Determining a Champion

Think Phelps made it perfectly clear. This system isn't going anywhere. Ever.
 
donthaveanickname said:
How do we know whether this is the majority or the minority?

Most people under 30 don't care about NASCAR, I think that's for sure. The current system and the one that existed since 2004-13 did not attract young fans and only led to a steady decline in attendance and viewership.

I'd bet that the championship would come down to the final race in most years. The drivers would also race differently than they do today and try to get the most points out of every race.
Click to expand...
You know what else would lead to a decline in viewership? Season long points system. The average age of a nascar fan is almost 60. We lost old fans, but didn't gain that many new ones. (Except for the 4 or 5 people in my personal life under 30 who became fans BECAUSE of the Chase/playoffs).

Nothing could be done to prevent the inevitable decline in ratings and attendance when the old demographic of fans pass along. Like it or not, in order to survive, NASCAR needs to cater to a younger demographic. If they appeal only to a larger older population, it goes stale. It might have been a failed effort, but it was the right effort.

The biggest mistake of ignorance in the fan base is the assumption that NASCAR is independent of the evolution of society, mainstream media, and how media is consumed and marketed. And that NASCAR doesn't need to make changes to "keep up". Being resistive to change doesn't prevent change, unless one lives their life in a constant state of anxiety.

TLDR: The world moves forward, media moves forward, sports move forward, society moves forward. NASCAR needs to move forward as well. Unless the change is inherently harmful to someone, resistance to change is inherently a problem for he who is resistive change. Not the change itself.



Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
Here is the direct quote. Nothing is set in stone with Nascar. It's a family owned business with no stock holders to consider when making changes. If the playoff system doesn't pull the numbers they will change it just like the next gen car model that is coming in 2022

Phelps noted the system was designed to create excitement and the best team doesn't always win.
"I think this system, how the playoff system worked gave fans what they wanted, which was intense drama and really this just amazing competition," Phelps said.
 
donthaveanickname said:
How do we know whether this is the majority or the minority?

Most people under 30 don't care about NASCAR, I think that's for sure. The current system and the one that existed since 2004-13 did not attract young fans and only led to a steady decline in attendance and viewership.

I'd bet that the championship would come down to the final race in most years. The drivers would also race differently than they do today and try to get the most points out of every race.
Click to expand...
the Championship never was clinched in race 20 of a 36 race season, I love your post here. The Chase/Playoffs have pretty much been a failure IMO
 
jaqua19 said:
You know what else would lead to a decline in viewership? Season long points system. The average age of a nascar fan is almost 60. We lost old fans, but didn't gain that many new ones. (Except for the 4 or 5 people in my personal life under 30 who became fans BECAUSE of the Chase/playoffs).

Nothing could be done to prevent the inevitable decline in ratings and attendance when the old demographic of fans pass along. Like it or not, in order to survive, NASCAR needs to cater to a younger demographic. If they appeal only to a larger older population, it goes stale. It might have been a failed effort, but it was the right effort.

The biggest mistake of ignorance in the fan base is the assumption that NASCAR is independent of the evolution of society, mainstream media, and how media is consumed and marketed. And that NASCAR doesn't need to make changes to "keep up". Being resistive to change doesn't prevent change, unless one lives their life in a constant state of anxiety.

TLDR: The world moves forward, media moves forward, sports move forward, society moves forward. NASCAR needs to move forward as well. Unless the change is inherently harmful to someone, resistance to change is inherently a problem for he who is resistive change. Not the change itself.



Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Indy Car and F1 run season long points systems, have pretty good ratings. To get back to stick and ball sports, Soccer Leagues around the world dont have playoffs. Just a season long tally. I think if they did go back to a season long system, I'd bet you'd be in a for a surprise. I would bet my life that it would perform better in ratings than what we have now. Why You ask? Well what we have now isnt getting eye balls on the TV set for younger people, I dont think the points system is the problem. What it is I dont know, I just think younger people arnt into cars anymore. I really think thats the main issue, you could do a points reset every 5 races it wont matter if people arnt interested in the cars and speed aspect of racing. I do know that if they went back to a season long points system a whole hell alot of people would probably come back...... and not every one that thinks like me is 65. I'm 35, there MIGHT be more of us that think like this out there.
 
jaqua19 said:
You know what else would lead to a decline in viewership? Season long points system. The average age of a nascar fan is almost 60. We lost old fans, but didn't gain that many new ones. (Except for the 4 or 5 people in my personal life under 30 who became fans BECAUSE of the Chase/playoffs).

Nothing could be done to prevent the inevitable decline in ratings and attendance when the old demographic of fans pass along. Like it or not, in order to survive, NASCAR needs to cater to a younger demographic. If they appeal only to a larger older population, it goes stale. It might have been a failed effort, but it was the right effort.

The biggest mistake of ignorance in the fan base is the assumption that NASCAR is independent of the evolution of society, mainstream media, and how media is consumed and marketed. And that NASCAR doesn't need to make changes to "keep up". Being resistive to change doesn't prevent change, unless one lives their life in a constant state of anxiety.

TLDR: The world moves forward, media moves forward, sports move forward, society moves forward. NASCAR needs to move forward as well. Unless the change is inherently harmful to someone, resistance to change is inherently a problem for he who is resistive change. Not the change itself.



Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Then how come the ratings the past 2 years for the finale and their great awesome dandy format that you're talking about, have totally tanked for the final race?

Uh hello, we had a perfectly fine "evolution" called the Chase and NASCAR decided to change change change the format again and again because apparently the Tony Stewart/Carl Edwards battle wasn't good enough??

How many sports or motorsports for that matter have changed their format and standings as many times as NASCAR has??? Let's change things some more!
 
Snappy D said:
What it is I dont know, I just think younger people arnt into cars anymore.
Click to expand...
Your right. We decided to go with 1 less vehicle so I called my granddaughter and said she could have the car. She said "why would I want to give all my money just to own a car". Damn, she is right and a lot of kids are the same way in thinking that. It cost to much to have that sitting 22 hrs a day.
 
Snappy D said:
Indy Car and F1 run season long points systems, have pretty good ratings. To get back to stick and ball sports, Soccer Leagues around the world dont have playoffs. Just a season long tally. I think if they did go back to a season long system, I'd bet you'd be in a for a surprise. I would bet my life that it would perform better in ratings than what we have now. Why You ask? Well what we have now isnt getting eye balls on the TV set for younger people, I dont think the points system is the problem. What it is I dont know, I just think younger people arnt into cars anymore. I really think thats the main issue, you could do a points reset every 5 races it wont matter if people arnt interested in the cars and speed aspect of racing. I do know that if they went back to a season long points system a whole hell alot of people would probably come back...... and not every one that thinks like me is 65. I'm 35, there MIGHT be more of us that think like this out there.
Click to expand...
I get that. F1 isn't Americans though. And American media and entertainment seems to be marketed quite differently.

Indy isn't exclusively American, is it? Also, Indy never had the following NASCAR did. NASCAR is THE American motorsport.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
AuzGrams said:
Then how come the ratings the past 2 years for the finale and their great awesome dandy format that you're talking about, have totally tanked for the final race?

Uh hello, we had a perfectly fine "evolution" called the Chase and NASCAR decided to change change change the format again and again because apparently the Tony Stewart/Carl Edwards battle wasn't good enough??

How many sports or motorsports for that matter have changed their format and standings as many times as NASCAR has??? Let's change things some more!
Click to expand...
I think the Chase was great. I'm not a fan of the current format and I'm speaking moreso towards the idea of adding a "playoffs", rather than this particular system.

The Chase from 2004-2013, was, imo, the best format we ever had for crowning a champ


Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
Team Penske said:
Your right. We decided to go with 1 less vehicle so I called my granddaughter and said she could have the car. She said "why would I want to give all my money just to own a car". Damn, she is right and a lot of kids are the same way in thinking that. It cost to much to have that sitting 22 hrs a day.
Click to expand...
Hard to tell. I don't think NASCAR is about the cars unfortunately. This sport has been driver-centric for far too long. Hell, I don't even really care about where these guys live or what they do in their spare time. Maybe....just maybe if we could get the younger set to understand that what they see on the track is an expression of the symbol they see on their steering wheel, we might have something. If you compare this sport to others athlete by athlete, it will NEVER measure up. Ever. NASCAR marginalizes the piece of this sport that sets it apart, and then wonders why younger crowds don't see Chase Elliott the same way as they see Lebron James. Who would?
 
It determines a winner in a fair and exciting fashion. I don’t read much more into it. Maybe it depends on what your interpretation of “champion” is.
 
jaqua19 said:
Indy isn't exclusively American, is it? Also, Indy never had the following NASCAR did. NASCAR is THE American motorsport.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Indycar had a 40 year head start and RULED American racing until the mid-late 1980's. Until then, NASCAR was that OTHER series down south where they drove taxi cabs. It wasn't until the CART-IRL split that Indycar was totally overshadowed by NASCAR. Granted I am in Indiana, but I barely knew NASCAR existed until I was in the 6th-7th grade, which was the late 70's. I listened to my first Indy 500 (that I remember) in 1972, and about 1976 someone gave my cousin a Richard Petty bumper sticker and I didn't even know who he was.
 
Formerjackman said:
Indycar had a 40 year head start and RULED American racing until the mid-late 1980's. Until then, NASCAR was that OTHER series down south where they drove taxi cabs. It wasn't until the CART-IRL split that Indycar was totally overshadowed by NASCAR. Granted I am in Indiana, but I barely knew NASCAR existed until I was in the 6th-7th grade, which was the late 70's. I listened to my first Indy 500 (that I remember) in 1972, and about 1976 someone gave my cousin a Richard Petty bumper sticker and I didn't even know who he was.
Click to expand...

It wasn’t until Jeff Gordon picked NASCAR that the sport was finished
 
Mispeedway15 said:
It wasn’t until Jeff Gordon picked NASCAR that the sport was finished
Click to expand...
Jeff Gordon picked NASCAR because the Indycar owners weren't interested in a sprint car driver with no cash to bring to the table. Whether Jeff would have had any significant impact on Indycar is a further reach than I want to make.
 
Mispeedway15 said:
It wasn’t until Jeff Gordon picked NASCAR that the sport was finished
Click to expand...
Stewart was a much larger blow to open wheel than Gordon was. Stewart had numerous open wheel championships including an Indy League championship. Gordon Never was that well known in open wheel, but because of his young age he was popular with Nascar's younger fans. Nascar was so much better managed by the Frances than the Hulman's. Money gets the best talent almost every time. That's why Stewart came over and Gordon was already there.
 
Mispeedway15 said:
It wasn’t until Jeff Gordon picked NASCAR that the sport was finished
Click to expand...
I always thought it was more complicated than that. The Split, Tony Stewart going to NASCAR, a lack of good American drivers (unitl Hornish showed up in the IRL) the U.S. 500/Indy 500 dueling race day, and the emergence of NASCAR doomed CART. Which is sad because CART through the middle 90's (Alex Zanardi, Juan Montoya) was an absolute blast to be a fan of.
 
Formerjackman said:
Jeff Gordon picked NASCAR because the Indycar owners weren't interested in a sprint car driver with no cash to bring to the table. Whether Jeff would have had any significant impact on Indycar is a further reach than I want to make.
Click to expand...

Come on, Gordon is who exploded the sport. Gordon comes in and kills it in his early 20s, and then NASCAR plays up the Dale vs Jeff rivalry on a weekly basis.

Dude was a star off the track, Indy not getting him allowed NASCAR to become a behemoth
 
All of the last four posters make valid points I agree with, even if you're arguing with each other.
 
Formerjackman said:
Indycar had a 40 year head start and RULED American racing until the mid-late 1980's. Until then, NASCAR was that OTHER series down south where they drove taxi cabs. It wasn't until the CART-IRL split that Indycar was totally overshadowed by NASCAR. Granted I am in Indiana, but I barely knew NASCAR existed until I was in the 6th-7th grade, which was the late 70's. I listened to my first Indy 500 (that I remember) in 1972, and about 1976 someone gave my cousin a Richard Petty bumper sticker and I didn't even know who he was.
Click to expand...
See, I grew up with NASCAR. dabbled a bit in Indy cars, and enjoyed Michael Andretti, before focusing more on Ricky Rudd in the 90s..I don't know why, and I know I'm being closed minded, but I don't have much respect for open wheeled racing and I never did as a top eschelon of motorsports. I still view Indy, and to a much greater extent, F1 to be the equivalent of Xfinity series racing/drivers in a different series. And open wheel drivers, with the exception of Tony Stewart having little success reinforced that.

I've tried watching races and can't get into it. I see open wheeled cars as overpowered go carts that require quick reflexes and quick decision making/thinking/precision to drive. I've always thought cup cars (pre gen 6) required more talent, and showcased more talent.

I also felt that the drivers who didn't have the low downforce talents to make it to nascar ended up in open wheel.

I know I need to Unlearn this. But I just view it as lesser.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
IndyCar had a hell of a head start, 45 years or so. Indianapolis Speedway opened in 1909 and that was about it when it came to big races. Once Nascar hit the media and became televised it pretty much was all over but the crying. But when the village idiot Brian took over, Nascar almost suffered the same fate as IndyCar... terrible management
 
Never been more dissatisfied with a final race. All 4 of them running 1,2,3,4 and everyone else just logging laps, that's not a race, and it's not helping NASCAR reach it's full potential.

Absolutely all 36 races. Crown a champion over the entire body of work. Immediate legitimacy. Stop being a laughing stock 1 race system.

There is no "playoffs are here to stay", if this year has taught us anything about NASCAR, it's that they could change it tomorrow if they really wanted to. They have an opportunity to do all of this before the new car comes out. Imagine the buzz surrounding a new car, new schedule, and now a legitimate non-gimmick full season point system. Sure sounds good to me.
 
Turtle84 said:
There is no "playoffs are here to stay", if this year has taught us anything about NASCAR, it's that they could change it tomorrow if they really wanted to. They have an opportunity to do all of this before the new car comes out. Imagine the buzz surrounding a new car, new schedule, and now a legitimate non-gimmick full season point system. Sure sounds good to me.
Click to expand...
That’s the thing for me, between Next Gen and the schedule revamp I should have a lot of reason for optimism about NASCAR but the playoffs really stick in my craw and put a damper on everything else.

Disclaimer: As a former bitter Gordon fan turned bitter Harvick fan there is a hint of personal bias.
 
Formerjackman said:
Indycar had a 40 year head start and RULED American racing until the mid-late 1980's. Until then, NASCAR was that OTHER series down south where they drove taxi cabs. It wasn't until the CART-IRL split that Indycar was totally overshadowed by NASCAR. Granted I am in Indiana, but I barely knew NASCAR existed until I was in the 6th-7th grade, which was the late 70's. I listened to my first Indy 500 (that I remember) in 1972, and about 1976 someone gave my cousin a Richard Petty bumper sticker and I didn't even know who he was.
Click to expand...
Growing up in the Midwest I also had a front row seat to both the heyday of open wheel and the growth of the "stock" car venues. Also helped that my Father was directly associated with both of them. First in the AAA and then USAC...which included both open wheel and stock cars. Heck....our garage when I was a youngster had a Agajanian Offy sitting right next to a Bill Stroppe Ford Fairlane, both for USAC....that replaced a 1954 Carrera Panamericana winning Lincoln. So to say that I was born chewing on lug nuts would be an understatement. My hands actually touched the history.

The USAC Champ Series (Big Cars back then) was by far and away the top echelon of racing in North America back then, the USAC stock cars were every bit as strong in both popularity and possibly higher in prestige at the time than NASCAR. Of course there were regional differences...but when they would merge, like at Riverside for the opening round of the season for both the USAC stocks and the NASCAR stocks, that raced in the same race....the USAC boys prevailed more so than the NASCAR boys. Keep in mind....Dan Gurney, Parnelli Jones, and AJ Foyt were primarily USAC drivers...so was Paul Goldsmith.

That being said, when USAC started to pin their future on a more "international" audience they started to neglect the stock car division. By the mid to late seventies, the stock car division had fallen irretrievably. They had lost their audience, which now had moved almost exclusively to NASCAR. USAC stock car demise started with the changing the formula...moving away from what had made them popular, to what they thought WOULD be popular due to demographic changes. First it was the politics of one of the big three to showcase their store bought "race car" (which NASCAR avoided at the time, thankfully), which enticed them to allow variations from other manufacturers....hence the "pony" cars. Which up to that time were used in the bull rings and regional short track series. USAC thought that local track popularity would be captured on the big tracks...it wasn't. And instead of having two series, like the AFL and the NFL with similar rules and equipment....they threw that away. So it was a double wammy.

My fear is that NASCAR has followed in the same path as what happened to the USAC stock car series....moved away from it's roots and is trying to assuage a demographic that does not wholeheartedly support the original concept of what stock car racing is....and endurance race to spot light vehicles people associate with.
 
OldTimer said:
Growing up in the Midwest I also had a front row seat to both the heyday of open wheel and the growth of the "stock" car venues. Also helped that my Father was directly associated with both of them. First in the AAA and then USAC...which included both open wheel and stock cars. Heck....our garage when I was a youngster had a Agajanian Offy sitting right next to a Bill Stroppe Ford Fairlane, both for USAC....that replaced a 1954 Carrera Panamericana winning Lincoln. So to say that I was born chewing on lug nuts would be an understatement. My hands actually touched the history.

The USAC Champ Series (Big Cars back then) was by far and away the top echelon of racing in North America back then, the USAC stock cars were every bit as strong in both popularity and possibly higher in prestige at the time than NASCAR. Of course there were regional differences...but when they would merge, like at Riverside for the opening round of the season for both the USAC stocks and the NASCAR stocks, that raced in the same race....the USAC boys prevailed more so than the NASCAR boys. Keep in mind....Dan Gurney, Parnelli Jones, and AJ Foyt were primarily USAC drivers...so was Paul Goldsmith.

That being said, when USAC started to pin their future on a more "international" audience they started to neglect the stock car division. By the mid to late seventies, the stock car division had fallen irretrievably. They had lost their audience, which now had moved almost exclusively to NASCAR. USAC stock car demise started with the changing the formula...moving away from what had made them popular, to what they thought WOULD be popular due to demographic changes. First it was the politics of one of the big three to showcase their store bought "race car" (which NASCAR avoided at the time, thankfully), which enticed them to allow variations from other manufacturers....hence the "pony" cars. Which up to that time were used in the bull rings and regional short track series. USAC thought that local track popularity would be captured on the big tracks...it wasn't. And instead of having two series, like the AFL and the NFL with similar rules and equipment....they threw that away. So it was a double wammy.

My fear is that NASCAR has followed in the same path as what happened to the USAC stock car series....moved away from it's roots and is trying to assuage a demographic that does not wholeheartedly support the original concept of what stock car racing is....and endurance race to spot light vehicles people associate with.
Click to expand...
Very well stated.
I couldn't agree more.
 
OldTimer said:
My fear is that NASCAR has followed in the same path as what happened to the USAC stock car series....moved away from it's roots and is trying to assuage a demographic that does not wholeheartedly support the original concept of what stock car racing is....and endurance race to spot light vehicles people associate with.
Click to expand...
that's all well and good, but you can ask 10 people what stock car racing is and get 10 different answers. But it does get tiring even though some think they know THE way it should all go.
 
OldTimer said:
Growing up in the Midwest I also had a front row seat to both the heyday of open wheel and the growth of the "stock" car venues. Also helped that my Father was directly associated with both of them. First in the AAA and then USAC...which included both open wheel and stock cars. Heck....our garage when I was a youngster had a Agajanian Offy sitting right next to a Bill Stroppe Ford Fairlane, both for USAC....that replaced a 1954 Carrera Panamericana winning Lincoln. So to say that I was born chewing on lug nuts would be an understatement. My hands actually touched the history.

The USAC Champ Series (Big Cars back then) was by far and away the top echelon of racing in North America back then, the USAC stock cars were every bit as strong in both popularity and possibly higher in prestige at the time than NASCAR. Of course there were regional differences...but when they would merge, like at Riverside for the opening round of the season for both the USAC stocks and the NASCAR stocks, that raced in the same race....the USAC boys prevailed more so than the NASCAR boys. Keep in mind....Dan Gurney, Parnelli Jones, and AJ Foyt were primarily USAC drivers...so was Paul Goldsmith.

That being said, when USAC started to pin their future on a more "international" audience they started to neglect the stock car division. By the mid to late seventies, the stock car division had fallen irretrievably. They had lost their audience, which now had moved almost exclusively to NASCAR. USAC stock car demise started with the changing the formula...moving away from what had made them popular, to what they thought WOULD be popular due to demographic changes. First it was the politics of one of the big three to showcase their store bought "race car" (which NASCAR avoided at the time, thankfully), which enticed them to allow variations from other manufacturers....hence the "pony" cars. Which up to that time were used in the bull rings and regional short track series. USAC thought that local track popularity would be captured on the big tracks...it wasn't. And instead of having two series, like the AFL and the NFL with similar rules and equipment....they threw that away. So it was a double wammy.

My fear is that NASCAR has followed in the same path as what happened to the USAC stock car series....moved away from it's roots and is trying to assuage a demographic that does not wholeheartedly support the original concept of what stock car racing is....and endurance race to spot light vehicles people associate with.
Click to expand...
History always repeats itself.
 
Turtle84 said:
Never been more dissatisfied with a final race. All 4 of them running 1,2,3,4 and everyone else just logging laps, that's not a race, and it's not helping NASCAR reach it's full potential.

Absolutely all 36 races. Crown a champion over the entire body of work. Immediate legitimacy. Stop being a laughing stock 1 race system.

There is no "playoffs are here to stay", if this year has taught us anything about NASCAR, it's that they could change it tomorrow if they really wanted to. They have an opportunity to do all of this before the new car comes out. Imagine the buzz surrounding a new car, new schedule, and now a legitimate non-gimmick full season point system. Sure sounds good to me.
Click to expand...

See I think this is based on an incorrect premise. Other than Kyle Busch, it seems the other racers flat out throttled down once they were out. You pick a system of a season long battle and we may have absolute dog**** racing down the stretch.

This is where multi car teams hurt the sport, once a racer is out of title contention the race team is just going to throw more resources behind their big dog still in it.
 
StandOnIt said:
Click to expand...



Even as a fan of the guy who won the championship, it still really really sucks Harvick had such a damn good year, and got screwed over by such a weird system.

The sucky thing is, from what I remember seeing, is that Harvick doesn't win under any system other than the full 36 race season. Any form of the chase since 04 he loses it as well. I guess it shows the fall off he had in the final 10 races, but damn it shows how great he was in the first 26 also. He still should've been champion in my opinion.
 
There are 3 7 time champions

Richard Petty Ran the most races champion.
Dale Earnhardt Hardest driving Champion
Jimmy Johnson Had the best playoff system champion.
 
It seems the criteria for determining a Champion isn’t what it used to be.
Elliott consistently got his ass kicked by the 4 and the 11 in terms of both wins and average finish position throughout the season.
IMO, this is why Championships don’t mean squat anymore.
 
BobbyFord said:
It seems the criteria for determining a Champion isn’t what it used to be.
Elliott consistently got his ass kicked by the 4 and the 11 in terms of both wins and average finish position throughout the season.
IMO, this is why Championships don’t mean squat anymore.
Click to expand...
He was the best in the field the final 10 races though which has been the format for a while now. It wasn't particularly close either. He won 3 of the 10 races and people forget he was going to either win or finish 2nd at Darlington, and was battling KB and Harvick for the win at Bristol before getting trapped a lap down by the caution while on pit road. Elliott could've easily had 8-10 wins last year if it weren't for terribly timed misfortune and getting cleaned out by JGR twice. He's was as deserving a champion as anyone last year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sdj
AdoubleU24 said:
He was the best in the field the final 10 races though which has been the format for a while now. It wasn't particularly close either. He won 3 of the 10 races and people forget he was going to either win or finish 2nd at Darlington, and was battling KB and Harvick for the win at Bristol before getting trapped a lap down with the caution while on pit road. Elliott could've easily had 8-10 wins last year if it weren't for terribly timed misfortune and getting cleaned out by JGR twice.
Click to expand...
He wasn’t the best driver of the 2020 season. Kevin was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom