NASCAR has either totally lost its mind or is so deep into the pockets of sponsors, team owners and corporate interests that it can no longer see and think clearly.  I suspect it’s a lot of both and the fact that it could barely muster the courage to put Carl Edwards on a measly three-race probation is evidence of it.  Instead of making it firmly clear that NASCAR was in control of its sport, it turned its press statement into an opportunity to express just how concerned it is about the fact that Brad Keselowski’s car got airborne after Edwards dumped him.  Safety first, after all!  NASCAR President Mike Helton explained it: “[Keselowski's car going airborne] is a very important element of all of this that I would ask all of us to be reminded of the fact of the car getting airborne was a very serious issue. And that’s something that we’ll take a look at very quickly and try to figure out how to help prevent that happening in the future.”  Way to divert the attention away from the real issue.

And this is where NASCAR’s conflicting statements begin.  They want to “prevent” an incident like this from happening in the future, yet they’ve given the drivers the green light to act like complete morons on the racetrack.  Does that make any sense at all?  Everyone in the racing community is rallying around NASCAR’s supposed pre-season pronouncement that drivers are free to “take the gloves off”.  Did I miss the press release?  When did NASCAR say that its drivers had free reign to behave like totally reckless maniacs and wouldn’t be punished for intentionally causing violent accidents?  If NASCAR thinks that fans are interested in watching their prima donna racers engage in tit-for-tat crashes rather than real racing, then they are even more hopelessly out of touch than I first believed.

NASCAR doesn’t understand the simple concept everyone calls “rules”.  Is it or is it not, by the rulebook, acceptable to intentionally crash somebody?  And if it’s not, what is the penalty, per the rulebook?  Because if the only penalty is a slap on the wrist then Keselowski should be free to send Edwards right over the damn billboards at Texas next month.

Kyle Petty nails it: “I think we took ourselves away from just being a sport to being a sideshow in some ways. We’re not a sport. Sports have rules.”

A Tale of Two Carls

Remember last May when Carl Long — an underfunded driver who was attempting to qualify for a non-points paying race — blew an ancient and decrepit motor and had it inspected by NASCAR?  NASCAR found the motor to be less than two-tenths of a cubic inch larger than the limit.  Two tenths.  Despite the fact that the violation was almost certainly unintended, they suspended the guy for 12 races, fined him 200 points that he didn’t even have, and fined his crew chief $200,000.  Twelve races for two-tenths.

Carl Edwards nearly kills someone and he gets “probation” — which amounts to nothing more than being under the “watchful eyes of NASCAR”.

Consistency isn’t a NASCAR trademark.  Consider:

• In 2007, Robby Gordon was suspended for one race after failing to yield to a black flag that was displayed for aggressive driving in the previous day’s Nationwide Series race.
• Ricky Rudd was fined $10,000 and placed on probation for the rest of the season after intentionally crashing Jeff Gordon in the 1994 Mello Yello 500 at Charlotte.
• In October 2004, Dale Earnhardt, Jr. was fined $10,000 and docked 25 championship points for joyfully dropping an s-bomb in a victory lane interview at Talladega.  The point loss dropped him from leading the standings.
• At Indianapolis in 2002, Jimmy Spencer intentionally crashed Kurt Busch in what is probably the most dangerous corner in all of American motorsports.  Busch was scolded by NASCAR for “gesturing” towards Spencer after climbing from his car.

The Apple Falls Far From the Tree

Unfortunately for NASCAR, Brian France does not seem to be able to command the kind of respect his father and grandfather garnered from its participants.  The limp-wristed, “well we’re not really sure if that’s over the line” approach doesn’t exactly exude a sense of strength on NASCAR’s part.

It makes me remember a time in 1990 when Dale Earnhardt and Geoff Bodine were wrecking each other consistently until Bill France, Jr. stepped in.  The intervention was recalled in the film Days of Thunder.  France had lunch with Bodine’s then car owner Rick Hendrick and explained:  “Rick… If you can’t control your drivers any better than this… then maybe you should stick to something you can control.  … Like selling used cars in downtown Charlotte.”

For all it’s boasting about safety it makes me laugh how much insanity NASCAR’s drivers get away with on the racetrack.  The sanctioning body is like the wrestling referee who’s off watching something else while a guy is bashing his opponent over the head with a steel chair.

NASCAR needs to grow a set, step up, and start sitting drivers who can’t contain themselves down for a week or two.  This whole fascination with “intentional crashing” is a black eye on the sport and really calls into question the legitimacy and integrity of NASCAR racing.

And a special thanks to Carl Edwards for ruining for the fans what was shaping up to be a great and dramatic finish between Kurt Busch and Juan Pablo Montoya today at Atlanta.  The race ended up taking a back seat to Edwards — who was 156 laps down — and his pouting match with Brad Keselowski, who was running in the top five with just three laps to go.  Television cameras caught Edwards attempting to and then finally successfully crashing Keselowski at the fastest part of the speedway.

To his credit, Edwards admitted to intentionally causing the crash, but seemingly expressed surprise that it ended so violently, with Keselowski’s car getting airborne and smashing the wall roof-first, crushing the driver’s side roll cage.  Not to be Captain Obvious here, but what else would one expect on a superspeedway with speeds reaching 195 mph?

Can we please get this kind of crap out of NASCAR before something bad happens and the national spotlight shines on yet another ugly aspect of our sport?  It’s really getting embarrassing.

So NASCAR’s dumping the wing — a primary feature of the Car of Tomorrow — and bringing back the spoiler, eh? I guess when NASCAR announced that the Nationwide Series new “Car of Tomorrow”-like car would have a more traditional spoiler, the writing was on the wall for the wing.

The wing had a couple of problems. First, the obvious problem, is that it was ugly as all get-out. I don’t think anybody really liked the look of it when it was first announced (okay, except maybe Brian France). The second is that its bulky appearance made it difficult for drivers to see out the rear window.

Another controversy that developed late last year was the idea that the wing was contributing to blowover crashes, such as those by Carl Edwards and Ryan Newman at Talladega. I don’t know that the wing is any different in this regard to the spoiler. Blowovers have become pretty common since Detroit and NASCAR downsized the cars in 1981. (Watch Connie Saylor blowover at Daytona 1981.)

As of now, the new spoiler will be tested at Charlotte Motor Speedway in the early part of the season and adopted for the circuit probably by the end of March. To me, the move brings two things to mind: 1) NASCAR is willing to make changes to address complaints, and 2) NASCAR is still stuck in an IROC mentality.

Why do I make point 2? Simply because NASCAR has said that the spoiler will be produced by an independent manufacturer and all teams must purchase their spoilers from said manufacturer. The spoiler will be an aluminum blade 4 inches (!) tall and at a fixed 70° (!!) angle. Fixing the spoiler angle is what tees me off the most. The 70° angle is, of course, “all about safety”, and realizing that no crew chief worth a damn would be raising it above that, they probably figured they might as well make it fixed.

I remember the days when the teams could adjust the spoiler as a means of setting up the car. Not just during the weekend, but in the middle of the race as well. It was considered another variable the crew chief could work with — finding a good balance between downforce and less drag, depending on the track. In the 80s teams could even lay that thing all the way back to 20° if they dared to.

Not anymore. Everyone runs the same spoiler now.

Same spoiler.

Same cars.

Same tracks.

Same drivers.

Boring.

I was reading Ernie Saxton’s column at phillyBurbs.com and he brought up some good points about how the current length of NASCAR Cup races could be detrimental to fan interest. The topic of shortening races has been brought up in the past and, in fact, Rockingham and Dover had both trimmed their 500-mile races by a hundred miles in the mid- and late-1990s.

Why 500 Miles?

Somehow or another NASCAR eventually evolved into featuring primarily 500-mile race distances, or something similar (such as 500 laps at Bristol). Like running, motorsports has a diversity of race lengths aimed to test different strengths. For example, a 400-meter sprint emphasizes the runners’ power (strength and speed). The most analogous form of motorsports to a 400m sprint would be what we typically see at our local short track. A marathon run, on the other hand, tests the runners’ endurance — like auto racing’s 12 Hours of Sebring. A NASCAR 500-miler is more like a 5K run — requiring a mix of both speed and endurance.

In other words, it appears that NASCAR wanted the element of attrition to be a factor in its races. It’s not enough to be fast… the driver has to be fast over a long haul.

In previous decades, attrition was a major player in NASCAR races. Five-hundred laps at a place like Bristol must have been hell without power steering. And 500 miles at Talladega before restrictor plates was probably just as hellish on engines. But in today’s NASCAR, attrition isn’t quite the element it used to be. Mechanical failures are not nearly as common as they were years ago, and driver fatigue is almost unheard of. About the only thing that doesn’t last anymore are Goodyear’s tires.

Without attrition, is it really important to run 500 miles anymore?

Shorter Races = More Excitement?

So will shorter races be more exciting races? I remember when Dover trimmed its race distances from 500 miles down to 400. For the most part, everyone was on board with that move. (Though many ticket holders wondered if the prices would be trimmed by a fifth as well. They weren’t.) So… is Dover any more exciting now that it’s 400 miles? Well… I think it’s safe to say that there’s 100 laps less of boredom, so maybe that could count for something. I mean — the pain is over quicker, so yes in that sense it’s better.

And the Cup series does have a handful of 300-mile races (Phoenix, Loudon). I’m not sure that they’re any more popular than the others. Of course the Nationwide series regularly runs 200- and 300-mile races (and with all the Sprint Cup drivers to boot), and there isn’t a lot of viewing interest. Likewise, the Indy cars run 200-mile races and… well… we don’t even have to go there.

What’s the Primary Problem?

NASCAR needs to understand that “race excitement” isn’t sufficient for their product. They need to re-generate excitement for their entire Series — “the big picture”. They could have a 50-lap race with a thousand passes and it won’t cut the mustard if people aren’t interested in the drivers and the drama of the circuit.

Most fans don’t tune in just to see passes and crashes. I remember watching four-hour races on television every week just to see if Davey Allison could hold on to the point lead… or to see who Dale Earnhardt was going to wreck next… or to see if Rusty Wallace really would retaliate for being taken out at Bristol.

Between vanilla drivers, cookie-cutter tracks and the “Race for the Chase” format, NASCAR has pretty much flushed those concepts down the toilet and taken much of the fans’ interest down with it.

At this point, does it really matter how long the races are?

Tidbits to Ponder

Here are some interesting facts from Fox Sports (via Jayski.com):

• After Dover, Cup races were averaging a caution period every 40 miles of racing. In 2008 the average was one every 45 miles. In 2001, one every 63 miles. In 1999, one every 72 miles.
• Through Dover, Cup race speeds had averaged 118 mph. In 2008, race speeds averaged 124 mph. In 2001, 128 mph. And in 1999, 130 mph.

Sometimes when I watch NASCAR on ESPN the coverage makes me simply wince. But other times I’m on the verge of throwing something through my television set. Something… I don’t know — heavy.

Here are three things, in order of annoyance, that I think they could change to improve their presentation dramatically. I don’t mean to pick on ESPN per se, since most of NASCAR’s broadcast partners suffer from these same problems, but ESPN just seems to excel at them.

End the Spotter Jibba-Jabba

ESPN was sort of on the cutting edge of bringing in-car team communications to the broadcasts in the 1990s. I think it has very good applications. Sometimes it’s nice to know what the crew chief and spotter are saying to the driver and vice versa. Of course the old saying “everything in moderation” should apply here. There are times when it’s appropriate and times when it’s not. It seems that ESPN has become very undisciplined in how it uses these communications.

Mr. T: Got no time for spotter jibba-jabba.

Example: Often when covering restarts, they’ll let the broadcast team relax from the mic and pretty much open wide all the teams’ spotter communications — simultaneously. The result is a mishmash on unintelligible voices that add absolutely no value to the broadcast experience. I truly cannot understand a thing that is even being said because there are ten half-muffled people all talking over each other. What is the point? When restarts come I find myself either muting the TV or changing the channel for a few minutes until the disaster is over.

Another problem is when an incident occurs. Typically when something happens on the track, they immediately open the spotters’ audio of the cars involved. The problem is that the guys in the booth are also trying to call the race and the incident itself. Often they have to cut themselves off altogether just because they’re competing with the spotter talk. And is broadcasting “Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Whoa!” really the best way to engage the viewer?

Stay Away from the Bumper Cam

Somebody in the truck must have a real fetish with the bumper-mounted camera. It’s a nice shot, but it’s also a very narrow shot, which means it’s not practical for action moments — like passes. I don’t understand why the bumper cam is used to cover passes. I can’t see what is going on. Shouldn’t that be important? And especially on the restrictor plate tracks where the cars are nose to tail. It’s not uncommon to be in a restart or a close pack of racing cars and what do we see? A big Chevy bowtie decal.  And, unfortunately… nothing else.

Scale Back the False Enthusiasm

Enthusiasm in a NASCAR broadcast is a necessity if the race is to be covered well. False enthusiasm, however, is easily identifiable and takes away from the show. It’s almost embarrassing because it sounds like the commentators are trying to overcompensate for something that is lacking. The cast at ESPN are particularly bad in this area in my opinion, as is that at SPEED. Just call the race as it is and let the product speak for itself. It shouldn’t need any extra hype.

And while I’m on the topic… how is Allen Bestwick in that silly pre-race trailer show instead of calling the race in the booth? Bestwick, probably due to his MRN background, is perhaps the only “new-school” commentator that understands how to call a race effectively and is, in my view, the best currently available television play-by-play announcer in American motorsports.  Somebody, please, put him in the booth!

These are three simply, easy, and non-controversial things that the television broadcasters can do to help improve the viewing experience. At this point I think every little bit that keeps people from flipping stations is going to help.

Usually when NASCAR heads out to Michigan the buzz before the race is about which of Detroit’s Big Three is going to earn bragging rights by grabbing the big win at the home track.

Of course this year the talk was about the depressing state of the American auto manufacturers, precipitated by GM’s recent announcement that it was scaling back financial and technical support for the Nationwide and Truck Series. Brian France, CEO and chairman of NASCAR, was quick to assure the media that NASCAR was open to having more foreign manufacturers in the sport. And anyone who knows NASCAR knows that comments like that mean that something is probably already in the works.

A large portion of NASCAR fans groaned several years back when it was announced that Toyota would be coming aboard. Today, NASCAR is finding it harder to connect with those older fans, a problem evidenced by decreasing attendance and waning interest. They have to believe that reconnecting with those older fans is important for moving the sport back in the right direction. But how will those fans react if Ford and Chevrolet become also-rans while foreign nameplates dominate the fields?

Of the potential participants, Honda seems the most likely to join the fray. They have a well-developed racing program and already supply V8 engines for Indy Racing League teams (and not just some — all of them). One possibility worth laughing over is Hyundai. Hyundai in NASCAR… that would go over real well, especially with the old-school folk.

Another badge given serious consideration has been BMW. Now certainly BMW has, like Honda, an established international racing program. But there would just be something odd about a European luxury sedan racing in NASCAR. Kind of a mix between yuppie and redneck. Think about it — BMW’s on the high banks of Darlington, SC? Ehhh… I don’t think this is a step in the right direction.

I think NASCAR shot itself in the foot with its whole “common template” philosophy that culminated with the infamous “Car of Tomorrow”. Scratching their heads, wondering where they fit in with the new NASCAR, The Big Three in Detroit were left with nothing more than providing push-rod engines and headlight decals for the front bumper.

So… who’s excited about BMW?