by Mike Maruska
1/7/2008
Since Brian France took over as chairman of NASCAR in 2004, change is the theme. Adaptation and evolution exist in every major sport, but in the last four years NASCAR fans have seen a dramatic increase in the number and scope of changes, some inevitable, many unpopular. A new playoff format, new title sponsor(s), a new foreign manufacturer(it makes no difference to me, but plenty of fans see this as a major change), a revised schedule (less Darlington and Rockingham, more California and Texas) and new television networks. Some changes have been great moves for the sport while others could have been left alone. The biggest problem right now is competition, or more accurately, the lack of it. There is no quick fix for something like that. Instead let’s look at a few things that NASCAR, if they were so inclined, could easily rectify with little resistance. They’re nothing fancy, just ideas that could go a ways to pleasing fans and competitors alike.
-
Reduce the guaranteed starting spots from 35 to 25. Guaranteed starting spots is a necessary evil. I have no problem with that, but I do take issue with the teams that are barely competitive, running in the 30’s but still maintaining a guaranteed starting spot each week. Teams like Yates, Haas-CNC and Hall of Fame Racing have done just enough to stay inside the comfort zone. Meanwhile Brian Vickers and Red Bull actually ran well on Sundays, but had loads of trouble making races.
Reducing the number of spots from 35 to 25 increases the number of open spots from eight to eighteen. Put another way, currently 81% of the field is locked in, but that number would fall to 58%. That leaves almost half of the field open for drivers to qualify on speed. Which brings us to…
-
Make all non-guaranteed cars qualify at the same time. Here’s a situation that pops up during qualifying:Two drivers are both forced to make a race on speed. One goes at the start of qualifying with a green track and hotter afternoon temperatures, while the second driver gets to wait until the late afternoon when the track has more rubber build-up and cooler temperatures. How is this fair? Drivers inside the top 35 have completely different concerns than ones outside.
Instead of a random draw among all the cars entered, split the draw into two parts. Let the guaranteed teams make their qualifying runs and build up to the end of the session when all the teams on the bubble are bunched together for some drama. Television could even create some kind of “Do or Die” segment that would be more interesting than the current qualifying show. Another byproduct of all the have-nots qualifying together is the severe weather factor. Let’s say rain is looming at Daytona and it’s doubtful every driver will get a run in. No problem. Start qualifying with the teams on the bubble so that it’s more likely they can make attempts. If rain comes later in the session, then the field is set by owners points for spots 1-35 and then the next 8 fastest times fall in at the tail. Some sort of plan like this could have saved a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth over Boris Said getting robbed at the Pepsi 400.
-
Cut back the Chase field from 12 to 10. This number should have been left alone in the first place. 10 was a nice, neat number that represented the very top drivers. It also made the fight to get in much tighter. So a marquee driver will occasionally miss the Chase, that only enhances the prestige of the Chase. The more exclusive the Chase is the better. Look at other sports like the NBA and NHL for the dangers of expanding the playoffs too much.
-
Take away the 5pt bonus for leading a lap under yellow. There is no skill in a 32nd place car staying out under caution to lead a lap. He should not get the same bonus points as a front runner negotiating through the field or beating everyone out of the pits. If a car thats 36th in owners points wants to get 5 bonus points, then stay on the lead lap, stay out longer during green flag pit stops or build a faster car. [I wrote about this idea last year, but no one at Daytona headquarters listened, so I’m including it again.]
-
Leave the Chase points alone. Okay, so this one is not a tweak, but more of a preemptive strike against tweaking. Every year there is talk–mostly by journalists or announcers–about creating a separate point system for Chasers. This would be a huge mistake.
Creating separate points would reward avoiding trouble more than creating incentive towards winning. A great example is the 2004 fall race at Atlanta. The point leaders Kurt Busch, Dale Earnhardt Jr and Jeff Gordon all experienced problems while Jimmie Johnson won the race in dramatic fashion. Under the current points Johnson gained between 121 and 148 points on the three leaders. Johnson gained enormous ground and rejoined the battle for the title. Under a system with isolated scoring for the Chasers, it would have been completely different. Johnson would have scored 10 points (or 100 if it were increments of 10) as the top Chaser while Busch got 1 . However the maximum points he could gain on Busch would be 9 whether Busch finished 43rd or 10th. Where’s the motivation to run fast?
Think about it this way. Other leagues don’t change the basic scoring from the regular season to the playoffs, why should NASCAR. During the first 26 races drivers have to go faster than and avoid 42 other cars. That element shouldn’t change during the playoffs. If a car is taken out by a non-Chaser, that’s a part of the game. The only thing changing the points would do is artificially make the points race appear close. Sure a 7 point lead entering Homestead looks appealing, but if that meant the leader only had to finish better than three other Chasers, that’s not close at all.
Check out Trouble in Turn2 for more racing news and opinions.