97forever
Team Owner
With all the hoopla surrounding the should we/ shouldn't we tamper with the point system one overlooked fact is this:
There do exist other proposed revamped ways of reckoning Nascar's top level series. Richard Sowers and his DGPI(drivers grade point ndex)is one thats actually
quite workable. It fulfills the need to reward accomplishment over consitency, rewards different possible points for different type's of tracks, etc. Others have expounded on these or similar idea.
That might be fine for the future, might be past time for change in fact.
Just don't use one of these new systems and look backwards.
For instance, using Mr. Sowers(Complete Nascar stats and facts book) Dale Earnhardt actually 'only' has SIX titles for instance, Pearson has FOUR and Elliott has two.Changes the look of things now doesn't it?Sure purist will say: 'Yeah, but those titles were won/lost by the system in place at the TIME.'
Well, yeah.
But those very systems were deemed unworkable and rplaced with more functional sytems werent they? They were considered flawed or the need to replace them would not have been there.
Now no doubt whats written in NASCAR stone is there for the long haul. It just isn't smart to tamper with legends after all.
So that would leave the question in the ultimately accepted(as if NASCAR would have the fortitude to actually take a stand) pont reckoning will history eventually draw abstract lines and say THIS ERA ENDS/THIS ONE BEGINS here..or will the new and finalized point reckoning system be just another novelty? Even worse would a new point system invalidate all prior era's sytems when a comparision is drawn?
Well, hell...I don't even pretend to know and an arguement could be made for the factall the drivers competed under the same rules AT THE SAME time.
Thats true enough...but they might still be found lacking when compared to the ultimate system. Just something to consider. A little food for thought.
There do exist other proposed revamped ways of reckoning Nascar's top level series. Richard Sowers and his DGPI(drivers grade point ndex)is one thats actually
quite workable. It fulfills the need to reward accomplishment over consitency, rewards different possible points for different type's of tracks, etc. Others have expounded on these or similar idea.
That might be fine for the future, might be past time for change in fact.
Just don't use one of these new systems and look backwards.
For instance, using Mr. Sowers(Complete Nascar stats and facts book) Dale Earnhardt actually 'only' has SIX titles for instance, Pearson has FOUR and Elliott has two.Changes the look of things now doesn't it?Sure purist will say: 'Yeah, but those titles were won/lost by the system in place at the TIME.'
Well, yeah.
But those very systems were deemed unworkable and rplaced with more functional sytems werent they? They were considered flawed or the need to replace them would not have been there.
Now no doubt whats written in NASCAR stone is there for the long haul. It just isn't smart to tamper with legends after all.
So that would leave the question in the ultimately accepted(as if NASCAR would have the fortitude to actually take a stand) pont reckoning will history eventually draw abstract lines and say THIS ERA ENDS/THIS ONE BEGINS here..or will the new and finalized point reckoning system be just another novelty? Even worse would a new point system invalidate all prior era's sytems when a comparision is drawn?
Well, hell...I don't even pretend to know and an arguement could be made for the factall the drivers competed under the same rules AT THE SAME time.
Thats true enough...but they might still be found lacking when compared to the ultimate system. Just something to consider. A little food for thought.
He talked about it on Inside WC Racing the day after Rockingham. Said he mentioned the idea to Brian France. 