CRANDALL: Dear NASCAR, your playoff system is broken

I sincerely have never seen a bad race. Ever. Each one has its own story. This is what I feel. Hell, I thought I didn't like road course racing. Went to Sonoma. I liked that too.
 
I hate the Chase, I hate the playoff system. But If we are keeping the playoffs, should be top 10 based on points/ wins and then 2 wildcards. Im thinking maybe make the last race before and then Indianapolis itself a "Win and your in" for a guy not in the top 10. If nobody outside the top 10 win those two races.... just take the top 10 in points. I'd keep the bonus points they have ( playoff/stage points) as it gets everybody racing from green to checkers.
 
ReturnTrip said:
I've disliked all 32 iterations of the Chase/Playoffs. This writer is a lightweight.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I think it is weird that we draw the line at Paul Menard or Ricky Stenhouse making the playoffs. Apparently it was still fine when Ryan Newman was one good restart away from being, objectively, the worst Cup champion ever. It was okay when Aric Almirola got in with what may be the flukiest type of win possible, a rain-shortened restrictor plate victory. Likewise with AJ Allmendinger qualifying with a handful of Top 10s thanks to his Watkins Glen win - because we like AJ. And yet again with Chris Buescher putting a Front Row car in with a win in the rain, on fuel mileage.

Never mind the unprecedented wildest of wild cards with a 13th competitor being added at the discretion of the sanctioning body before that, or the numerous years before that where we could debate whether Jimmie Johnson was or wasn't the "deserving" driver and if "peaking at the right time" should be a thing in NASCAR.

There is no competitive reason the NBA should have 16 teams in the playoffs; no one has mistakenly believed that the Timberwolves and Wizards actually have a shot at taking the Warriors in 7 games, or that they even should have a shot. Professional playoffs are largely nothing more than massive revenue generators, driven by huge TV ratings and the biggest crowds seen all season in their respective sports, but that hasn't been the case for NASCAR. Despite all of the different iterations of whatever NASCAR feels like calling it now, it hasn't resonated well with the core nor with the casual fans it intended to bring in. There hasn't been a good reason for them in a while now, if ever.
 
ChexOrWrex said:
Laughable
Click to expand...

Then, tell me what it is.....I mean this very sincerely, and not rhetorically. I love Jeff Gluck. However, I have always been a fan of spending time talking about what a good race is (or what "good racing" is) rather than simply defining a race as "good" or "bad." What is the "standard?" Perhaps Mr. Gluck could use this as evaluative criteria, and we could get this sport moving forward again.
 
Simple Fan said:
Playoffs are the best way to crown a champion. Old points system was broken, that's why the made the switch. 16 is a fine number for the playoffs and its not like all 16 make it to the final.
Click to expand...
Playoffs crown a winner. They do not crown the best.

The playoff that best approximates the best team is the most exclusive - the College Football Playoff.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Agreed. I think it is weird that we draw the line at Paul Menard or Ricky Stenhouse making the playoffs. Apparently it was still fine when Ryan Newman was one good restart away from being, objectively, the worst Cup champion ever. It was okay when Aric Almirola got in with what may be the flukiest type of win possible, a rain-shortened restrictor plate victory. Likewise with AJ Allmendinger qualifying with a handful of Top 10s thanks to his Watkins Glen win - because we like AJ. And yet again with Chris Buescher putting a Front Row car in with a win in the rain, on fuel mileage.

Never mind the unprecedented wildest of wild cards with a 13th competitor being added at the discretion of the sanctioning body before that, or the numerous years before that where we could debate whether Jimmie Johnson was or wasn't the "deserving" driver and if "peaking at the right time" should be a thing in NASCAR.

There is no competitive reason the NBA should have 16 teams in the playoffs; no one has mistakenly believed that the Timberwolves and Wizards actually have a shot at taking the Warriors in 7 games, or that they even should have a shot. Professional playoffs are largely nothing more than massive revenue generators, driven by huge TV ratings and the biggest crowds seen all season in their respective sports, but that hasn't been the case for NASCAR. Despite all of the different iterations of whatever NASCAR feels like calling it now, it hasn't resonated well with the core nor with the casual fans it intended to bring in. There hasn't been a good reason for them in a while now, if ever.
Click to expand...

A lot of good points in there. I don't believe anyone who objects to the appeal of a fluke Paul Menard title run viewed those other fluky examples enthusiastically.

Otherwise, absolutely, expanded playoffs in other types of sports are dubious from a competitive standpoint, and are there for commercial reasons. The concept never made sense for an auto racing series. We are stuck with it for the foreseeable future. That doesn't necessarily mean forever, because the plain truth is that they have not been commercially successful for NASCAR. In all other sports that feature them, they are, and money drives everything.
 
Last edited:
Revman said:
Then, tell me what it is.....I mean this very sincerely, and not rhetorically. I love Jeff Gluck. However, I have always been a fan of spending time talking about what a good race is (or what "good racing" is) rather than simply defining a race as "good" or "bad." What is the "standard?" Perhaps Mr. Gluck could use this as evaluative criteria, and we could get this sport moving forward again.
Click to expand...
I believe the subject of conversation, and my post, has shifted.

The standard I was referring to was what the top series of american stock car auto racing is, and was at that time for decades.

With the never ending changes while chasing the carrot on a string has diluted what that standard is.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Professional playoffs are largely nothing more than massive revenue generators, driven by huge TV ratings and the biggest crowds seen all season in their respective sports, but that hasn't been the case for NASCAR.
Click to expand...
Those are some of the reasons 'playoffs' don't make sense for NASCAR. In other sports with playoffs, the only teams participating are those who are actually in the playoffs. Every other team in the league is done for the year. In other sports, those teams making the playoffs are competing in extra games that extend the season and make for revenue for those teams. In NASCAR, the 'playoff' races are the same ones that have long been the last 10 races of the schedule, and playoff teams aren't making any more revenue than they were under the old 36-race season.

As to 'Game 7 moments', to have one you have to have a head-to-head best-of-7 series, not a one-race shootout. And many of those best-of-7 series end after 4 or 5 games. How about a best-of-36 series? Not that anything is going to change anyway.
 
gnomesayin said:
The concept [of playoffs] never made sense for an auto racing series.
Click to expand...
You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. If you do have a playoff, you get what we have now... endless complaining about it, but at least we have a championship that gives more reward to winning and less reward to conservative points racing than the pre-Chase decades.

If you don't have a playoff, you are forced by commercial realities to shave the winners reward to near nothing and prop up the mid-field runners in the season-long points accumulation. This keeps the championship "alive" until late in the season, but is terribly unfair to the best teams, and creates elevated incentives toward boring low-risk points racing. So be careful what you ask for! We had this for decades, and I for one hated it every one of those years... it made the Nascar championship a laughing stock to me, and capped my interest in Nascar lower than it would have otherwise been. And many others who followed multiple forms of racing, and thus were exposed to alternative championship structures and philosophies, felt the same way.

If you don't have a playoff and elect to ignore the commercial realities, in theory you could revamp the points scale to appropriately reward winners and top-5 runners. That would satisfy sporting criteria, but would entail great risk of having the championship effectively decided with many weeks remaining in the season. Sports that ignore commercial realities are pretty much doomed in today's marketplace. For example, Nascar would be foolish to adopt a points scale philosophically similar to F1 or MotoGP or IndyCar, and apply it across a 36 race schedule... It just ain't gonna happen regardless of the sporting appeal it would have.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Those are some of the reasons 'playoffs' don't make sense for NASCAR. In other sports with playoffs, the only teams participating are those who are actually in the playoffs. Every other team in the league is done for the year. In other sports, those teams making the playoffs are competing in extra games that extend the season and make for revenue for those teams. In NASCAR, the 'playoff' races are the same ones that have long been the last 10 races of the schedule, and playoff teams aren't making any more revenue than they were under the old 36-race season.

As to 'Game 7 moments', to have one you have to have a head-to-head best-of-7 series, not a one-race shootout. And many of those best-of-7 series end after 4 or 5 games. How about a best-of-36 series? Not that anything is going to change anyway.
Click to expand...
I like the full schedule Championship....every race was a playoff race. If the champ clinched 3 races early, never bothered me. Try harder next year. Also I always felt drivers were battling for positions in the standings...let me correct myself...,,the race broadcasts televised those battles better for 3rd place in points or say top 10. (Also felt as a viewer and fan you got to know those drivers/teams better because effort was made to get their stories what wrong this year, how they are preparing for next year. )Those were cool to me as it was a big deal to finish top 10 in points. Even Rookie of the year battles were highlighted more, I can’t begin to tell you last time A broadcast had ROY points battle graphic. Now it’s not prestigious at all the points, it just comes down to a One Race winner take all the NASCAR Homestead Bowl and that’s the only thing highlighted those 4 drivers except in the case we have a big name retiring.I’d bet we will have this playoffs for ever and I’ve grown accustomed to it. I always felt it was never broken, maybe more emphasis on winning a race but the old way never bothered me. The Chase/Playoffs is just something I’ve tolerated, it’s just a gimmick in my mind. I do wonder how things would go with the Winston Cup Points system In today’s NASCAR world though with the emphasis on winning and more bonus points
 
Simple Fan said:
Playoffs are the best way to crown a champion. Old points system was broken, that's why the made the switch. 16 is a fine number for the playoffs and its not like all 16 make it to the final.
Click to expand...
The pre-Chase points system was not without its flaws, but I don't know if I'd go so far as to say it was broken. The reason they made the switch is because Nextel/Sprint wanted a playoff (probably also the same reason we saw a major overhaul when Monster came in) and NASCAR also probably thought it would help them compete with the NFL.
 
Lamestream media at work.

Joey Logano is 4th...160something points back already. Don't tell me that would be healthy for only three drivers to be relevant in July.
 
NASCAR Apologist said:
Lamestream media at work.

Joey Logano is 4th...160something points back already. Don't tell me that would be healthy for only three drivers to be relevant in July.
Click to expand...
Would it be any less 'healthy' than the current situation? The mainstream sports media would still be focused only on the Big 3.
 
I agree with her and I hate to make Jimmie the scapegoat because he played by the rules, but him winning his 7th title in that fashion really threw me off the one race for a championship. I would make the Chase 12 races they have a bye after Bristol, so make Bristol your "regular" season closer, then bye then Darlington opens the Chase
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Would it be any less 'healthy' than the current situation? The mainstream sports media would still be focused only on the Big 3.
Click to expand...
What else are we talking about? If Stenhouse can make the playoff. Menard. Newman. If the three HMS guys can hang on. What if someone sneaks in with a win, like Allmendinger at the Glen? Big stuff to follow. Totally not happening if there weren't a playoff.
 
36 races, 36 chartered teams. How about we eliminate 1 team after every race and reset the points for everyone remaining. Championship winner is the last team standing at the end of the season. Game 7 moment every week :rolleyes:
 
LewTheShoe said:
You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. If you do have a playoff, you get what we have now... endless complaining about it, but at least we have a championship that gives more reward to winning and less reward to conservative points racing than the pre-Chase decades.

If you don't have a playoff, you are forced by commercial realities to shave the winners reward to near nothing and prop up the mid-field runners in the season-long points accumulation. This keeps the championship "alive" until late in the season, but is terribly unfair to the best teams, and creates elevated incentives toward boring low-risk points racing. So be careful what you ask for! We had this for decades, and I for one hated it every one of those years... it made the Nascar championship a laughing stock to me, and capped my interest in Nascar lower than it would have otherwise been. And many others who followed multiple forms of racing, and thus were exposed to alternative championship structures and philosophies, felt the same way.

If you don't have a playoff and elect to ignore the commercial realities, in theory you could revamp the points scale to appropriately reward winners and top-5 runners. That would satisfy sporting criteria, but would entail great risk of having the championship effectively decided with many weeks remaining in the season. Sports that ignore commercial realities are pretty much doomed in today's marketplace. For example, Nascar would be foolish to adopt a points scale philosophically similar to F1 or MotoGP or IndyCar, and apply it across a 36 race schedule... It just ain't gonna happen regardless of the sporting appeal it would have.
Click to expand...
Personally I don't have much use for championships in racing. I watch and attend races because I want to see good racing and hope that guys I like finish well, not because I want to see how today's race will have long term championship implications. In local short track racing I find that it's the guys that aren't running for points that put on the best shows when they show up at the track because all they want is to win. I've also watched some fantastic racing on championship nights where the champion only had to take the green flag. Why was it great? Because I was there to see my favourite drivers run at great tracks, not because it was championship night.

People like big events. The Nascar Cup series comes to each track it visits just once or twice a year. That's a massive event for each track. Maybe the individual races should be treated as the massive events that they are rather than as small stepping stones on the path towards the championship.

Based on what I read across these forums (ex Chase Elliot threads "but he hasn't won a race"), there are a lot of fans that believe that winning races is the only thing that truely matters. Maybe I'm way off, but how many people actually watch races because they care about long term championship implications of races rather than because they like watching 36 cars racing for every position they can get in that race?

On a related note, I'm not a fan of how the elimination format makes non-championship eligible cars less important than cars still in the chase. For example in 2014 when Junior won at Martinsville and Johnson won at Texas, it felt like those guys took away a championship opportunity from their teammate when they weren't in it anymore. Also believe that Larson would have a win or two at Homestead if it weren't that somehow only the championship 4 are allowed up front at that race.
 
I've been to a number of short tracks when travelling. I don't know the local guys from Adam's housecat, don't know where they stand in the local points, don't know which one's are already champions, and frankly don't care. My ignorance doesn't keep me from having a good time during what is likely my only visit to that facility. I may (or may not) ask local fans who to watch out for, but I'm going to watch the (hopefully competitive) racing regardless.

It's easy to take the same approach to the national touring series. Watch the races as individual events, and ignore the network's playoff-related babblings and graphics.
 
A playoff champion gets a cup and a season long champion has bragging rights among his piers. There is no reason we can't celebrate both (they should split the $$$ IMO). I pretty much tune in to watch a race. The playoff creates some extra interest but I get annoyed when lap-by-lap playoff standings dominate the coverage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom