Corey LaJoie: Please Explain.

Jorge De Guzman said:
We need a race and soon. From STILL whining about Larson and the Indy 500 in May to whatever this thread has become. And for the record, I prefer sitting high up in chicken bone row, it’s so high I can see my car in the parking lot when I turn around in the stands, you can see everything!
Click to expand...
So the only chicken bones you get hit with are from the spotters ;)
 
LewTheShoe said:
Or does the "nepobaby" label apply to every son/daughter who works in the same industry as their father?
Click to expand...
Charlie Spencer said:
As near as I can tell from his comments here, yes, that's VB's working definition...
Click to expand...
Yeah, I see now that @virtualbalboa uses misuses that definition. It's a pity that so many race fans are 'all ate up' by the fact that some kids have parents that are into racing and expose their children to racing... while others don't. WTF dude, why the disparaging labels for everyday, ordinary people?

When I started racing in the 1970's, my parents didn't know a camshaft from a roller skate. I got moral support only, no financial help, no parental connections or showing me the ropes. I didn't expect any, either. A few years later, my sister got more help in her athletic endeavors... because Mom and Dad were able to help nurture the first baby steps. My sister wound up earning a spot on the U.S. national team including the Olympic Games team, were she ranked first American on the leaderboard. It is laughable disgraceful to disparage her career because Mom helped her at some early local-level events. Jealousy is often an ugly thing, and this discussion about nepotism is an example of that.
 
LewTheShoe said:
Yeah, I see now that @virtualbalboa uses misuses that definition. It's a pity that so many race fans are 'all ate up' by the fact that some kids have parents that are into racing and expose their children to racing... while others don't. WTF dude, why the disparaging labels for everyday, ordinary people?

When I started racing in the 1970's, my parents didn't know a camshaft from a roller skate. I got moral support only, no financial help, no parental connections or showing me the ropes. I didn't expect any, either. A few years later, my sister got more help in her athletic endeavors... because Mom and Dad were able to help nurture the first baby steps. My sister wound up earning a spot on the U.S. national team including the Olympic Games team, were she ranked first American on the leaderboard. It is laughable disgraceful to disparage her career because Mom helped her at some early local-level events. Jealousy is often an ugly thing, and this discussion about nepotism is an example of that.
Click to expand...
👍 It's one thing to mention it in passing, but to go on and on about it is something else.
 
LewTheShoe said:
Yeah, I see now that @virtualbalboa uses misuses that definition. It's a pity that so many race fans are 'all ate up' by the fact that some kids have parents that are into racing and expose their children to racing... while others don't. WTF dude, why the disparaging labels for everyday, ordinary people?

When I started racing in the 1970's, my parents didn't know a camshaft from a roller skate. I got moral support only, no financial help, no parental connections or showing me the ropes. I didn't expect any, either. A few years later, my sister got more help in her athletic endeavors... because Mom and Dad were able to help nurture the first baby steps. My sister wound up earning a spot on the U.S. national team including the Olympic Games team, were she ranked first American on the leaderboard. It is laughable disgraceful to disparage her career because Mom helped her at some early local-level events. Jealousy is often an ugly thing, and this discussion about nepotism is an example of that.
Click to expand...
Well said. Every part of it.
 
My Deddy got me a job in the cotton mill.

It was rough, and as I posted many times, I didn't have money to afford a luck box in those days. I carried my pre cut potatoes in my socks to make some soup for lunch. The potatoes were cut in shapes to contour to the shape of my foot and go in between my toes.

If my Moma and Deddy hadn't helped me learn how to cut the soup potatoes to contour with my foot, I would not have made it.


After a few weeks amd pay checks, I was able to afford a cap to keep my head warm in the morning and then use it as a soup bowl for lunch. Prior to that, I just knotted up my sock to make a pouch to hold my soup.

If the socks had a hole that only left your tied up boxer shorts to use as a make shift soup container.

It was a tough life, but I was thankful and people stuck together. Sharing a bowl of soup with a girlfriend during those times was special. Every one of us had our unique flavors. I think I liked Sarah's and Tatiana's borush the best.
 
Today's drivers don't get rides at the Cup level just because of who Daddy was. Sure, that may get them started and up the ladder to some extent. By the time their being looked at for Xfinity or Cup, owners have had plenty of opportunities to assess how they drive. Even if Daddy is writing the sponsorship checks (and Randy isn't), few owners are willing to sign a driver who doesn't have at least some driving ability.

Did having Randy Lajoie as a father help Cory in the industry? Sure. Did it get him a couple of full-time Cup rides? Highly doubtful. Does he have a ride now? No, more because he makes poor decisions than due to his abilities.
 
Greg said:
I am not sure that any driver in the modern era is self made. Racing is just to much of a war, if you don't have any help you will never make it.

If you have never sat in a race car, you have no clue. By the time most would figure out the basics, the money will be gone (unless you at least have someone the knows how to provide a lot of feedback and direction). Buckshot Jones would have drove circles around 99% of the fans or civilians.
Click to expand...
Very, very few drivers remotely merit being called this at the top levels, though obviously at this stage every level of motorsports is full of ride buyers, almost all of whom have a dream attached to their procurement of making it to NASCAR where the most money can be made (thus providing ROI for all their backers). Not incidentally IMO, as the number of drivers who have been "self made" declines, so have the ratings and the attendance of domestic American motorsports.

(Yes, we can have a long discussion about what it would even mean to be "self made" in racing though I think it is very, very obvious to most anyone how the nature of family-financed or run teams has changed in the post Al Jr/Jeff Gordon world. There are clear, quantifiable differences between both the historical and present nature of Bobby Allen's Shark Racing and Rick Ware Racing. No one is going to argue about this and I also recognize that. The best possible defense about this is that what it means to be "self made" now relates to the ability of a child and his parents to sell the child's future success to investors/personal sponsors, which would be great if your associated TV programming is Shark Tank and not the Bank Of America 400.)

There is so much about this topic that is taken at face value which if examined just a little bit you realize how ridiculous this would look to anyone outside this bubble. e.g, The notion that the sport needs all the kids with the famous last names of their parents as recognizable figures: You know what that does? It makes you a slave to nostalgia and the fanbase who remembers the parents/grandparents. Please, I beg you: go ahead and invoke Bronny James' name so we can have a comparison between how the NBA media talks about Bronny and how the NASCAR media talks about literally anyone at all. If NASCAR is half Bronny Jameses, does that really encourage people to engage with it and watch?
 
virtualbalboa said:
Very, very few drivers remotely merit being called this at the top levels, though obviously at this stage every level of motorsports is full of ride buyers, almost all of whom have a dream attached to their procurement of making it to NASCAR where the most money can be made (thus providing ROI for all their backers). Not incidentally IMO, as the number of drivers who have been "self made" declines, so have the ratings and the attendance of domestic American motorsports.

(Yes, we can have a long discussion about what it would even mean to be "self made" in racing though I think it is very, very obvious to most anyone how the nature of family-financed or run teams has changed in the post Al Jr/Jeff Gordon world. There are clear, quantifiable differences between both the historical and present nature of Bobby Allen's Shark Racing and Rick Ware Racing. No one is going to argue about this and I also recognize that. The best possible defense about this is that what it means to be "self made" now relates to the ability of a child and his parents to sell the child's future success to investors/personal sponsors, which would be great if your associated TV programming is Shark Tank and not the Bank Of America 400.)

There is so much about this topic that is taken at face value which if examined just a little bit you realize how ridiculous this would look to anyone outside this bubble. e.g, The notion that the sport needs all the kids with the famous last names of their parents as recognizable figures: You know what that does? It makes you a slave to nostalgia and the fanbase who remembers the parents/grandparents. Please, I beg you: go ahead and invoke Bronny James' name so we can have a comparison between how the NBA media talks about Bronny and how the NASCAR media talks about literally anyone at all. If NASCAR is half Bronny Jameses, does that really encourage people to engage with it and watch?
Click to expand...
I am unsure how to respond to all of that, but I will say I wish NASCAR were more grassroots, and I think we have some common interests.

I just think we need to realize that continuing in the current direction is almost inevitable. There are some rare exceptions, but most pathways to Cup racing these days involve identifying a young gun to put into a Cup car in their young twenties, at a time when they have still lived most of their life as a dependent.

I would love a world where most of the best rides were going to thrtysomething year old drivers, with half a dozen championships that they earned against the other seasoned drivers at their regional tracks.
I too believe that they would they would bring in a following of grassroots fans with them that would be more passionate.

NASCAR isn't perfect. I wish they had kept half the Xfinity races running on local short tracks, like they did with the Busch races in the 80s. I believe that would have been a better bridge for getting Saturday warriors into more one-off deals to compete in more prestigious races.
But that would have only slowed down the progression to the current state.

I am also sure that you are well aware that the modern prototype Jeff Gordon was developed in the world that met most all of my grass root ideas.

I wouldn't put all it on Nascar. There are just too many moving parts to getting the needed big money to make it in cup racing. It exceeds my ability to articulate it all, and I doubt that anyone could read and control the culture even if they had such powers.

Even more so I don't think these thoughts are very applicable in this case.

I can't fault Lajoie on that account. He isn't making it based on talent or a lack of it, but I do think he has done the work and made a good faith effort, and I don't think of him as being solved spooned etc..
 
LewTheShoe said:
Yeah, I see now that @virtualbalboa uses misuses that definition. It's a pity that so many race fans are 'all ate up' by the fact that some kids have parents that are into racing and expose their children to racing... while others don't. WTF dude, why the disparaging labels for everyday, ordinary people?

When I started racing in the 1970's, my parents didn't know a camshaft from a roller skate. I got moral support only, no financial help, no parental connections or showing me the ropes. I didn't expect any, either. A few years later, my sister got more help in her athletic endeavors... because Mom and Dad were able to help nurture the first baby steps. My sister wound up earning a spot on the U.S. national team including the Olympic Games team, were she ranked first American on the leaderboard. It is laughable disgraceful to disparage her career because Mom helped her at some early local-level events. Jealousy is often an ugly thing, and this discussion about nepotism is an example of that.
Click to expand...
Unless you and your sister's parents are Torvill and Dean, your experience isn't analogous to Corey Lajoie's. Speaking of, if you turned on the next 4 winter Olympiads and half the skaters were kids of past Olympic skaters, wouldn't you find that just a little bit weird to be watching Kerrigan vs. Baiul forever?
 
Greg said:
I am unsure how to respond to all of that, but I will say I wish NASCAR were more grassroots, and I think we have some common interests.

I just think we need to realize that continuing in the current direction is almost inevitable. There are some rare exceptions, but most pathways to Cup racing these days involve identifying a young gun to put into a Cup car in their young twenties, at a time when they have still lived most of their life as a dependent.

I would love a world where most of the best rides were going to thrtysomething year old drivers, with half a dozen championships that they earned against the other seasoned drivers at their regional tracks.
I too believe that they would they would bring in a following of grassroots fans with them that would be more passionate.

NASCAR isn't perfect. I wish they had kept half the Xfinity races running on local short tracks, like they did with the Busch races in the 80s. I believe that would have been a better bridge for getting Saturday warriors into more one-off deals to compete in more prestigious races.
But that would have only slowed down the progression to the current state.

I am also sure that you are well aware that the modern prototype Jeff Gordon was developed in the world that met most all of my grass root ideas.

I wouldn't put all it on Nascar. There are just too many moving parts to getting the needed big money to make it in cup racing. It exceeds my ability to articulate it all, and I doubt that anyone could read and control the culture even if they had such powers.

Even more so I don't think these thoughts are very applicable in this case.

I can't fault Lajoie on that account. He isn't making it based on talent or a lack of it, but I do think he has done the work and made a good faith effort, and I don't think of him as being solved spooned etc..
Click to expand...
Racing revolves around money. The issue with that has always been that money corrupts, and clearly, there are many people in racing to corrupt. Obviously I can't argue with you that the pathway to Cup racing (and Indycar racing, and F1) is constructed at present around the development of young children, identified well before their 20s either in talent or in funding potential, in race cars far exceeding the performance capabilities of anything those same children would ever legally be permitted to drive outside the track. My displeasure at this is not at all hidden: I show open contempt for it. I should not know that Brexton Busch exists, much less be anticipating his arrival to the Cup series in 9 or 10 years when he is legally capable of driving a car (regardless of how talented he winds up actually being or what his accomplishments are).

Jeff Gordon's rise to stardom is, I would argue, a phenomenal example of how money has corrupted and changed motorsports for the worse. His stepfather leaned on and paid off whomever he needed to in order to get Jeff to the top as soon as possible, which led to tracks and sanctioning bodies changing minimum age requirements and Jeff finding personal sponsorship from the likes of Pepsi and Nestle at a very early stage. This is not a statement about his greatness, but rather a statement about what his greatness and the path he took did to motorsports. We all know and all say "Everyone is looking for the next Jeff Gordon" and that is absolutely true. Everyone always is looking for the next Jeff Gordon. They are only looking for the next Jeff Gordon. Part of that package involves the sponsors, and sponsors like recognizable names because it saves them the trouble of needing to be concerned with name recognition; same logic that applies to why every movie is a reboot or based on a comic book (and look how the film industry is doing!). Lack a name from Dad and Mom, and you need a parent who made a billion dollars drilling for oil or running a fast food chain.

It isn't that I don't get it. It isn't that I don't understand. I get it. I understand it. I think it sucks out loud.
 
virtualbalboa said:
Racing revolves around money. The issue with that has always been that money corrupts, and clearly, there are many people in racing to corrupt. Obviously I can't argue with you that the pathway to Cup racing (and Indycar racing, and F1) is constructed at present around the development of young children, identified well before their 20s either in talent or in funding potential, in race cars far exceeding the performance capabilities of anything those same children would ever legally be permitted to drive outside the track. My displeasure at this is not at all hidden: I show open contempt for it. I should not know that Brexton Busch exists, much less be anticipating his arrival to the Cup series in 9 or 10 years when he is legally capable of driving a car (regardless of how talented he winds up actually being or what his accomplishments are).

Jeff Gordon's rise to stardom is, I would argue, a phenomenal example of how money has corrupted and changed motorsports for the worse. His stepfather leaned on and paid off whomever he needed to in order to get Jeff to the top as soon as possible, which led to tracks and sanctioning bodies changing minimum age requirements and Jeff finding personal sponsorship from the likes of Pepsi and Nestle at a very early stage. This is not a statement about his greatness, but rather a statement about what his greatness and the path he took did to motorsports. We all know and all say "Everyone is looking for the next Jeff Gordon" and that is absolutely true. Everyone always is looking for the next Jeff Gordon. They are only looking for the next Jeff Gordon. Part of that package involves the sponsors, and sponsors like recognizable names because it saves them the trouble of needing to be concerned with name recognition; same logic that applies to why every movie is a reboot or based on a comic book (and look how the film industry is doing!). Lack a name from Dad and Mom, and you need a parent who made a billion dollars drilling for oil or running a fast food chain.

It isn't that I don't get it. It isn't that I don't understand. I get it. I understand it. I think it sucks out loud.
Click to expand...
I wish things were different too, but I still try to appreciate what we have, today

The world changes, maybe I should have followed dirt racing more to satisfy the grassroots need etc.
As for the world of asphalt stock car racing that is forever changed; I will keeping watching and hoping for the best.

I have to be honest with myself as well, I doubt that I would still be constantly at the local grassroots tracks even if it was all still the same. I am not as young as I used to be and as willingly to pay the cost for all of the demands at this stage of my life. I grew up close enough to literally hear them racing in my own backyard . It was calling my name and made me a fanatic. I was addicted to the racing and I just don't have it in me, like I did back then.

Maybe the same kind of thing happened to a lot of other people from my generation, irregardless of what them crazy kids are doing these days.
 
Greg said:
I wish things were different too, but I still try to appreciate what we have, today

The world changes, maybe I should have followed dirt racing more to satisfy the grassroots need etc.
As for the world of asphalt stock car racing that is forever changed; I will keeping watching and hoping for the best.

I have to be honest with myself as well, I doubt that I would still be constantly at the local grassroots tracks even if it was all still the same. I am not as young as I used to be and as willingly to pay the cost for all of the demands at this stage of my life. I grew up close enough to literally hear them racing in my own backyard . It was calling my name and made me a fanatic. I was addicted to the racing and I just don't have it in me, like I did back then.

Maybe the same kind of thing happened to a lot of other people from my generation, irregardless of what them crazy kids are doing these days.
Click to expand...
On dirt, it is both easier for me to ignore the things I dislike about what modern racing is now and more difficult. Easier in so much as the danger presented in a midget or sprint car is significantly higher, and thus the notion that I am watching people pay to risk their lives for my entertainment is something I can more easily digest at some level there. More difficult in that the young ages of so many talents makes it very hard for me to see them risk their lives when they otherwise would never be permitted to ever sign any legal documentation indicating they consented. Daison Pursley is a phenomenal talent, and he probably would have been just as phenomenal if he had gone to school and got in a race car at 18 instead of nearly being paralyzed before he turned 18. Seeing the crumpled, unmoving mass with my own eyes on the Tulsa Expo Center Floor that was Ashton Torgerson was never going to be easy, but it certainly was tougher when I found out he was 16. Thank god he's fine now, but at the same time, why? Who is this intended for?

Nobody asks this. Nobody confronts this. No one cares.

This is not all that different as to how powerboat racing was funded on the back of cocaine in my mind. It's a miracle it has been sustained this long in this fashion without serious repercussions IMO.

(this is somewhat removed from the topic though related since it is all part of the same foundational issue, idk, w/e)
 
Actually, to my point above, I do think there are repercussions. This is a ladder system we have now is more akin to something we'd see in Formula cars in Europe, but the ecosystem is still that of "stock car racing" and it winds up being like a square peg being pushed into a round hole. It seems as though the general direction is that everything from the USAC Midgets on up through XFinity will eventually be de facto amateur series in the way that F2->F4 are all actual amateur series with no payouts to teams and drivers. I don't know how that is good long term but as I indicated before, the checks are clearing from the parties cutting them and as such no one has to think or try to do anything differently to make a buck. This is what it will be. If that means every midget at a race track is supplied by KKM in 2034, then that is what will happen.
 
virtualbalboa said:
Racing revolves around money. The issue with that has always been that money corrupts, and clearly, there are many people in racing to corrupt. Obviously I can't argue with you that the pathway to Cup racing (and Indycar racing, and F1) is constructed at present around the development of young children, identified well before their 20s either in talent or in funding potential, in race cars far exceeding the performance capabilities of anything those same children would ever legally be permitted to drive outside the track. My displeasure at this is not at all hidden: I show open contempt for it. I should not know that Brexton Busch exists, much less be anticipating his arrival to the Cup series in 9 or 10 years when he is legally capable of driving a car (regardless of how talented he winds up actually being or what his accomplishments are).

Jeff Gordon's rise to stardom is, I would argue, a phenomenal example of how money has corrupted and changed motorsports for the worse. His stepfather leaned on and paid off whomever he needed to in order to get Jeff to the top as soon as possible, which led to tracks and sanctioning bodies changing minimum age requirements and Jeff finding personal sponsorship from the likes of Pepsi and Nestle at a very early stage. This is not a statement about his greatness, but rather a statement about what his greatness and the path he took did to motorsports.
Click to expand...
That's complete BS. John Bickford was a working class schlep that didn't have the money to pay off ANYBODY, and they didn't lobby anyone to change the age requirement, they simply MOVED to where the rules were more relaxed. If you've seen where they lived in "Arm"Pittsboro Indiana, you would KNOW they weren't rolling in money. Jeff got rides and sponsors because he was fast, and because his age garnered attention, but it wasn't all a smooth ride. He got fired from a couple of those rides too. Jeff's rise to NASCAR was more accident than master plan. Unable to draw any interest from open wheel teams, he went to the Buck Baker Driving School to see if he would like stock cars. He impressed a fellow student who happened to be Leo Jackson's son in law. That lead to a ONE race deal at Rockingham, where Jeff sat on front row, but crashed. Shortly after, he got a call to test Bill Davis's car at Rockingham, the ONE track he had laps on, based on that one start and the fact that he had a relationship with Ford from sprint cars.. Feeling totally comfortable at Rockingham, he aced the test and got hired. A year and a half later, Jeff caught Rick Hendrick's eye, and the rest is history. To call this an example of buying rides or nepotism or ANYTHING else derogatory is just insane.
 
Formerjackman said:
That's complete BS. John Bickford was a working class schlep that didn't have the money to pay off ANYBODY, and they didn't lobby anyone to change the age requirement, they simply MOVED to where the rules were more relaxed.
Click to expand...
I've heard plenty to the contrary over the years to this. PLENTY. Here's where I'll acquiesce: Jeff went to Florida to race because Bickford saw a story on Speedworld that a 13 year old was racing there. Otherwise, it was Bickford being the man knocking down doors to get his stepson to race.

Also, Jeff and John end up in Indiana precisely for this reason. I've heard the stories too: You really think John Bickford couldn't find a pot to piss in, but could get Jeff a Formula Vee test as some sort of crazed fantasy as that being a manner to get into CART?

Formerjackman said:
To call this an example of buying rides or nepotism or ANYTHING else derogatory is just insane.
Click to expand...
Jeff Gordon is a great racer who never would have been there without the work of his stepfather. Wouldn't argue that one bit. I don't know how I would. There are other race car drivers in the same or a similar boat.

BTW: You know who paid for Jeff Gordon to go to the Buck Baker Driving School?
 
virtualbalboa said:
I've heard plenty to the contrary over the years to this. PLENTY. Here's where I'll acquiesce: Jeff went to Florida to race because Bickford saw a story on Speedworld that a 13 year old was racing there. Otherwise, it was Bickford being the man knocking down doors to get his stepson to race.

Also, Jeff and John end up in Indiana precisely for this reason. I've heard the stories too: You really think John Bickford couldn't find a pot to piss in, but could get Jeff a Formula Vee test as some sort of crazed fantasy as that being a manner to get into CART?


Jeff Gordon is a great racer who never would have been there without the work of his stepfather. Wouldn't argue that one bit. I don't know how I would. There are other race car drivers in the same or a similar boat.

BTW: You know who paid for Jeff Gordon to go to the Buck Baker Driving School?
Click to expand...
Bickford was certainly using every tool at his disposal to advance Jeff's career, but he wasn't just buying him rides, because THAT kind of money wasn't there. Frankly, even if he DID, so what? It's the old Chase Elliott argument. Did Chase have the silver spoon? Absolutely, but let's not forget that he excelled in every car they put him in, and ultimately that's what matters. There is a long list of drivers that got promoted up the ladder that had absolutely no business being there because they never had the talent, but don't hold it against the people that DID. You don't get to choose who your parents are. If the happen to be wealthy or have standing in the racing community, that's not the kid's fault.
 
Ernie_Irvan#4 said:
Corey Lajoie: “but I beat Chase Elliot, Kyle Larson and Bubba Wallace in K&N one time!”
Click to expand...
I believe he outran them several times. His CC at that time is a personal friend of mine and Corey was getting top of the line equipment and more importantly getting competent people who took those pieces and put them in place which gave him the opportunity to show his talent. I don't understand that hate for Corey. He's a stand up guy that more than paid his dues
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Today's drivers don't get rides at the Cup level just because of who Daddy was. Sure, that may get them started and up the ladder to some extent. By the time their being looked at for Xfinity or Cup, owners have had plenty of opportunities to assess how they drive. Even if Daddy is writing the sponsorship checks (and Randy isn't), few owners are willing to sign a driver who doesn't have at least some driving ability.

Did having Randy Lajoie as a father help Cory in the industry? Sure. Did it get him a couple of full-time Cup rides? Highly doubtful. Does he have a ride now? No, more because he makes poor decisions than due to his abilities.
Click to expand...
He is gonna run a part time schedule for RWR, its a living! ;)
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Today's drivers don't get rides at the Cup level just because of who Daddy was. Sure, that may get them started and up the ladder to some extent. By the time their being looked at for Xfinity or Cup, owners have had plenty of opportunities to assess how they drive. Even if Daddy is writing the sponsorship checks (and Randy isn't), few owners are willing to sign a driver who doesn't have at least some driving ability.

Did having Randy Lajoie as a father help Cory in the industry? Sure. Did it get him a couple of full-time Cup rides? Highly doubtful. Does he have a ride now? No, more because he makes poor decisions than due to his abilities.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Kyle Larson grew up in a regular family with a dad who loved going to races, now look
 
Mispeedway15 said:
Exactly. Kyle Larson grew up in a regular family with a dad who loved going to races, now look
Click to expand...
Couldn't finance him higher than go carts or 1/4 midgets I believe. But to think that is the only way to get to the top levels in motorsports is a foolish notion. We have people who made it using video games now for christ's sake.
 
"Are parents not supposed to use their influence or money to help their kid?"

No. Of course they can from a moral and legal perspective. The "problem" is that I don't celebrate rich parents pouring money into their kids this way. I wouldn't celebrate any kid or parent where the parents paid for the kid to be on a collegiate team (remember that with USC?) either. Why should I? How does making the sport more and more insular and reliant on this kind of activity helpful?

Again, who is this for? If the answer is "for the maximum number of people to have jobs, the sport has to be oriented this way", that's an honest answer, but not one that is going to build or retain regular working class people as fans.
 
virtualbalboa said:
The "problem" is that I don't celebrate rich parents pouring money into their kids this way.
Click to expand...
We're not celebrating that. We're appreciating the kid's success.

What's the problem with supporting your kid's talents? Would racing be better off if well-to-do parents didn't support their child and the next Jeff Gordon went undiscovered?

If financially challenged parents and siblings have to scrape and sacrifice for one child to advance, is that less detestable? Should everyone have to struggle to succeed? If so, why?
 
virtualbalboa said:
"Are parents not supposed to use their influence or money to help their kid?"

No. Of course they can from a moral and legal perspective. The "problem" is that I don't celebrate rich parents pouring money into their kids this way. I wouldn't celebrate any kid or parent where the parents paid for the kid to be on a collegiate team (remember that with USC?) either. Why should I? How does making the sport more and more insular and reliant on this kind of activity helpful?

Again, who is this for? If the answer is "for the maximum number of people to have jobs, the sport has to be oriented this way", that's an honest answer, but not one that is going to build or retain regular working class people as fans.
Click to expand...
Would you have any thoughts on how you would eliminate the silver spooned ones, or ride buyers?

If you were in charge of Nascar or any other forms of racing with absolute power, how would you keep the drivers more connected to the grass roots etc, and more relatable/connected to the fans.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Assuming those drivers are more relatable, which I debate.
Click to expand...
I could relate more to the seasoned veterans getting the best rides and opportunities based on merit.

But I agree it is subjective, 10 different people probably gets you 10 different opinions on the definition.
 
Hey I got it. Whey don't they have a rich guys poor guys series like stick and ball football. You know just like the NFL for the good guys and then they fudge up some others for a summer league? It's a brilliant idea.
 
Greg said:
My Deddy got me a job in the cotton mill.

It was rough, and as I posted many times, I didn't have money to afford a luck box in those days. I carried my pre cut potatoes in my socks to make some soup for lunch. The potatoes were cut in shapes to contour to the shape of my foot and go in between my toes.

If my Moma and Deddy hadn't helped me learn how to cut the soup potatoes to contour with my foot, I would not have made it.


After a few weeks amd pay checks, I was able to afford a cap to keep my head warm in the morning and then use it as a soup bowl for lunch. Prior to that, I just knotted up my sock to make a pouch to hold my soup.

If the socks had a hole that only left your tied up boxer shorts to use as a make shift soup container.

It was a tough life, but I was thankful and people stuck together. Sharing a bowl of soup with a girlfriend during those times was special. Every one of us had our unique flavors. I think I liked Sarah's and Tatiana's borush the best.
Click to expand...
Thanks' Greg, now I may never be able to eat potato soup again. :(
 
virtualbalboa said:
I wouldn't celebrate any kid or parent where the parents paid for the kid to be on a collegiate team (remember that with USC?) either. Why should I? How does making the sport more and more insular and reliant on this kind of activity helpful?
Click to expand...

Any high level sport requires heavy parental involvement and investment from a young age. Go to any kids hockey or baseball game, those parents have invested hundreds of dollars into their kid. If you can’t keep up with the Joneses, you lose opportunities.

Auto racing is a more extreme example of this but the race to spend money to advance is a problem in all sports.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom