during NASCAR'S 90s growth, why did they build all 1.5-2 mile tracks

4tires17gals

4tires17gals

Team Owner
Joined
Apr 21, 2016
Messages
1,523
Points
163
Does anybody know the inside chatter? I mean Homestead, Kansas, Texas, Chicago, Fontana
 
Indy cars were the main reason but also the fact they could have more people paying higher prices to get into the infield. It was also ass u me d the sport would keep growing and they could add more seats.

The more seats went away with Indy cars. :rolleyes:
 
sloggie said:
The idea was that you could run both Indycars and NASCAR at the same track. That was back when people still cared about Indycar open wheel racing.
Click to expand...

I saw Graham Rahal interviewed yesterday and he said IndyCar was the fastest growing motorsport right now, surpassing Nascar in their attendance. Said there were 200k at their last road/street course. Saw it on Yahoo.com....
 
Well in just playing the word association game, when the causal viewer or average person thinks of racing, their first thought is "speed". So I'd imagine that played a big part in it as well.
 
4tires17gals said:
Does that make smaller tracks more expensive then the plate tracks?
Click to expand...

I don't think so as building a 3/4 mile track with seating for 50,000 has to be less than a 2.5 mile super speedway with 60,000 seats.

IMO the critical mistake for Nascar was not determining why the series experienced such a sudden explosion of popularity and instead of finding out why they adopted a "build it and they will come" mentality. It worked well for a half dozen years or so until most of the new fans left taking a bunch of the old guard with them.

Some people will claim that all sports have experienced a decline in live attendance and TV viewership but the stats don't bear that out and even if it was true no sport has had the embarrassing task of having to remove hundreds of thousands of seats due to there being no demand for them. I would need to do the math again to be accurate but going from memory Nascar has had between 5 and 6 million less viewers this year then last year and that is including the races that were rain delayed last year. If you adjust for those races it gets really ugly.

IMO in 15 years or so Nascar will be where open wheel racing is today in that it will still be around and still have a presence but it's footprint will be much smaller. At some point Nascar's oversupply of product will have to be addressed and cuts will need to be made in all areas. The greatest thing Nascar has going for it now is it's generous TV contract and the worst thing is it's old audience which is dying off at a faster rate then it is being replenished.

I have really liked the racing we have had this year but my concern is that even good racing is not enough to attract new fans or bring old ones back into the fold. It is still early to know for sure but based on what has transpired so far it ain't looking good. Lots of problems and lots of challenges for Nascar to address in the coming months and years to be sure.
 
BobbyFord said:
The tracks were built to generate revenue. Period.
Click to expand...

They sure as hell weren't built for quality races as even with the new rules package Kansas was like watching one of last year's aero-fests.

I am not saying it never happened but I never heard people complain about the crappy racing at the old Atlanta, Darlington, Wilkesboro and the Rock. Out of those 8 good races we have 1 left.
 
Ford 222 said:
I saw Graham Rahal interviewed yesterday and he said IndyCar was the fastest growing motorsport right now, surpassing Nascar in their attendance. Said there were 200k at their last road/street course. Saw it on Yahoo.com....
Click to expand...

I find that very hard to believe but who knows? I do know that they cancelled racing at Fontana as less than 10,000 showed up for the Indy Car race last year.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
I find that very hard to believe but who knows? I do know that they cancelled racing at Fontana as less than 10,000 showed up for the Indy Car race last year.
Click to expand...

I find it hard to believe but that's what he told fox news. I think he said they had over 200k a Long Beach? Maybe they did some voo doo accounting?
 
I've only heard that the growth of the standard 1.5er configuration came to be in order to host multiple racing series. Never heard the ticket price being the reason. Obviously Bruton Smith hasn't either as far as Bristol is concerned.
 
the schedule now is pretty good, I love the 4 plates and the 6 shorts, but will never forget rockingham and the Wilkboro. Rockingham was really really good with 3 groves pre aero package. Wilkboro had 2 grooves and now we parade at Bristol and spend $300,000
 
Ford 222 said:
I find it hard to believe but that's what he told fox news. I think he said they had over 200k a Long Beach? Maybe they did some voo doo accounting?
Click to expand...
Long Beach 3 or 4 (not sure) day total attendance.

Their most popular venue after Indy.
 
In fairness, we have moved away from the cookie-cutters somewhat. Homestead never really was one because it lacks the dogleg-it's more like old Atlanta. Fontana definitely isn't one, other than to Michigan. Kentucky is no longer a cookie cutter because they've made it more like Darlington (and I think the length will change slightly). The variable banking added to some of the others makes them less similar.
 
There's also the fact that these tracks were capable of massive seating expansion. With a short track like Bristol you're pretty much maxed out at the current seating of 160k. With a 1.5 miler you could eventually have over 200k seats if the sport kept growing like they expected it to. Plus, many of these new tracks were also in new markets that were far far larger than any NASCAR had gone to before. Hey, if we can get 70k to go to the tiny little town of martinsville why can't we get double that with a track right outside of Chicago, LA, KC, Dallas, Miami and Vegas. Even Kentucky is built within driving distance of two 1 million plus cities.
 
Acs said:
There's also the fact that these tracks were capable of massive seating expansion. With a short track like Bristol you're pretty much maxed out at the current seating of 160k.
Click to expand...
If they were still selling seats like the days of old, your statement on Bristol would most certainly have been proven false. As long as there is no law against the height of the grandstands, like there was at Richmond years ago, Bruton would have continued to make that coliseum rise.
 
it seems like it was IndyCar. Dover motorsports group did IndyCar and NASCAR.
 
I was browsing an old Texas Motor Speedway article on Jayski a few weeks ago...there were plans to put in grandstands around the entire 1.5 miles. They said it would be able to seat over 300k. When they had all the backstretch tiers of seats open (backstretch seating is closed now but the grandstand used to go twice as high) and the frontstretch, total capacity was over 150k.
 
29-4 said:
In fairness, we have moved away from the cookie-cutters somewhat. Homestead never really was one because it lacks the dogleg-it's more like old Atlanta. Fontana definitely isn't one, other than to Michigan. Kentucky is no longer a cookie cutter because they've made it more like Darlington (and I think the length will change slightly). The variable banking added to some of the others makes them less similar.
Click to expand...

The 1.5 milers got a bad name as even though they may have had some differences the racing for the most part sucked.
 
Acs said:
There's also the fact that these tracks were capable of massive seating expansion. With a short track like Bristol you're pretty much maxed out at the current seating of 160k. With a 1.5 miler you could eventually have over 200k seats if the sport kept growing like they expected it to. Plus, many of these new tracks were also in new markets that were far far larger than any NASCAR had gone to before. Hey, if we can get 70k to go to the tiny little town of martinsville why can't we get double that with a track right outside of Chicago, LA, KC, Dallas, Miami and Vegas. Even Kentucky is built within driving distance of two 1 million plus cities.
Click to expand...

Martinsville currently seats 55K and doesn't sell out so if 70K fans showed up wanting tickets it would be pandemonium!!!
 
Speedbowl14 said:
I was browsing an old Texas Motor Speedway article on Jayski a few weeks ago...there were plans to put in grandstands around the entire 1.5 miles. They said it would be able to seat over 300k. When they had all the backstretch tiers of seats open (backstretch seating is closed now but the grandstand used to go twice as high) and the frontstretch, total capacity was over 150k.
Click to expand...

If memory serves the only tracks that have more permanent seats then Texas are Indy and Bristol.
 
I think it was Chicagoland that was a joint effort between Tony George and Bill France Jr.

Other than that, my guess would be that it mainly boils down to better sight lines that a tri-oval or quad-oval provides.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
Dover will be lucky to get 50K this weekend which is still a good crowd but is nothing like the old days.
Click to expand...

That's sad if you're right. If Jacksonville had two games a year like Dover, they could probably draw 2-300,000.
 
I think something needs to be done to get the tracks to hold off on repaves. I think the tracks should look more at fixing the asphalt rather than repaving the whole thing. I didn't see the issue with michigan. Charlotte used to be pretty good because the track was so bumpy and had lots of dips. the suspension on the cars had to really work. I guess they are going to redo kentucky too which I don't get either. I see nothing wrong with just doing patches in places. it adds character to the track.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
Dover will be lucky to get 50K this weekend which is still a good crowd but is nothing like the old days.
Click to expand...

Dover doesn't have many excuses for such poor numbers, IMO. It has a decent sized city around it, a full service hotel on site, and is within 2 hours driving of Philly, DC and Baltimore, two of the top 10 largest cities in the country. Yeah, it's not within an easy day-trip distance and maybe the stands need some love, but for comparison Kentucky can sell out near 100,000 for one race even though it's between two cities that would fit inside DC.

29-4 said:
That's sad if you're right. If Jacksonville had two games a year like Dover, they could probably draw 2-300,000.
Click to expand...

Yeah weekly attendance for the NFL is north of a million fans. Of course, that's spread across the country and only for a 16 week season, but still, NASCAR should be averaging attendance over 100k a week.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
Some people will claim that all sports have experienced a decline in live attendance and TV viewership but the stats don't bear that out and even if it was true no sport has had the embarrassing task of having to remove hundreds of thousands of seats due to there being no demand for them.
Click to expand...

I agree with most of what you have said but let's not go too far. Even the mighty NFL has had to move to new markets to get better attendance, i.e St. Louis to LA. Things change, life happens, and if you don't put a good product on the field/track, people aren't going to watch no matter what city you live in.

One issue that NASCAR has to contend with, which is similar to baseball, is that the venues are just as much stars as the teams. Daytona, Birstol, Talladega, Charlotte, Watkins Glen, etc. You could say a similar thing about baseball, Wrigley Field, Yankee Stadium, Fenway, etc.

To that point, NASCAR should embrace it. Stop the repaves, let the newer tracks age a little bit. Create some history so to speak by involving the culture of the local city. Anyone watch the Kentucky Derby the other day? They have traditions that make the Kentucky Derby unique. Everyone gets dressed to the nines, the girls wear goofy hats, the guys act like they have an inside tip on the horse to win, and everyone "has" to drink a mint julep (which btw are terrible).

Nascar needs the equivalent of the Kentucky Derby fan fare each week. They also need a race like Monaco, all for showing off how much money people have. It should be the indy race or fontana race. Indy has a boring track so more people will pay attention if you bring the fancy crowd out. Alternatively, the fancy crowd in LA can be seen at the Fontana race. It only needs to be 1 race a year, the other 35 races can have their own theme. But that is what makes NASCAR and large events, fun.
 
LouieLouie said:
I agree with most of what you have said but let's not go too far. Even the mighty NFL has had to move to new markets to get better attendance, i.e St. Louis to LA. Things change, life happens, and if you don't put a good product on the field/track, people aren't going to watch no matter what city you live in.

One issue that NASCAR has to contend with, which is similar to baseball, is that the venues are just as much stars as the teams. Daytona, Birstol, Talladega, Charlotte, Watkins Glen, etc. You could say a similar thing about baseball, Wrigley Field, Yankee Stadium, Fenway, etc.

To that point, NASCAR should embrace it. Stop the repaves, let the newer tracks age a little bit. Create some history so to speak by involving the culture of the local city. Anyone watch the Kentucky Derby the other day? They have traditions that make the Kentucky Derby unique. Everyone gets dressed to the nines, the girls wear goofy hats, the guys act like they have an inside tip on the horse to win, and everyone "has" to drink a mint julep (which btw are terrible).

Nascar needs the equivalent of the Kentucky Derby fan fare each week. They also need a race like Monaco, all for showing off how much money people have. It should be the indy race or fontana race. Indy has a boring track so more people will pay attention if you bring the fancy crowd out. Alternatively, the fancy crowd in LA can be seen at the Fontana race. It only needs to be 1 race a year, the other 35 races can have their own theme. But that is what makes NASCAR and large events, fun.
Click to expand...

I do think the race promoters need to do a much better job of getting people to the track and your ideas sound like a lot of fun. Nascar has produced some good racing this year and it is up to the local tracks to get the word out and get the fans in the seats. I am not a marketer but there are brilliant people that can drum up excitement and draw crowds but I don't think the tracks avail themselves of that type of service.
 
I think a huge problem with NASCAR in the current era is that there is "too much information". Until around 2000, practically the only NASCAR we saw on tv were the pre-race ceremonies (invocation, national anthem, and command to start engines), the actual race, and maybe a few highlights on ESPN during the night following the race. Now there's tons of NASCAR-related shows throughout the week, plus even more articles and stories about the sport on the internet between races. I just think the sport's presence became too over-saturated and it turned the casual fan away because it was too complex to follow, plus it created a sense of boredom for the die-hard fans.

Let me put it this way....the Olympics are one of the most viewed events on tv. Why? Because they only occur every few years and there are practically no stories about them outside of when the Olympics are actually occurring. If they occurred on a (mostly) weekly basis like NASCAR and had tons of regular tv shows and online articles pertaining to the Olympics, I guarantee that viewership ratings would drastically decrease.

I do not believe that the increase of 1.5 mile tracks is what severely damaged this sport. I think NASCAR just got too full of itself and tried to cash in on "easy money" near the end of it's growth spurt without taking into effect the unintended consequences of such actions. Far less media coverage and maybe fewer per year would go a long way in helping this sport recover. Additionally, the advent of the Chase helped to ruin the "every race is a spectacle" feeling because now only race 36 really matters, compared to races 1-36 equally mattering.

In summation:
  • 1.5 mile tracks are not the primary issue
  • Get rid of the 1+ hour pre-race shows
  • Greatly scale back on mid-week NASCAR tv shows
  • Race season should be shortened to ~30 races
  • Every race should matter (get rid of the Chase)
  • Fire Brian France immediately
 
RacerrecaR said:
I think a huge problem with NASCAR in the current era is that there is "too much information". Until around 2000, practically the only NASCAR we saw on tv were the pre-race ceremonies (invocation, national anthem, and command to start engines), the actual race, and maybe a few highlights on ESPN during the night following the race. Now there's tons of NASCAR-related shows throughout the week, plus even more articles and stories about the sport on the internet between races. I just think the sport's presence became too over-saturated and it turned the casual fan away because it was too complex to follow, plus it created a sense of boredom for the die-hard fans.

Let me put it this way....the Olympics are one of the most viewed events on tv. Why? Because they only occur every few years and there are practically no stories about them outside of when the Olympics are actually occurring. If they occurred on a (mostly) weekly basis like NASCAR and had tons of regular tv shows and online articles pertaining to the Olympics, I guarantee that viewership ratings would drastically decrease.

I do not believe that the increase of 1.5 mile tracks is what severely damaged this sport. I think NASCAR just got too full of itself and tried to cash in on "easy money" near the end of it's growth spurt without taking into effect the unintended consequences of such actions. Far less media coverage and maybe fewer per year would go a long way in helping this sport recover. Additionally, the advent of the Chase helped to ruin the "every race is a spectacle" feeling because now only race 36 really matters, compared to races 1-36 equally mattering.

In summation:
  • 1.5 mile tracks are not the primary issue
  • Get rid of the 1+ hour pre-race shows
  • Greatly scale back on mid-week NASCAR tv shows
  • Race season should be shortened to ~30 races
  • Every race should matter (get rid of the Chase)
  • Fire Brian France immediately
Click to expand...
I wouldnt say there is a "ton" of NASCAR programing during the week, you Race Hub Mon-thur and NASCAR America Mon-Thur , if NASCAR America does their hour shows, thats 8 hours during the week, but they do 30 min shows too, so now you are 6 hours. I think you should of flipped and said there is a ton mid week articles being written , as they are, and that is the area that is saturated, but it something that the casual fans are not probably going to search out to read.

Look at the NFL, football is pretty much all ESPN talks about, plus you have NFL Network, talk about saturation , I guess what I am saying is I dont feel that "too much" media coverage had a lot do with the casual fans losing interest. I think it was a lot reason rolled into one that all played their role. But the biggest thing is they were casual, probably only watch for wrecks, and got bored and moved on, and we are better off without them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom