Driver's Union?

K

Kyle48

Guest
This tire thing made me think of the drivers finally forming a union, and it apparently did some other folks too.

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080313/SPORTS0601/803130362/1027/SPORTS06

link to editorial re: Driver's Union.

I think the article echoes alot of my thoughts. NASCAR has made such a HUGE deal about being "similar to the NFL", well the NFL has a player's union, and right now, with the names in NASCAR bigger and more mainstream than ever, it would be very difficult for the France family to say; "we'll just have someone else drive." I mean, can you imagine someone else in the 88 because Junior refused to drive? What about the 24 or the 48, the 29, 9, 20 or 18? It would be disasterous for NASCAR to try to take the "we'll go on without you" stance now. If you could get 20 drivers to commit, it would be groundbreaking for the past time.
 
That is a good idea, but one that has been tried in the past and failed. Ask Richard Petty. There is one thing that is for sure, if any driver refuses to drive, there will be an unlimited supply that will fill in. Okay, so you say that people won't go see a race without the likes of Gordon, Johnson, Earnhardt, Stewart etc., maybe, and maybe not. If you go out to California, they can't sell out with those drivers, and it's getting that way at other tracks as well. Tell you what, if all the drivers decided not to drive this weekend at Bristol and the owners replaced them with a bunch of local boys, those seats will still be filled, if not by the original fans, other fans from close by. I go each and every week at my local track and it doesn't feature any of the millionaires that are on the Cup circuit. AND, when it comes to either the local race or a Saturday night Cup race, I tape the Cup race.
 
They tired that before and the drivers were band for life from NASCAR.

The "banned for life" was four years. :)

Buck - that line of thinking is what NASCAR has perpetuated to the drivers and the fans. The fact is, they would put drivers in those seats, but Home Depot wouldn't sponsor John Doe, Budweiser wouldn't like Mike Justanotherdriver behind the wheel of the 9 car, DuPont wouldn't care for Jimmy Icandrivetoo limping around the track because he's never been behind the wheel of a COT. See the 1987 NFL season. The sponsors make the past time go, the sponsors depend on the fans showing up, and the marketability of the drivers to sell their product. Therein lies the reason I can't get that lucrative Coors endorsement I'd love to have - because no one knows who the hell I am. :)

NASCAR would limp through one, maybe one and one half seasons before deciding to make some sort of agreement with the drivers. Meanwhile the new IRL/CART deal would soak up some big names and relegate NASCAR back to it's southern roots. Now, judging by other threads on here, some fans like yourself would love that, but it's not good business. Little France would cave in. This isn't '61 or '65, it's 2008, and there's millions involved. The drivers are paid well enough to walk away and possible even get contracts elsewhere. Just imagine Stewart, Gordon, or Johnson even mentioning they'd be interested in driving in the IRL full-time (or again, in Tony's case). Letterman/Rahal has the cash to sign any one of them away from their current deal and probably for more. Hell, Newman, Hornish, and Ku. Busch wouldn't even have to switch teams.

It's a whole different world.
 
Kyle, I agree with you totally, but in my mind, that might not be all that bad. Get all that damned money out of the sport and it just might go back to what made it great in the first place. Gimme those backyard shade tree mechanics and their cars and I'll show you a great race. Oh the memories. So, in that vein, bring on the union. Time for all those hot shot prima donas to hit the road. If they are good enough, they can make it in the IRL or F1.
 
The drivers could start their own series and run it they way they choose.

Surely Nascar would welcome a little competition 'cause as Barzini said " after all, we are not communists".
 
That is a good idea, but one that has been tried in the past and failed. Ask Richard Petty. There is one thing that is for sure, if any driver refuses to drive, there will be an unlimited supply that will fill in. Okay, so you say that people won't go see a race without the likes of Gordon, Johnson, Earnhardt, Stewart etc., maybe, and maybe not. If you go out to California, they can't sell out with those drivers, and it's getting that way at other tracks as well. Tell you what, if all the drivers decided not to drive this weekend at Bristol and the owners replaced them with a bunch of local boys, those seats will still be filled, if not by the original fans, other fans from close by. I go each and every week at my local track and it doesn't feature any of the millionaires that are on the Cup circuit. AND, when it comes to either the local race or a Saturday night Cup race, I tape the Cup race.
I don't believe that the fans would fill the stands at the prices that Nascar demands, heck, they would not fill the stands regardless of the price if the big name drivers aren't there. Nor do I believe that the TV networks would be paying the dollars that Nascar expects if the big name drivers don't compete. And, for sure the sponsors will not fork over the money. Things are quite different today than they were back when.
 
I don't believe that the fans would fill the stands at the prices that Nascar demands, heck, they would not fill the stands regardless of the price if the big name drivers aren't there. Nor do I believe that the TV networks would be paying the dollars that Nascar expects if the big name drivers don't compete. And, for sure the sponsors will not fork over the money. Things are quite different today than they were back when.

NASCAR doesn't set the ticket prices.

:rolleyes:
 
That is a good idea, but one that has been tried in the past and failed. Ask Richard Petty. There is one thing that is for sure, if any driver refuses to drive, there will be an unlimited supply that will fill in. Okay, so you say that people won't go see a race without the likes of Gordon, Johnson, Earnhardt, Stewart etc., maybe, and maybe not. If you go out to California, they can't sell out with those drivers, and it's getting that way at other tracks as well. Tell you what, if all the drivers decided not to drive this weekend at Bristol and the owners replaced them with a bunch of local boys, those seats will still be filled, if not by the original fans, other fans from close by. I go each and every week at my local track and it doesn't feature any of the millionaires that are on the Cup circuit. AND, when it comes to either the local race or a Saturday night Cup race, I tape the Cup race.


I'd have to agree Buck, the local racing is better anyway , at least around here in New England it is. We have a ton of tracks that are Nascar sanctioned, that feature Mods, Late Models, sportsman, Mod Lites,....ect. Some of the best racing is at the local tracks in my opinion, why go out to the big races and spend over a grand for a weekend for you and your wife when you can pack a pinic basket lunch, by a couple of tickets for under $50 for the both of you, and have a great time on a Friday or Saturday night? I'd rather pick the Friday night race at Stafford Speedway or a Thursday night Thunder at Thompson Speedway than go to NHIS for a Cup race. That's just me though i'm sure there are a lot of you that still will pay over $100 a ticket to see the big boys run. To me the price does not justify the quality at this point, i'd rather spend $200 on a Red Sox ticket than a cup race, just for an example, but definetly in my opinion more bang for your buck.

As for the Union thing i don't see there being enough organization of the drivers to make the Union work at this point.
 
I dont like the idea......the MLB players union almost killed MLB, it could do the same to nascar.
 
Back
Top Bottom