series and thus make them more viable, for the long-term benefit of the sport.


The Chase concept is a failure - This is the signature Brian France decision and the one decision above all that has harmed the sport's long-term popularity.   The concept of playoffs in racing has corrupted the season, and the fact eight of the fourteen "Chase" championships to date - 2004-17 - would have seen a different champion in a season-long title format shows how the playoff format has crowned the wrong champion on a consistent basis.


The Car Of Tomorrow - Just one view of the car - a squat-looking top-heavy sedan body with a wing and grotesque gapped airdam - was enough to prove the concept would never work, and once it was shoved down the sport's throat it didn't work - it was dubbed The Quick Brick and instead it was the Sick Brick that wasted years of the sport's existence chasing a sham.


Moreover, areas where Brian France gets praise don't hold up -

He gets praised for making the sport safer - as if the sport's inevitable technology evolution was not already doing so.

He gets praised for pushing Diversity - a concept that is never anything but a dead end, shown in the failure of Danica Patrick, shoved down racing's throat for one reason - because she is a woman.

"But what justifies diversity? Nothing but unsupported assertions, repeated endlessly, piously, and loudly."

No one has ever made a credible argument that the sport being an all-male sport waving Confederate flags was ever relevant to anything and ignores how unmolested market forces create real mixture - Bubba Wallace success with Richard Petty illustrates unmolested market forces working.


In short there is no credible reason why Brian France should not step down.   He's an addict - that's been known for a long time and quietly enabled by everyone.  He's not qualified for the job he was given - he's proven that.   There is no way around it - Brian France needs to step down.

More NASCAR Questions

Twenty years ago NASCAR was on the rise and October's Diehard 500 was the most exciting race of that 1997 season with a profligacy of passing to where the official stat of 32 lead changes looks too low

Speedweeks 2017 hopes to see an upset winner of the 500 along the lines of the 2014 Firecracker 400 - though without the rain



The Wall Street Journal authored a widely-read analysis of the decline of NASCAR popularity and racing writer Jeff Gluck adds his own take by noting Brian France's absence from the sanctioning body to where he in essence has no stake in the company and Lesa France Kennedy and Jim France basically are the ones in charge even though Brian ostensibly handles day-to-day operation.

As one respondent, Shane McKinney, notes in the Gluck piece, "It's amazing the actual shareholders.....have no interest in NASCAR except to collect the monies."

It showcases what has been apparent for many years now - the incompetence of the sanctioning body's leadership.    It also raises questions about whether the France family down the road will continue to hold onto NASCAR and its racetrack brethren International Speedway Corporation.   Certainly the fact Monster Energy Drink is paying substantially less in sponsorship money than past sponsors is a disturbing sign the sport's value has faltered badly.  

It shows how much hope a lot of people have put into Monster Energy's involvement - for the sport's history shows it has genuine competitive excellence, excellence it needs to get back.

Brian France And A NASCAR Season - Yet Again - To Forget

NASCAR's 2016 season plodded to its end at Homestead and to the surprise of many Jimmie Johnson exploded to the championship by winning the Miami 400. That Johnson won the title - and became the third driver with seven Winston Cup titles - was a head-shaker and yet another layer of success for a driver who has never struggled for anything at the major league level, getting into stock cars by way of the old ASA Series in 1998 and having GM's then-racing boss Herb Fishel as a guiding force, to where it was obvious by 2000 that Johnson would be slotted with Fishel's designated championship outfit - Hendrick Motorsports.

The longtime story that Jeff Gordon "discovered" Johnson and signed him to Hendrick is just spin, as the prospect that Johnson would enter Winston Cup with a Ford team, a Dodge team, or a non-Hendrick Chevy team was nonexistent by dint of the fact Herb Fishel was basically his mentor - it would nonetheless provide reason to respect Johnson's successes if he'd won races and titles with one of the other Chevy teams like Morgan-McClure or Andy Petree Racing.  Being Fishel's hack inevitably puts a damper on Johnson's successes.

Johnson's title - the seventh time in now thirteen Chases where the declared champion was not the champion of a non-Chase format - and his widespread unpopularity testifies to the underrated problem that NASCAR's stars are not in sober fact worth rooting for, and it is just another example making the 2016 Winston Cup season worth forgetting.   The racing at the Cup level once again was the biggest reason - NASCAR's lack of lead changes was in graphic evidence to a more visible extent than normal this past season, and the low downforce package was pushed throughout the season in varied media forums even though the blunt truth of its utter failure testifies to the spin that substitutes for analysis in modern NASCAR.   There simply isn't reason to feel NASCAR is giving people the actual truth.

Brian France's reputation for spineless spin was in action yet again during Homestead weekend following word that NASCAR's champion's points fund was cut in half.   The spin is the points fund will be more equitably split - which rubs salt into the wound for the likes of Dave Marcis, who long demanded NASCAR and its tracks "pay a better damned purse" as he would caustically put it to Bruton Smith.   That NASCAR suddenly is going that way suggests there are real money problems.

And it led Brian France to hold a 30-minute presser defending the health of the sport, and his defenses as usual have no credibility. As one observer, Randy Cadenhead, put it, "he was not prepared and had no intention of fielding any hardball questions."    Indeed Cadenhead described the presser as "a trainwreck" and with a new Cup series sponsors still not signed just three months before the Daytona 500 - this twenty-three months after Sprint announced it was leaving the sport - the analogy to a trainwreck is apt.

There is also the promised new manufacturer for NASCAR - Brian France made it out that two such manufacturers were wanting to enter the sport, and yet there is no sign of anything.  


*****


So was there anything worth remembering in the 2016 NASCAR season?  Well yes - the Truck Series produced terrific races at Daytona (by far the best race of the year), Kansas, Texas, and Michigan, while the Xfinity series saw a pair of unusual affairs at Bristol and a very spirited Firecracker 250.   At the Cup level the Daytona 500's photo finish was virtually the only racing all day while the Firecracker 400 had the most sustained battle for the lead.   The Cup series also ended a drought spanning some 25 months without a first-time winner.  

Yet it was all thin competitive gruel for a sport that's supposed to be a lot better than this, illustrated not only by the Trucks but by the Indianapolis 500 and Indycar's Texas 600k finish, Indy Lights' 100-miler at the Brickyard, and Talladega's ARCA 200-miler.   


*****

Adding to the sense of bitterness is 2016 marked anniversaries of three of NASCAR's most memorable seasons -

In 1976 NASCAR's first greatest finish erupted in David Pearson's stunning wreck and victory in the Daytona 500, followed by his spectacular ten-win season, a spectacular nine victories and first title for Cale Yarborough, and gutsy efforts by Richard Petty, Dave Marcis, Benny Parsons, and Lennie Pond, not to mention a shocking comeback win by Donnie Allison amid a winless season for his brother Bobby.  It was a season highlighted by the Daytona 500 stunner and memorable battles at Atlanta, the Southern 500, Charlotte, Pocono, and Talladega.

Ten years later 1986 saw an eruption of thirteen Cup winners and three first-timers - none wilder than Bobby Hillin's upset at the chaotic Talladega 500.  A last-lap melee at Richmond by Dale Earnhardt sent a surprised Kyle Petty to his first win and was the first national notice to the questionable racing ethic of Earnhardt.   The story of the year was the mid-season eruption of Tim Richmond to national prominence; Richmond's eruption to seven wins was highlighted by his wreck at Pocono where he erased a lap deficit and stormed to a stunning photo-finish win; amid all that Earnhardt clawed to five wins and his second series title, and it wasn't until controversy and tragedy cut short his career that people realized how special Richmond was.

Ten years after that, the 1996 season began in one of the wildest Daytona 500s ever; a three-straight victory bid by Sterling Marlin faltered - he would settle for a huge comeback win at Talladega and a rain-shortened Firecracker win - and Dale Jarrett, a former 500 winner, stormed to the win that began a spectacular run of success (four wins that year alone) while Earnhardt earned a pair of wins and more controversy after a dropkick to Bobby Hamilton, denying Hamilton a win that would not come until a bitterly fought season reached Phoenix at the end of October. Memorable upsets by Geoff Bodine, Ricky Rudd, and Bobby Labonte - driving for Joe Gibbs Racing in the first year the organization opened its own engine shop - sandwiched around Hamilton's breakthrough.   The story of that season, though, was Jeff Gordon, who exploded to ten wins for the first time in his career, and Terry Labonte, who stormed to two wins and pounced on late-season DNFs by Gordon, this despite a wrist injury late in the season.   The Daytona 500, both Talladega weekends, Pocono in June, Dover in September, and Phoenix highlighted quality racing that season.

It was a case of a lot to look back upon and next to nothing to look forward to.   This may be the summation of what so many fans feel about NASCAR with the end of 2016 and Brian France's endless spin in the wake of real problems.

At Talladega And Elsewhere When Will NASCAR Figure It Out?

NASCAR declared Elliott Sadler the winner - even though objectively he isn't




And therein lay one of the fundamental problems NASCAR has that it seems incapable of addressing.   In the Sparks Energy 300 at Talladega Elliott Sadler was declared winner because the yellow flew for Joey Logano's wreck and NASCAR determined through scoring loops that somehow he was the leader.   Why the yellow even flew at that circumstance is a question without much of an answer - saying it was for safety ignores that the leaders crashed anyway.

Moreover, has NASCAR ever given a credible reason for freezing the field when the caution comes out?  They implemented that rule because two or three cars at New Hampshire in 2003 sped up to put someone a lap down with Dale Jarrett crashed down the frontstretch - rather than hold those specific drivers accountable for a questionable decision, NASCAR decided to change the rule.  

The issue of letting cars race to the line has been a longstanding one where NASCAR has demonstrated the safety rationale for freezing the field is a fraud in such finishes as the 2004 Daytona 250 and the 2007 500.   The entire concept has done nothing for safety; it's put the wrong winner into victory lane on several occasions. 

Even when the right winner was seen, such as in the ARCA General Tire 200 the day before, there was no safety reason for not racing to the line.  

The rule needs to go, period.   Mike Joy in 1990 in Stock Car Racing Magazine proffered a sensible alternative - a red light rule when track conditions make racing to the line dubious - basically throw the red and yellow flags and lights on to make the cars slow down without racing in such a circumstance and revert to the last completed lap for the running order.  

It created needless controversy over what had been a competitive 300-miler for the Xfinity cars at Talladega.   NASCAR's absurd no-superdrafting rule bit Aric Almirola and Brendan Gaughn early on with a pass-through penalty and also once again needlessly stifled passing - best illustrated by the futile sidedraft battle by Joey Logano, Ryan Reid, et al that never got above fourth in tahe race'smiddle stages before Reid's crash set up the frantic final 25 or so laps.   The entire fiasco also ruined a superb effort by Brennan Poole, who took the flag first despite hitting the wall at the stripe with another car.  

It of course started with Logano and swerving with Sadler that sent him into the wall and a vicious semi-T-bone hit, and if you remember such controversies as Irwindale in 2009 that have followed Logano through his career one can feel a bit of poetic justice at work.  

The controversy also puts a damper on Sadler, the official winner for the first time in some two years.   Always a classy type, Sadler shouldn't have to defend himself for winning at Talladega; he wasn't the issue here, NASCAR's judgement is the issue.  


*****


A delicious subplot to this Winston 500 weekend developed with Robbie Allison.   The son of Davey Allison and grandson of Bobby, Robbie won at Anderson Speedway, his first race win.   It's too premature for him to hit the superovals, but that career path looks certain down the road.  

Lugnuts And NASCAR Ineptitude

The most inexplicable rule change in years - maybe ever - has become a major controversy.  NASCAR is allowing teams to secure tires with three to four lugnuts, not all five. It has become controversial because several drivers have spoken against the change - the most public is Tony Stewart, and his comments have gotten him a $35,000 fine by NASCAR, which the NASCAR Drivers Council has stated it will pay.

That NASCAR even implemented this rule is baffling, with wanting to "spice up" pitstops somehow being considered a worthwhile competitive goal.   That it is self-evident nonsense - missing even one lugnut inevitably weakens the wheel and leads to trouble - that NASCAR decision-makers somehow didn't want to see is even more disturbing, for it indicates even less grasp of the inner workings of the sport in the sanctioning body's leadership than even pessimists thought.  

Stewart has been controversial almost from his rookie season, and his on- and off-track deportment has often been malicious (the use of bodyguards in his Chili Bowl confrontation with a heckler curiously has gone unnoticed - it's the kind of thing classic thugs have) - and we of course know it became lethal in 2014.   None of that matters here - NASCAR fining Stewart is wrong not least for the fact that such fines inherently inhibit honest discussion.  

Kurt Busch has pushed for NASCAR to convert to one central lugnut as other racing series use - the problem is it's totally unnecessary - just tighten all five lugnuts.  

Racing writer Randy Hallman compares Stewart's outspokenness to Dale Earnhardt Sr., saying he was "a driver not hesitant to say what he believed needed to be said."   It's a spotty analogy given what Earnhardt said often had a self-serving quality or wasn't terribly insightful - for one, Earnhardt's famous "Bill France must be rolling over in his grave" comment about the lack of passing in the 2000 Daytona 500 was ultimately little better than a Captain Obvious moment.   I don't particularly remember one policy battle with NASCAR Earnhardt ever was right about. 

Moreover Hallman's premise that drivers since Earnhardt's death have lacked outspokenness is wrong - drivers speaking out became more, rather than less, prevalent in 2001 and after; even rumors of drivers acting on "what (they) believed needed to be said" in 2001 got media attention, best shown by the infamous Stock Car Reporters website and its sham Talladega-boycott story authored before the April 2001 500-miler there.

What's struck me about the last fifteen years is not lack of driver outspokenness but a mild prevalence of it, more of such than people seem to think.    This is why NASCAR has the low downforce package despite the universal evidence of history from 1998 onward that the concept does not work - and isn't this year, either. 

Stewart's outspokenness needs to be taken on an individual basis - what is the issue, what is he saying, does what he's saying jibe with what's really going on?   It's the same with everyone else.   NASCAR indeed is wrong to fine him here - and they need a better explanation than Scott Miller's mealy-mouthed assertion that NASCAR will reevaluate the lugnut rule.  

Sports always need honest discussion - and it's a two-way street, applying to the Drivers Council as well as NASCAR.

More Fontana Postmortems

The California 400 weekend is now past, but there remain some postmortems worth mentioning. 

The incident that had everyone talking was Danica Patrick's crash after tangling with Kasey Kahne. Kahne, not known for controversy on the racetrack, seemed surprised when Patrick swerved up toward him, while Patrick tore up yet another racecar in a career increasingly defined by torn-up racecars.

While she was wrecking again, her boyfriend Ricky Stenhouse led a surprising surge into the top-5 by edging out Chase Elliott.  Stenhouse and the moribund Roush fleet haven't had anything to be proud of, but lately have begun regaining some ground.

The young guns may have a new member in Brian Scott, whop quietly drove Richard Petty's #44 to a respectable 12th.

Contrast these young guns with Austin Dillon, who won the pole but never led, struggled all race, and finished 24th.   He's still ahead of the game from where he was last year, but progress still isn't coming at the pace a lot of people seem to expect.

Haven't we seen this movie before?  Kevin Harvick leads the most laps and at the end doesn't have what is needed to win the race. 

Speaking of faltering, Martin Truex Jr's season has plummeted the last few races even as he led over twenty laps at Fontana - this of course is no thanks to Joey Logano, as Joey did it again in a wreck at Fontana.


Before the race weekend Brian France stated that "there is some interest by a couple of manufacturers" to race in Cup - with Rumor Control Central indicating Audi. We'll believe that when we see it, though one certainly wants Dodge to return as well as Honda to enter.


So it goes as the Easter Bye Week hits.

No, NASCAR's 2016 5&5 Rule Won't Work

As the 2016 Winston Cup media tour proceeds we've had several pieces lauding the low downforce package for the Cup cars to be used this coming season, from the likes of USA Today (here from latter October of 2015) and from Carl Edwards during the 2016 Media Tour as he laid out three reasons why the low downforce package will be better. Tony Stewart also touched on this in a Dave Moody interview critical of Brian France's aloofness from garage areas - at Pocono in 2015 Stewart says Brian France "gave me a hard time" for lobbying for lower downforce as Gene Stefanyshyn lobbied for higher downforce.

What is always missed in these discussions is that history has already proven low downforce doesn't work, a fact Stewart seemed oblivious to in his shots at Stefanyshyn's racing credentials during his interview, illustrating that credentials doesn't always mean command of the facts.  The first version of the 5&5 Rule debuted in 1998.   It was designed to lower downforce and thus reduce corner speeds - the rationale cited was the same then as it is now - and increase passing, it accomplished neither, to where late that season Terry Labonte publicly stated the package had made the racing boring, and NASCAR dropped it in November.  

Downforce increased.   In August-September 1999 Goodyear made a tire change to a compound designed to battle Hoosier in Winston West racing; it had more stagger and debuted at Michigan.

Late in that 1999 Yankee 400 the battle for the lead swelled into a spirited nose to nose fight reminiscent of Michigan of old - i.e. of the bias-ply tire era.


Another heated battle for the lead developed at the Delaware 400 at Dover that September.  But by 2001-3 Goodyear was running a much harder tire compound.  In 2004, after heavy lobbying from Rusty Wallace and after John Darby took over the garage area, NASCAR tried the 5&5 Rule again and doggedly kept it, via multiple spoiler reductions to go with some three Darby-mandated swaybar changes and resultant changes by Goodyear to tires - and it all accomplished nothing.   The COT then debuted in 2007 as a low downforce concept - and failed.  

Drivers lauded NASCAR after the races at Kentucky and Darlington because they ran low downforce - yet passing didn't improve.  Neither race stood out for anything - Kentucky didn't approach any kind of record for lead changes in 2015 - it had thirteen official and nine unofficial; in 2011 it had twenty official.   Darlington saw 24 lead changes in 2015, not exactly a significant upgrade over the 21 lead changes of 2011's running with high downforce or even 2014's running that saw 22.  

And criticism of the high downforce package used at Indianapolis and Michigan in the summer of 2015 ignored the real problems with passing - the cars still have too much horsepower (by well over 300) and the tire used simply isn't sufficient for grip; the fact the cars never stalled out in traffic as opposed to with low downforce ought to be recognized as a manifest positive.   Contrast this with the Truck series and the epic Kasey Kahne-Erik Jones sidedraft battle in 2015 with a tire that gripped well enough that they could lean hard and fight thusly - it raced more like old bias-plies than radials, notorious for needing to catch the car instead of race it.   The Trucks are also high downforce vehicles.  

What remains the truth is that underpowered and overgripped racecars have produced the most lead changes, be it Indycar or Indy Lights on the superovals, the NASCAR Modifieds at New Hampshire, the Trucks on big tracks, and in restrictor plate racing - the 80 lead changes at the Cal Indy 500 at Fontana would not have been possible with lower downforce; neither would the Erik Jones-Kasey Kahne shootout last May.

Making the same mistakes made in 1998, 2004, and beyond won't make the racing better, and NASCAR needs to know better - still.  Racing is about lead changes, not throttle control.  It's about not having to catch a racecar, not about struggling to handle. 


A superb insight is provided in a question asked by veteran NASCAR writer Mike Mulhern - what is the over-under on the first rule change for 2016?

NASCAR's Chase To Nothing

Brian France does little more than prove he is utterly clueless about racing, and now he astonishingly has changed NASCAR's Busch and Truck Series into Chase formats despite respectable point races in those two series over the last decade without a Chase format.   France's cluelessness shows in his comments about the misbegotten format -

"When we looked at how successful the format is (in Winston Cup)...."  Stop.   There has been no success with the format in Winston Cup.   The artificial exclusion of fields from any kind of points contention for the final three months of the season, the artificial reracking of points, and the resultant lack of legitimacy to the series champion - all shown with winless Ryan Newman's reracking into title contention in 2014 and Kyle Busch's title despite missing a third of the season, and with the Racing Reference website's comparison of the Cup champ with what the actual champion would be under a points format that flowed naturally as was done until 2004 (with Kevin Harvick beating Joey Logano for the title by 21 points if 2015 was a non-Chase format) - has resulted in an undeniable net loss in popularity, attendances, and sponsorships for racing.  

"The way to win in the future is you've got to beat people, you've got to be winning, you've got to be in the crosshairs of elimination at any given moment." 

So where are the lead changes?   For any of that to be true, Brian, the lead changes would have to be increasing.  The strategy would have to be "I have to go for the lead right now."  That lead changes are nonexistent shows apart from the sport's dismal handling of technology and spending issues that drivers are NOT trying harder.   The winner of the most races is not gaining on winless drivers.    Incentive to win, far from being enhanced, has been stifled - to where Kevin Harvick's crew chief acknowledged Harvick's pursuit of win after win hurt his Chase chances in 2015..   No one is trying to win these races because NASCAR will not allow anything to be gained from it - they're just riding and trying to collect points.  

This makes NASCAR honcho Steve O'Donnell's assertion that the new format would eliminate points-racing - he cited Erik Jones' stroker ace imitation at Homestead as an example of what the Chase format will ostensibly eliminate - all the more dishonest.  

Stifling incentive to win is the inevitable result of a new format to the Truck Series - a caution clock.   Every twenty green-flag minutes will see a mandatory caution.   "We think it's going to add to the strategy during the race," says O'Donnell - this in the face of realworld evidence that knowing when cautions will fly makes drivers not try to lead.   Citing that Cup teams make pitstops under early competition cautions by O'Donnell as usual ignores what really happens - nothing changes as far as going for the lead - the only spot in a race that's worth having - goes.

In 1974 NASCAR ran a one-season-only points format that rewarded purse money won times number of starts divided by 1,000 - the purpose was to reward winning races above everything else.   That format worked - the only issue was it worked too well - the 1974 point lead changed nine times between Richard Petty and Cale Yarborough, who won ten races each; Petty outpointed almost the entire field at several late-season races because he'd won more money than anyone else, while David Pearson campaigned just 21 races and finished third in points with seven wins.   Convoluted as that point system was, it was fundamentally the correct idea - and it's what NASCAR needs, a points system that requires winning races and most laps led, with top finishes secondary to points success. 

Brian France's lack of understanding about racing continues to prove itself with another misbegotten idea for a sport woefully dry on competitive worth, a sport whose competitive apex was among the most compelling sporting dramas anyone could imagine.   2016 is supposed to be better than what Brian France thinks.

Sizing Up Brian France Entering The Second Half

NOTE: This has been updated since initial publication.



With the Firecracker 400's completion the Winston Cup season enters the second half in earnest, and we get more verbiage from Brian France as he pats himself on the back amid his discussion about "robust discussion" about the 2015 schedule. Whenever Brian France speaks he tends to put his foot in his mouth to at least a minor extent, and he does it again when he pats himself on the back that points racing has ostensibly been reduced with his new format where winning one race in effect locks a driver into the Chase.

Looking at the overall racing doesn't show any appreciable increase in competitive intensity.   Certainly there have been good competitive spots - apart from the plate races the season has seen unusually good racing at Fontana, Bristol, Martinsville, and to a lesser extent Kentucky.   But it also saw Dale Junior's admission at Talladega that he backed off trying to win because he already had a win and thus had no incentive to fight harder.  

Yes, it bears repeating that the issue of competition is not solely a points issue; that it a myriad of issues between the cars being too fast, handling being too important instead of the draft (see the Kansas Truck 200 back in May for the best non-plate race example where the opposite was the case), and the unraceability of radial tires.   And it bears remembering that even in NASCAR's competitive apex era of 1971-84 more races didn't produce as much passing than did; it's to be expected in any endeavor to have bad days as well as good. 

Yet for all that, one should not let France off the hook, for the points racing ethos still exists.   That the win by itself is not incentivized, and that most laps led remains grossly under-incentivized, remains a blind spot for the sanctioning body.  

Daytona and Talladega both saw over 40 lead changes; it is manifestly false that the sport can't once again get over 50 there and at Pocono, Michigan, Charlotte, Indianapolis, Kansas, Kentucky, etc.


*****


There is also the seemingly unending issue of NASCAR's over-control of the racing, shown again in the Firecracker 250 finish and the controversy over NASCAR's no-push-drafting rule.   The foolishness of NASCAR was shown for all yet again as it tried to justify having a rule that gives the officiating tower a control of the racing it has no right to have.   Kasey Kahne and Ryan Sieg push-drafted to the win as did others, and only James Buescher got penalized for it. 

It bears repeating how push-drafting had evolved by 2013 - shown in the Truck 250 at Talladega - away from the bizarre look of 2011 back toward conventional pack racing, and the net positives of increased passing, especially for smaller teams able to fight the big boys straight up, outweigh negatives.   And it is just part of the problem of the officiating tower being given more control when NASCAR needs to be taking such control away and giving it back to the racers, whether it's closing pit road when the yellow flies, dictating how fast cars can enter and exit the pits (before NASCAR started closing pit road in March 1989 there was no pit safety issue; that happened AFTER NASCAR began closing pit road), and limiting what parts of the asphalt drivers can pass on (see Junior's 2003 Talladega win and Tony Stewart's 2008 non-win).  

Brian France needs to give NASCAR a major philosophical change - the belief that the sanctioning body has to meddle has to go.   Sensible rules are always needed; meddling isn't a sensible rule


*****


Brian France wants more team owners in the sport, and "is continuing to look at ways to reduce costs for teams."   It does beg the question of why he's still allowing the likes of Rick Hendrick and Jack Roush not only to field three or four racecars but to control the engine and chassis supply of almost everyone else.   And it is a question the manufacturers need to be asked - isn't it time to help other teams build their own engine shops and thus build their own engines? 

As for manufacturers, there remains a need for explanation of why Dodge quit the sport and why Honda so far has not entered it.   Richard Petty's Daytona win is an unrealized boon that would have benefitted Dodge - and still can if/when Dodge returns to the sport.

Related to such issues remains NASCAR's exclusivity deals, notably its deal with Goodyear; such deals have either taken away potential team sponsors or outright shut out certain companies from participating in the sport.   No one can credibly claim Goodyear exclusivity has made the sport better, or that Firestone and Hoosier can't help the sport by helping more teams.

And the wildcard thrown into the mix is the new Race Team Alliance, a business alliance involving Hendrick, Roush, Richard Childress Racing, Petty, Ganassi-SABCO, Michael Waltrip Racing, Joe Gibbs, Stewart-Haas, and and Penske.   The stated purpose is to pool ideas on cost-saving in relation to travel and to parts acquisition, with the idea of getting a hotel partner for raceteams being floated.   Some have compared this to the now-defunct Formula One Constructors Association, an alliance of F1 teams that worked together in negotiations with the FIA, the F1 series' governing body.   Rob Kaufmann, the co-founder of Michael Waltrip's team, is head of the group. 

It will be interesting to see where this goes, and if it brings about something close to the spending controls - aka salary cap - that racing has long needed.


*****


France stated he won't limit Cup driver participation in lower series, and thus remains blind to how Cup drivers have bled the Busch Series dry - to where only fifteen drivers ran the full schedule in 2013 and only seventeen have run the full schedule in 2014.   The Truck Series is in the same boat even though Cup drivers for the most part don't race there - only seventeen drivers have run all the races, and while few Cup drivers race in the series Kyle Busch has run five times with five wins, versus just two other drivers winning even once in eight races entering July.  

While France hinted a new sponsor for the Busch Series is pretty much around the corner, the fact basically no one can make any money there or in the Trucks remains a black spot for him.   Would it really hurt him if he switched some of the multi-billion dollar TV money into the purses in support races? 


*****


There was the usual talk about Iowa Speedway, and curiously missing seemed to be discussion of the validity of hosting non-points races such as the All Star Race.   Such events have outlived their usefulness as evidenced again in Charlotte's All Star Race.

There was also talk about attendance declines, with Dover singled out for some criticism.   Overlooked is that Dover is still drawing quality crowds; they look smaller because the track overbuilt the way Michigan and Rockingham did.   Dover does warrant criticism in that it has proven two things -


* Concrete is worthless as a racing surface, as Dover has struggled to produce competitive racing for the twenty years it has run concrete.

* Shorter is not better.   Dover cut to 400 miles after 1996 because NASCAR raised the sanction fee for a 500-mile race - and Dover's 400s are nowhere close to its 500s in competitive depth.   If anything other tracks in addition to Dover need to go to 450 miles or back to the full 500.


So Brian France has thus spoken again, and the 2014 season has gotten more enjoyable of recent, in spite of him.

What NASCAR Has To See To Gain Back Credibility

This was initially published February 17; it has been updated



MRN's Dave Moody notes the angry reactions to Austin Dillon's Daytona 500 pole in RCR's renewal of the number 3, a convenient "feel good" story of the kind racing fans stopped trusting long ago. That distrust of the sanctioning body is so prevalent has been well known for some time, and that it has come out with a vengeance after Austin Dillon's pole run is hardly surprising. Moody notes the absurdities of conspiracy-mongering in accusing Dillon's pole run of being manipulated by NASCAR. To add to his point, qualifying produced several surprises - Martin Truex on the front row, a rebound of Roush Fenway Fords coming off a subpar season, promising efforts by Richard Petty's cars - notably the #43 of Aric Almirola, now wrenched by Trent Owens, whose birth father Randy Owens was Richard's brother-in-law and one of his crewmen, struck down by a freak water tank explosion at Talladega in 1975 - and the curious back seat to which the Hendrick and Stewart/Haas cars were shoved almost from the opening of practice.   And to top it off was Denny Hamlin's win in the Busch Clash Saturday night where Chevrolets - normally favored at Daytona - were noticeably left behind by the Fords and Toyotas.


Conspiracy thoughts have long permeated the sport and NASCAR has no one to blame but itself, because it insists on giving itself the most control over the racing perhaps of any sports sanctioning body.   The officiating tower in NASCAR has been given more control than anywhere else over the years, to where it controls when pit road is opened - the rule closing pit road came into being in March 1989 and has steadily seen additional pit restrictions that did not exist, and weren't particularly needed - how fast drivers can enter or exit the pits - leading to nonstop pit speeding violations as dubious as most civilian traffic tickets - and at Daytona and Talladega it controls where cars can and can't race - its yellow line rule has done nothing but lead to numerous dubious calls and non-calls, the most infamous remaining the 2003 Winston 500 win by Dale Junior passing on the apron of Turn Three and the 2008 Diehard 500 win by Tony Stewart when Regan Smith was flagged for his last-lap pass below the line at the stripe, this after Ramsey Poston of NASCAR made comments to the effect that such a pass was in fact legal.


Distrust in the sanctioning body was nowhere close to as pronounced in years past, to where legitimate controversies over the legality of some race wins did not harm the sanctioning body long term.   Among them was the 1973 National 500, where Cale Yarborough's Chevy won but postrace inspection revealed probable violation of engine size; engine builder Robert Yates acknowledged in the Tom Jensen book Cheating that the engine wasn't legal.  The controversy led Bobby Allison to file a lawsuit he soon withdrew after a lengthy meeting with Bill France Jr.   Other controversies have been the 1984 Firecracker 400, which oddly didn't become particularly controversial until the infamous 1995 "The Call" magazine article questioning NASCAR's level of control of the racing.   There were also controversies over the spacer penalty to Mark Martin in 1990 - that one was a controversy defending Martin against NASCAR - and the legality of Junior Johnson's racecar in 1991 after a major engine size penalty in May and a dubious inspection of the car's fuel capacity in October; Larry McReynolds stating he saw the pumps and they showed Junior's car taking in more than the allowed 22 gallons of fuel. 


There is also the lingering bitterness in some fan circles over NASCAR's treatment of Tim Richmond, which may never go away.


NASCAR has begun to make changes to try and win back fans via better racing.   The first test in the Busch Clash was a good start, though by no means a complete start; spoiler changes to improve racing at intermediate tracks still await live-fire competition, though Charlotte testing showed some promise.  


But the goal of reestablishing credibility remains one where NASCAR must act via letting go control of the racing.   Fewer templates, opening up areas of the racetrack for the racers (i.e. no more yellow line rules), liberalizing pit road rules to allow the racers control instead of the officiating tower, and the officiating tower putting the flags away a la NFL referees in playoff games - those are areas NASCAR needs to seriously explore.    And Saturday's Daytona 300 Busch Series race illustrates how far NASCAR has to go between the foolishness of trying to police tandem drafting - it bears repeating that the practice was evolving in 2013 to where, as shown in the Talladega 250 for the Trucks, tandem drafts could pass but didn't just stay together, the second-place vehicle bailed on the leader and passed, while conventional drafts were able to keep up and catch up; it was a perfect mixture of styles that produced 29 lead changes in 250 miles - and the absurd penalty on James Buescher combined with NASCAR's on-air admission to not being able to catch all infractions. 


Fans have justly beein upset with NASCAR over how the Busch Series race developed, and Speedweeks 2014 has seen some very good racing - notably the Clash, the first Twin, and the Nextera 250 Truck race, while the Regan Smith win in the 300 was amazing - but also illustrated that NASCAR has to go further in letting go.


Austin Dillon's pole would not generate the controversy it has if NASCAR ran a tight ship and eliminated conflicts of interest.   If Aric Almirola or Martin Truex or someone less known than the sport's "stars" like Jimmie Johnson or Jeff Gordon wins the 500, that will help weed out conspiracy buffs - and it's worth noting the 500 isn't far removed from the wins by  darkhorses Jamie McMurray and Trevor Bayne.    Running a tight ship where there isn't conflict of interest and the racers instead of the officiating tower are seen to have the control is the biggest way to weed out the conspiracy mongers.    James Buescher and Regan Smith offered some more proof of this.

Hard Questions With Answers For NASCAR 2014

THIS WAS INITIALLY PUBLISHED ON JANUARY 19 - IT HAS BEEN UPDATED



The NASCAR season is close to arriving, so we ask some hard questions of the sanctioning body with what we believe are the answers -


##########



What is with the changes in the points structure?

It's because Brian France is becoming more desperate to make his Chase concept something it simply can never be - a viable championship format for racing.   The concept of artificially locking 10-12 drivers into the points race for the final ten races hasn't worked because the racers can only points-race, and people see through it - it is not a legitimate racing championship, it is nothing but a contrived formula where the champion is not a legitimate one because the championship is decided by nothing but a short run.   Brian France's talk of putting more emphasis on winning is not about making winning mean something - it's yet another contrivance because the emphasis on winning is ONLY in the context of making the Chase.  

France still needs to figure out that "Game 7 Moments" do not happen in racing - they can't.   Racing is about going for the win, period, and letting points fall where they fall covering the entirety of the season - wins in March or June or whenever directly matter in November.    The sport got memorable points battles because the racers didn't particularly race for points - they raced to win races and knew that the entirety of their season mattered.   Instead today what they have to do is points-race, and for the notional chance of making a ridiculous artificial season cut-off.



What of NASCAR's claim that (quoting USA TODAY's Jeff Gluck) its internal research from 2010 shows fans favoring eliminations and a one-race playoff?

NASCAR spin.   That's all it is.  There is no sincere belief anywhere in any playoff format for racing.   The fans want the Chase concept eliminated, period.  




Will aero changes after the two Charlotte tests help make for better racing?

NASCAR's two Charlotte tests (the first before the Diehard 500) led to overdue increases in spoiler size after it was seen that the larger spoiler allowed more in the way of passing - it remains curious, though, that NASCAR apparently tested a roof blade in Charlotte yet has not mandated it despite the device's history of success at improving passing.    The two Charlotte tests appear to have reconfirmed what was seen with the Trucks and Busch Series at Kansas as well as with the Trucks at Homestead this past season - when the draft is more important than handling, passing goes up.    We can hope 2014 will see the draft become relevant more often again as we saw with the Truck Series and Busch Series races at Kansas as well as the Trucks at Homestead.




Drivers say they're racing as hard as they can.   Are they?

No, they're not.   It shows because lead changes are - despite NASCAR spin - scarce.   40 lead changes is supposed to be the norm; breaking 50 lead changes is not supposed to be an exception, and the last non-restrictor plate race to flirt with 50 lead changes was the National 500 at Charlotte in 2000.   That it is in large part racecar-related is true enough; it does not, though, give the drivers as much benefit of the doubt as they seem to want.

The points-racing ethos showed in most graphic form at Talladega in October when the field went single-file for the final 15 laps with no one trying to pass - the mentality of points-racing took over.    Tony Stewart's 2011 championship also illustrates points-racing - he won five of the last ten races yet all he got out of it was a points tie - he traveled more miles for fewer results.    This is where the sport has to get points-racing out entirely - Stewart should by the mere fact of winning five of the last ten races have clinched the title weeks before the season's end.   This is the kind of incentive that makes racers race harder - the only alternative needs to be go for the win; traveling more miles should produce more results.



NASCAR for 2014 has gone further in banning tandem drafting on the restrictor plate tracks.   Is there any validity to opposition to it?

No, there isn't.   The arguments against it dance around the real hatred of it - it looks weird.   Yet this mentality ignores how it has been evolving back toward conventional drafting - shown in the Truck 250 at Talladega last October - and how it remains by far the best power to pass the sport has ever seen and NASCAR can't credibly justify any rule that takes away passing.




NASCAR hired ex-Penske Racing honcho Richard Buck to replace John Darby.   Will he make a difference? 

We can't of course know right now, but the changes that have come of late are a sign of promise. Darby's tenure as Winston Cup director was a failure in that he kept pushing for rules packages that were basically evolution of the failed 5&5 Rule of 1998 - he sought to cut downforce and never produced any success with it; he pushed the Car Of Tomorrow and it failed.    He refused to understand that the draft has to be more important than handling to produce better racing; the other way around never succeeds.

The signing of Gene Stefanyshyn into the sanctioning body appears to have had a positive effect, though more results down the road need to happen.



Will there be substantial schedule changes down the road as rumored with the new NBC TV deal?

There has been debate to that effect but there is no evidence it can happen.    The only tracks whose demographics aren't as strong as advertised are Martinsville and Fontana and Toyota has invested quite a bit in Fontana; if anything we may see Fontana get back its second Winston Cup date because of Toyota's involvement, not to mention NASCAR still seems to believe in the myth of the LA audience.   Martinsville is beloved to perhaps too much a degree given its small size and the overrated quality of its racing, but there is no lobby to get rid of it.    There is talk of adding a road course but that's hype; the road courses are competitively worthless.   Loose talk about going to Eldora is nonsense because that place is strictly bush league.   Don't look for scheduling changes.



What about the new NBC TV deal?

Mike Mulhern put it best in ATHLON SPORTS 2014 NASCAR Preview when he said the biggest story of 2013 was that Brian France got NBC to bid for half the season while getting FOX to stay with the sport through 2024.   The laughable part of the NBC deal is that it was a blind bid and NBC was basically bidding against itself - no one else had any interest, and ESPN and Turner tried to get out of their 2014 deal.   The last time NBC covered the sport it basically got shafted by NASCAR between losing money and then seeing the Chase - ostensibly intended to help the network's faltering ratings - alienate the sport's audience.

It's unlikely that everything the audience hates about how the sport is covered will change given the lack of independent voices involved in covering the sport - NBC's reported on-air talent is basically the usual. 



Should people buy ESPN's claim that it will still devote quality coverage to NASCAR in this, the last year of its TV deal?

No.   ESPN short-shrifted hockey once it got outbid by NBC and was never that beneficial to NASCAR to start with; Brock Yates noted back in 1987 that ESPN's lowball approach did little to improve the appeal of racing to people and the fact is steadily lost coverage to upstart TNN and networks involved with Ken Squier's company showed this.    Keep in mind ESPN tried to give up the 2014 season.



Is 2014 a lull year for NASCAR as USA TODAY'S Nate Ryan writes?

No.   Ryan's piece in USA TODAY'S NASCAR preview release lists "lull" periods in - 2000, when NASCAR dropped track-by-track TV deals for centralized deals - 2006, when NBC quit - and even 2007, when ESPN returned.    The piece in effect blames the outgoing networks for short-shrifting promotion of the sport in those periods, but that's just the self-serving spin of NASCAR.   The reality is the period from the start of 2000 onward has been a net negative for the sport and the fault lies entirely with NASCAR.    "In 2005 the sport reached its most recent zenith with record crowds and TV ratings following the second edition of the Chase.......captured by charismatric Tony Stewart," writes Ryan.   Funny, what is remembered about 2005 is that the Chase was put into effect because ratings and crowds had begun declining in 2003 and the decline began to accelerate with implemetation of the Chase format.  

"NASCAR ended (2013) without much momentum."   Ryan blames it on the Kyle Larson crash at Daytona - an event forgotten right away once it became clear there were no serious injuries and the fencing issue was solely about a fixable crossover gate, not anything fundamentally wrong with the fencing - on Johnson's sixth title lacking indelible moments - as though any of Johnson's titles had even one such moment - other off-track fiascos such as Michael Waltrip Racing's dirty pool at Richmond - a legitimate issue - and the injuries and/or poor showing of Denny Hamlin, Brad Keselowski, and Tony Stewart, a gross overselling of their popularity.

2014 may be a "lull" year only because NASCAR still can't get it right, not because it is losing two TV partners.


Chevrolet has basically monopolized the sport since 1976.   Will that ever change?

Unfortuneately the answer seems an emphatic No.   Ford has clearly cut its NASCAR spending and there is some concern it may pull out entirely as Dodge has.   Only Chevy and Toyota are spending serious money in the sport and it's almost an open secret how NASCAR's hierarchy doesn't want a non-Chevrolet brand to dominate the sport, though to be fair under Billy France Ford won six manufacturer titles 1992-2002 and the sport was healthier for it.   Dodge had an opportunity to return to the sport with Petty and possibly Childress, but of course it didn't develop; there is literally no sign Honda or any other marque have any NASCAR interest.   And last season Toyota shot itself in the foot with the fiasco of its engine program.  This isn't good for racing.



Will Jimmie Johnson win a seventh Winston Cup title?

Realistically it's impossible to see any scenario where he doesn't.   He is Chevrolet's designated champion and was made such when former Chevy racing boss Herb Fishel in effect put him into stock cars in the latter 1990s.   Hendrick Motorsports has virtually all of its life been Chevy's designated championship team - at the direct expense of others running the brand, hence the Childress-Earnhardt-Petree engineering alliance following a similar Pontiac teams alliance in the 1990s - and there was no possibility Fishel would ever allow a team like Morgan-McClure or a non-Chevy organization to sign Johnson.   And the Chase format has basically been a Jimmie Johnson show.   So the championship is becoming less and less revelant.



Is Johnson's dominance good for the sport?

Not really.   He is so widely disliked and the sport's attendances and TV ratings have dropped so much that it is impossible for the sport to be deriving any positives from his success.   The comparison has long been made with Richard Petty and Dale Earnhardt and their periods of dominance - except Petty for his entire career was racing against two generations of Hall Of Famers while Earnhardt was also racing many a Hall Of Famer (Tim Richmond, Davey Allison, etc).    Moreover, Petty and Earnhardt's eras saw lengthy periods where they were not winning championships, plus Earnhardt won the most races in a season only twice (1987 and 1990) - the nickname Dominator was pretty laughable when Underachiever was more appropriate.  

Nowhere did Petty or Earnhardt so dominate an era as to turn people off, though they certainly had seasons where they crushed opposition early and often.   Johnson's dominance has been smothering to where it has helped smother a lot of life out of the sport.    There hasn't been any kind of rivalry - challenges by Kyle Busch, Carl Edwards, and Matt Kenseth were stillborn for the most part and the artificiality of the Chase has further neutered any kind of rivalry.  



Can Dale Earnhardt Jr. ever become even close to that level of winner?

That he's won just twice with Hendrick Motorsports and is seeing his crew chief bolt for NBC indicates that since it hasn't happened by now it's not going to happen.   Junior is reminiscent of Bill Elliott in that he won because of a technology gimmick - aero work in the transmission tunnel of DEI cars - and once everyone else figured out what he was doing he disappeared.   Though by all accounts he's someone who breaks the present NASCAR mold - see the Ricky Craven piece below - it hasn't made him a winner despite being in an ideal situation.



Does Winston Cup now have a Rookie Of The Year battle that's legitimate?

Doubtful.   Kyle Larson and Austin Dillon are the rookies getting the most media love, yet overlooked is that neither showed much to believe in in a Busch Series that may be at its weakest competitive point in decades - Dillon won the championship yet failed to win a race in the Busch Series in 2013 and had fewer top-fives and fewer laps led than runner-up Sam Hornish (himself a driver out of his element in stock cars).   Larson finished eighth in points without a win and with just 107 laps led - all in a series where only fifteen drivers ran all the races, just four series regulars won even one race, and only Regan Smith won more than one (winning twice).   The lack of money invested into the series by NASCAR is an open secret (as it is with the Trucks and other lower touring series). 

Morevover, it would seem that the technology arms race has made it harder rather than easier for young talent to go anywhere.   The last seven seasons have failed to produce a top rookie who has actually done much - Juan Montoya is now gone after two fruitless road course wins while Joey Logano continues to stumble along with Penske despite three wins - and last year's rookie Ricky Stenhouse looked pedestrian in the ex-Matt Kenseth #17.   And drivers who are getting rides look more and more like F1 rejects who can work with engineers.  The flow of short track talent graduating to national touring series no longer looks like it is happening.



Former driver now analyst Ricky Craven has said the sport needs to roll on driver personalities, citing Ernie Irvan in the 1990s as someone who "challenged the status quo."   Is he right?

No.   Citing Ernie Irvan undercuts his argument because Irvan was a driver who didn't challenge the status quo; he wrecked a lot of cars, wrecked a lot of fields, and despite winning races never established any serious popularity until Robert Yates signed him to replace the late Davey Allison - and then after himself nearly dying and then coming back late in 1995 he very quickly wore out his welcome (see the 1996 Delaware 500 fiasco and the bigger embarrassment of his wife getting into a nightclub fracas and then him plowing blind and stupid into a stopped racecar at the ill-fated 1997 Texas 500 weekend).   His final injuries that ended his career were what finally established some level of humility in him to where people could take him seriously as a person.  

The sad truth is it is hard to find any driver who can genuinely establish any reason to root for him.   Craven's piece (in ATHLON SPORTS' 2014 preview) also cites Kevin Harvick and Kyle Busch as examples of "that kind of personality," except all they have for personality is the same baggage Ernie Irvan had - they're idiots on and off the track, and they don't give any reason to care about them other than they win races.  

The sport needs a wholesale change in attitudes as well as a lot more in the way of lead changes.   Getting 50 lead change races back will help attract the audience first.




Will Stewart-Haas Racing get back on top?


Not seeing it.   Danica Patrick proved to be a drag there like she's been everywhere else she's raced.   Kurt Busch did better with Furniture Row's team than expected, yet it was still a mediocre team that made the Chase solely because no one else could do anything to stop him.   Kevin Harvick ultimately shot himself out of RCR despite winning there last season.   And Tony Stewart has begun to look more worn down.    Plus there remains scuttlebutt that Stewart and Gene Haas aren't on the same page, perhaps shown by the story Gene Haas wants to own an F1 team - why we don't understand.



What will happen to Michael Waltrip's team?

The story is they were in financial trouble before the Richmond fiasco and have had to cut back to two cars thanks to NAPA leaving - I'm still baffled that whole deal in 2001 went to Waltrip instead of Ron Hornaday, a superior spokesman for the company then and now.   If Toyota still believes in that group they will win races.  



Will we see any dark horse team win a race in 2014?

That 2013 saw David Ragan's Front Row team and Jamie McMurray's Ganassi-SABCO team win - not to mention the preposterous shocker of Brian Vickers' New Hampshire win with Waltrip - is a sign the thrill isn't entirely gone.   That Richard Petty's team got what appears to be a better-than-expected extention from Smithfield Foods is a good sign for them; perhaps finally Richard's #43 can win again.



##########


And so we await Daytona Speedweeks.

NASCAR Needs More Emphasis On Winning

Surprisingly, NASCAR has entertained the notion of changing the points structure to put some more emphasis on winning, and that many drivers claim they're trying as hard as they can to win races. Brian France appeared on MRN's "NASCAR Live" show and stated the sanctioning body isn't satisfied with the balance of winning and consistency in the championship.  And several drivers such as Kyle Busch, Jimmie Johnson, Joey Logano, and Carl Edwards insist that they're doing all they can to win races.


Sorry, but they're not telling the truth.   And as usual, it's the lead changes - the lack of them - that discredits their argument.  


Last October the Diehard 500 at Talladega saw 52 lead changes - for all of NASCAR's self-congradulatory emphasis that the seasons are breaking new records for lead changes, Talladega is almost always the only race all season to even reach 35 lead changes, never mind break 50 - but the big story of that race was that in the final 15 or so laps the field stopped racing and instead went into points-preservation mode.   Points racing has been a curse in the sport for over twenty years, and recognition of it dates to the early 1980s with criticism of the Latford Point System and its surprising lack of emphasis on winning. 


That the issue of lack of lead changes is not exclusively points related is true enough, as the technical issues of the racecars has been a chronic source of discussion forever.    Yet driver indifference to winning is real, because the fight for the lead almost never happens - between the excesses of the technology arms race and the indifference in the points structure toward winning or leading, the much-maligned intermediate tracks would be breaking 40 lead changes as a rule instead of an exception otherwise. 


A points system where winning the race pays far more in points and where leading the most laps allows the driver to make major points gains even with a mediocre finish is a points system that the sport can believe in because it is a points system where going for the win is the focus.   Correcting the racecar issues stifling passing remains a priority as well, but it should not be overlooked how more points for winning and more for most laps led are a necessity as well.

Open Response To Brian France

So Brian France has sent out another open letter to NASCAR fans.   


My open letter in response:


##########


To NASCAR Chairman Brian France:

So you've sent out another open letter basically patting yourself on the back for the fact another season has wrapped up.  You defend yet again the misbegotten Chase format, citing 2004 and Kurt Busch's forgettable championship - a championship he wrapped up just by qualifying for the Miami 400 - and the artificially close 2011 Tony Stewart-Carl Edwards title tilt as justification for the concept.

Here are a couple of facts refuting your love for the Chase -


It is an entirely artificial construct, locking 4/5ths of the field out of the last ten races in terms of the top 12 in points while locking in twelve cars for the championship despite over half of them having gained a chance solely on a mid-season points rerack.   Racing is not like other sports - it is 1 versus 42, not team versus team, and the ENTIRETY of the season is what matters, not the last ten races.

A true champion is one who wins a lot of races, not one who just racks up a best average finish during the season.   The Chase format feeds the bastardization of racing because it refuses to require winning - it refuses to require performance.

You mention the Generation Six racecar and refuse to face the obvious - it is a failure.   There was nothing on the racetrack that the Generation Six generated that was particularly memorable.   You also say you're testing possible changes for better racing.  

I can give you the rules package that will succeed at such right here -



Mandate a roof blade for all NASCAR divisions - the same roof blade used on restrictor plate tracks in Winston Cup in 2001 and in the Busch Series 2004-10.

Mandate a larger rear spoiler and make it out of clear material so drivers can see through it out the lead car's windshield.

Mandate restrictor plates and/or smaller carb spacers to more greatly restrict horsepower and thus reduce speeds; the goal not only should be to reduce the speeds to what the tracks can safely handle, but also must ultimately be to take handling out of the equation and make the draft more important, because passing is opened up when the draft is more important than handling - this has been amply demonstrated over the decades of NASCAR history and was also visible at Kansas Speedway this past season with the Truck Series and the Busch Series and yet again in the Truck Series finale at Homestead.  Underpowered and overgripped is what increases passing.
Open up radiators and cooling systems to allow tandem drafting - as witnessed in the Truck Series 250 at Talladega this past October, opening up cooling to allow tandem drafting increases passing while the evolution of tandem drafting is returning the racing back to exciting "conventional" drafting without the need for radiator restrictions.

Eliminate the Chase format altogether.


For all NASCAR classes, return to the Latford Point System used in the latter 1970s until recently, and add strong point bonuses for winning the race and for most laps led - 125 bonus points for the win, 10 points for leading, 100 points for most laps led.    This is a point system that thus requires the competitors to race for the win - and eliminates the kind of fixing incidents witnessed at Richmond's Capital City 400 this past September.

Force the disbanding of elements of multicar teams such as Hendrick Motorsports to where they field no more than two cars; this will open up the series for new team owners who are presently locked out of the series.

Encourage other manufacturers, such as Dodge and Honda, to participate in NASCAR's varied series.


Eliminate the absurd exclusivity deal with Goodyear and allow other tire brands to compete - they can provide revenue to the sport as well as race teams and increase competition; they've done so before.  They can also better solve handling issues that consistently pop up with Goodyear and its squabbles with "aggressive setups."

Switch some television and other revenue streams into NASCAR's smaller divisions such as the Trucks, the Busch Series, the Modifieds, etc.    Smaller car counts are bad for the health of these divisions, which produce superb racing just the same as the Top Three divisions in NASCAR as well as help create the next generation of big three stars.

Take away rules that give the officiating tower too much control over the racing - yellow line rules, declaring rundowns via scoring loops instead of the start/finish line - they take away from the purity of the competition and do so without reason.
 

The sport needs to get better because there is simply too much anger and bitterness toward it now to be able to enjoy it.   The days when 60 lead changes was a norm in the sport need to return; the days when fans could support drivers instead of hate them need to return.   The days when teams could maintain themselves in all of NASCAR's varied divisions instead of just barely scrape by need to return.


Thank you,


Mike Daly

Takeaways From Talladega And Thompson

The third weekend of October was a boffo weekend for racing as Talladega opened up for the Truck Series and Winston Cup while Thompson Speedway brang down the curtain on its 2013 season and that of the Modified Tour. A scattershot look at both -


 -----------------------


Donny Lia, Rowan Pennick, and Ryan Preece give the Mod Tour a fresh new class of stars  - The final 20 or so laps of the Sunoco 150 were a spirited battle between Lia, Pennick, and Preece; Lia had won at Stafford a few weeks earlier while he and Todd Szegedy got into it in September at New Hampshire's FW Webb 100-miler with Ryan Newman.   Preece had won the most races and won the series title while Pennick had not led a lap since the Town Fair Tire 100 at Loudon in July.   The three of them got into it and Pennick took the win, his first since the 2010 Riverhead 200.

The three of them showcased youth and spirited competition that will serve Modified Racing well.



Johnny Sauter makes a nice living in NASCAR's high minors - Over the years there have been drivers who've never made it in Winston Cup but whose talent is showcased in NASCAR's "high minors" of the Busch Series and the Trucks.   The Truck 250 was one of the most amazing Talladega Truck races ever seen and Johnny Sauter's rally to the win - his ninth in the Truck Series - was as brilliant a battle as seen anywhere.  

Sauter reminds one of Todd Bodine, Mike Wallace, Ron Hornaday, and Randy LaJoie, drivers who tried a go of it in Cup and never made it, then established their own mini-kingdoms of success one level below Cup.   That's not a bad way to go in racing.



Jamie McMurray again defies assumptions - In 398 Cup starts McMurray now has seven wins.   He may never contend for a series title but he doesn't have to to have a memorable career.   It reintroduced the sport to a driver who hadn't won since his eye-opening 2010 season and who most had pretty much written off.



Aric Almirola again shows he is a disgrace - It may be fitting that Almirola was born in Tampa Bay, where the Bucs have degenerated into an embarrassment to the NFL.   Certainly his two seasons in Richard Petty's #43 have been a disgrace even with the surprising fifth at New Hampshire and five other top ten finishes.   Winning the Diehard 500's pole by rain-induced default, Almirola led eight laps and then was never heard from again, limping home 22nd after just riding around all day.  Petty deserves a lot better than that - winning Talladega is what Petty deserves, not the pseudo-effort Almirola phoned in.



Talladega again showcases the best of racing and the worst of NASCAR's rules ineptitude - The Truck 250 was another case where the supporting race to Cup was better than the Cup race.   NASCAR's Generation Six racecar has done poorly all season (necessitating early October's aerodynamics test at Charlotte) and Talladega showed it can produce great racing even with a bad rules package as the lead changed 52 times.   But even with that passing was graphically difficult since NASCAR's radiator rules discourage tandem drafting - the cars seemed even not to want to touch at all - and the points-racing ethos in the sport kicked in with drivers running in line the last ten laps waiting for a moment that didn't happen.


Contrast this with the Truck 250, where tandem drafting was prolific; the most striking part of the race, though, was how conventional drafting was able to keep pace and once a tandem took the lead the push-Truck would dive under and take the lead.   The negatives of the tandems in the past - the push-vehicle before would push a leader into the clear and just stay there; conventional drafts could not keep up - appear to be evolving away.    The Truck race didn't have the weird look that tandem races had had; it looked and felt like an old-fashioned superspeedway shootout.  

It's why Brian France and NASCAR need to stop opposing tandem drafting; it is the strongest power to pass the sport has ever seen.   Perhaps Gene Stefanyshyn, NASCAR's innovation director, can persuade the sanctioning body that the best innovations often are going back to the future.



Denny Hamlin wasn't the only one hoping his season ends soon  - Hamlin blew up and it was mentioned on the mediacast that he's looking forward to end a lost year.   Meanwhile Stewart-Haas Racing had a bad ending - Danica Patrick shockingly ran strong then disappeared in the final 30 laps, while Austin Dillon ran great all day then got spun out and then blasted viciously on the backstretch - a fitting image of the team's lost 2013 season.  



Yes, there was a Trevor Bayne sighting - Some compared him to Tim Tebow - fitting since Bayne's 2011 Daytona 500 win hasn't gotten any positive follow-up aside from two Busch Series wins.   Even with that he basically has disappeared since that Daytona win.  



NASCAR needs to rethink whether to have paved run-offs - Over and over vehicles have slid hard into the inside wall at Talladega and elsewhere and never have we seen any evidence to think paved run-offs are doing any good.


And with that NASCAR heads to Martinsville, though we're a little puzzled why it's been pushed to late October the last number of years.

Brian France's Nose Grows

Brian France spoke to reporters before the Charlotte 300 Nationwide race and talked about several issues.   But a telling point came when he defended the heavy fine to Denny Hamlin when he criticized the Generation Six racecar; in response Hamlin wrote on his Twitter account, "Someone's nose is growing." 

France discussed the Winston Cup schedule in light of Bruton Smith's deranged rant saying he may move Charlotte's National 500 to Vegas, this before another rant about his tax fights with Cabarrus County, NC.   France didn't offer any particular insight in his comments, just the usual points about the mixture of events.  

The schedule is good as it is; the only real changes needed are to go back to 500 mile race distances at places like Pocono and Michigan and to push start times to earlier for better convenience for trackside audiences - the argument about later start times and TV ratings doesn't work.  I'd also like Texas World Speedway to be able to host some races.

But the line about not crossing a line about "our product" is the kind of self-deception that has permeated Brian France's tenure in NASCAR - the fact is the product ISN'T as good as it needs to be.  France talks about continuing developmental work on the Generation Six, but given how much work went into it before, one can't feel confidence that NASCAR can make this thing work.  Though just four months into the season, the Gen-6 has already proven a flop, though its next two plate races offer some reason for optimism. 

Someone's nose keeps growing in NASCAR.  

NASCAR's Long-Term Game Plan

With the 2013 season proceding Mike Mulhern takes a look at NASCAR's "game plan" for renewing the sport's popularity. Mulhern asks what in this game plan is working and what isn't.  

My own view on the plan -

What NASCAR is doing is trying to push star power with the drivers, get in people's face through every social media outlet possible, trying to "make a NASCAR weekend about more than just the racing," trying to improve "product relevance," and trying to attract other demographics.

By any look at all this, so far it isn't happening.

The sport's fanbase is still what it always has been, and the attempts to market to the "pinkhat" crowd simply aren't working - the same thing has been happening with the Boston Red Sox of Roush-Fenway co-owners John W. Henry, Larry Lucchino, and Tom Werner, whose belligerent marketing of The Brand drew in the pinkhat crowd and angered the true fanbase of the team to where the Red Sox's relevance to New England has dropped quite dramatically.  The Sox's marketing efforts in 2013 have changed noticeably back toward a stronger marketing of baseball as opposed to the Red Sox Brand.

The first effort in NASCAR's marketing effort is of course the Generation Six racecar, and that part of the scheme is manifestly not working - the Gen-6 is not terribly different from the much-mocked Car Of Tomorrow and after a promising month where the racing showed some signs of improving, the competitive ennui of the sport's last ten-plus seasons has returned, low-lighted by an abysmal All Star weekend.

This failure really is the first of the two big individual failings in the sport - to put it bluntly, where did 60-lead-change-racing go?  

Constantly forgotten by so many in the sport is how its popularity first took off in the 1970s when, despite the factory withdrawal and economic crunch of the time, the competitiveness of the racing took off - 1971-80 the sport saw over 30 races break 40 official lead changes with another two dozen or so flirting with 40 and memorable last-laps at such races as the 1974 Volunteer 500 at Bristol and 1975 Yankee 400 at Michigan.   1981-4 it continued as 15 races broke 40 lead changes with Talladega in 1984 breaking 68 lead changes twice.   Even with the beginning of the Dead Lane Era in 1985 there were still races that at least flirted with 40 lead changes as well as wild finishes in the next 15-plus years of the sport.   In that period Talladega has been by far the best racing anywhere, breaking 40 official lead changes 21 times after 1984, while Daytona nearly reached 40 in 1993 and 1996 and then broke that number six times in the last twelve years.

As the technology arms race has increased in the last 2.5 decades, however, the result has been stifling of passing, speeds too high for the tracks to handle, and safety issues, plus the second of the sport's great individual failings - spiralling costs and utter lack of any cost/spending controls.    NASCAR's recent TV deals for Cup have been in the billions - yet it is harder and harder for sponsors to stay and the dying off of teams that rose in the first half of the 2000-10 decade has been a graphic downfall for the sport.

Related to the technology arms race has been NASCAR's idiotic "Green" initiatives, pushing as they do the perpetual myth that the environment is in some kind of serious crisis that must be dealt with - that the environment is in fact quite healthy and in no particular need of "rescuing" makes eco initiatives ultimately a waste.

Oversold is that NASCAR somehow was wrong to hold onto carburated pushrod technology for as long as it has - the fact that technology still works makes nonsense of arguments against it.   If anything NASCAR was wrong to abandon carburation; its experiment with EFI has accomplished nothing as far as betterment of the sport goes.


**********


For all of NASCAR's efforts at broading the fanbase etc. they have simply gone about it the wrong way.  

What is needed is great racing.   The Winston/Aarons 500 weekend was a boost for the sport because it produced superior racing - 47 lead changes among 16 drivers in the Nationwide 312-miler and the most amazing finishes the sport has seen in decades in both - the Ron Bouchard pass in the 312, David Ragan's spectacular charge to victory in the 500.  

Give us back the lead changes - then NASCAR will have something that it can market that's actually worth watching.  It's to be understood not every race can break 60 lead changes, but the sport can only benefit if it saw more than a few such races during the year - the much-hated "cookie cutter" tracks are manifestly capable of such races because they've had them before.

The lead changes produce the excitement that draws in fans and makes them want to learn about the sport.   Billy France understood this when he was in charge of NASCAR; Brian France does not, hence his constant pushing of The Brand.  

The bottom line is this -

NASCAR needs to figure out getting the competition package to where 60 lead changes is not the exception.

NASCAR needs to reign in the overmarketing.

NASCAR needs to figure out how to reduce the spending and thus improve the sport's affordability.  

This is a proven formula for improving a sport's popularity.

More On The Generation Six

THIS WAS ORIGINALLY POSTED ON MARCH 9.

The Generation Six racecar continues to generate controversy as NASCAR's heavy-handed punishments of Denny Hamlin and Brad Keselowski for speaking out continue to generate debate amid the car's poor competition performance and burgeoning support for Hamlin. Largely lost amid the controversy is another story circulating under the radar that may be a major change in the sport - the striking level of cooperation between manufacturers in the sport.

It's a major change given the bitterness that permeated manufacturer rivalries in the past. If it is real, it can help the sport in multiple ways. Right now, though, the Gen-6 car is not producing what was promised of it, and the talking point of "give it time" sounds as Mike Mulhern puts it - "'come back next year and we'll have it all sorted out for you.'"

"That is unacceptable," as Mulhern succinctly puts it, and it is given the project began in mid-2010 but which was obviously working where no one seemed to know what they were doing.    Testing showed almost right away the car was not going to make anything better - one of the most notable changes was at the splitter; it was advocated that removing the splitter would help alleviate aeropush; when NASCAR did just that for tests at Texas and Kansas, the change produced failure.

The story of the Gen-6 racecar is evolving into one of the more graphic fiascos in recent NASCAR history and a further indictment of the sanction body's leadership from Brian France to John Darby.

UPDATE: Hamlin chose not to appeal NASCAR's fine, but the fine has left a sullen atmosphere in the garage area which brought about this thoughtful piece by Nate Ryan about NASCAR's inability to lead.

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.    

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.