Nascar Hall of Fame Winners

StandOnIt

StandOnIt

Farm Truck
Joined
Feb 26, 2013
Messages
86,443
Points
1,033
Location
yoooklahoma


1747776681720.jpeg



1747776823431.png

 
I probably should be happiest about Gant finally making it, but hell yes on Kurt. He was a consistently good driver, and possibly not HoF-worthy on that, but he gave us so much great entertainment, and for the right reasons. His 2004 (ish?) race against Craven was a top tier NASCAR moment, but his interview after it was what made me love him.

So congrats on making the HoF Kurt. Enjoy sitting there with all the decrepit old has-beens!
 
kckolbe said:
I probably should be happiest about Gant finally making it, but hell yes on Kurt. He was a consistently good driver, and possibly not HoF-worthy on that, but he gave us so much great entertainment, and for the right reasons. His 2004 (ish?) race against Craven was a top tier NASCAR moment, but his interview after it was what made me love him.

So congrats on making the HoF Kurt. Enjoy sitting there with all the decrepit old has-beens!
Click to expand...

That is awfully disrespectful, shame on you. If not for the older veterans we would not even have a racing series.
 
I love Harry Gant. I think he's beyond cool. But for me, less than 20 Cup wins and no championships is not the best of the best. There are more deserving crew chiefs, etc. that deserve to me in. How come a guy like Buddy Parrott isn't even considered, let alone not getting in?
 
MRM said:
I love Harry Gant. I think he's beyond cool. But for me, less than 20 Cup wins and no championships is not the best of the best. There are more deserving crew chiefs, etc. that deserve to me in. How come a guy like Buddy Parrott isn't even considered, let alone not getting in?
Click to expand...
Well by your criteria he didn't win a championship as a crew chief.
 
Happy for all who made it. Burton should make it one day. More are deserving, but I like to limit the number available each year. Makes inclusion all the more special.
 
MRM said:
I love Harry Gant. I think he's beyond cool. But for me, less than 20 Cup wins and no championships is not the best of the best. There are more deserving crew chiefs, etc. that deserve to me in. How come a guy like Buddy Parrott isn't even considered, let alone not getting in?
Click to expand...
He's the oldest Cup winner ever, plus it's NASCAR Hall of Fame, not Cup. So it takes more than his Cup Stats, but if we just look at that, he's tied for 49th on the list of all time winners. That's pretty high up when you think about how many people have raced at the Cup level. He won Championships in the NASCAR Sportsman Division three times. Remember NASCAR Hall of Fame.... not Cup.
 
I'm not saying Gant isn't deserving. I'm saying others should have gone in before him. Like Parrott and Larry Phillips. Congrats to all three.
 
I liked the idea from the DBC special today that said to copy baseball where there is a vote threshold to get in, if you get a certain amount of % you are in. So some years you could have no one other years 7. It be better than 2 and 1 imo.
 
kkfan91 said:
I liked the idea from the DBC special today that said to copy baseball where there is a vote threshold to get in, if you get a certain amount of % you are in. So some years you could have no one other years 7. It be better than 2 and 1 imo.
Click to expand...
I think you would pretty quickly run out of candidates if you did that, and you might go two-three years without any inductees, which would make NASCAR and the Hall pretty upset. As for Gant's worthiness, I proposed some minimum standards here many years ago and was harshly criticized for it. If Gant isn't worthy, then Rudd shouldn't be in, and Bonnett should never make it. You could throw a blanket over their cup careers, but Gant has like 25 Busch wins and God only knows how many Sportsman wins that the other two don't really have.
 
Formerjackman said:
I think you would pretty quickly run out of candidates if you did that, and you might go two-three years without any inductees, which would make NASCAR and the Hall pretty upset. As for Gant's worthiness, I proposed some minimum standards here many years ago and was harshly criticized for it. If Gant isn't worthy, then Rudd shouldn't be in, and Bonnett should never make it. You could throw a blanket over their cup careers, but Gant has like 25 Busch wins and God only knows how many Sportsman wins that the other two don't really have.
Click to expand...

If you look at the current inductees (not necessarily this class, just all the ones in), I'd argue the very concept of a minimum driving standard is long gone. Perhaps more than any sport, the NASCAR Hall of FAME is accurately named.
 
kckolbe said:
If you look at the current inductees (not necessarily this class, just all the ones in), I'd argue the very concept of a minimum driving standard is long gone. Perhaps more than any sport, the NASCAR Hall of FAME is accurately named.
Click to expand...
Thst's just it, I proposed a standard and nobody here was having anything to do with it.
 
Formerjackman said:
Thst's just it, I proposed a standard and nobody here was having anything to do with it.
Click to expand...
It might be just as hard to get a voting panel to agree on a set of standards as it would be for the individuals.

I also think that once a standard denied a few popular candidates that there would be some efforts to revise those requirements.

I also think that any HoF will have a subjective aspect to it as implied by the name.
Having the most wins, championships etc is a good indicator of who may have been the best driver, but it will never be a guarantee.

If a candidate inspired more people or fans, who could say they are not as worthy as another driver with better stats.

All the above is obviously just my opinion.
 
Greg said:
It might be just as hard to get a voting panel to agree on a set of standards as it would be for the individuals.

I also think that once a standard denied a few popular candidates that there would be some efforts to revise those requirements.

I also think that any HoF will have a subjective aspect to it as implied by the name.
Having the most wins, championships etc is a good indicator of who may have been the best driver, but it will never be a guarantee.

If a candidate inspired more people or fans, who could say they are not as worthy as another driver with better stats.

All the above is obviously just my opinion.
Click to expand...

Pretty much why every year the same discussions happen. Somebody should be in there before another one is or why is so in so in the Hall in the first place. It can never be a mathematical certainty when dealing with the Hall of Fame, too many factors are involved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom