Gordon: Nothing wrong with dominance

[tkj24]

It's getting to be a bit predictable, this Hendrick Motorsports domination in NASCAR. Last Sunday in Darlington, S.C., the team -- built around Jeff Gordon and Jimmie Johnson -- won for the eighth time in the past nine Nextel Cup points races, prompting the question of whether Hendrick is becoming too good. Literally. Someone asked Gordon that. "Is Hendrick becoming too good?" He paused. "No," he then said flatly. "My job is not to get ratings; my job is to win races and be competitive on the racetrack." "You know, the Yankees ruined baseball . . .," another voice intoned. The implication is the same one that has been hurled over the years at the Chicago Bulls and UCLA Bruins and Boston Celtics: Dynasties are bad for sports. They kill interest and kill the little man's necessary faith in upsets. They flatten TV ratings, and for every fan who jumps on a dynasty bandwagon, two more get fed up and walk away from the sport. But is any of that true? And has Hendrick even earned the right to be a part of the "D-word" debate? Plenty of people don't even believe dynasties exist any more.

 

[Patrick9999]

I think Gordon's spot on.

Of course I'd rather see my favorite driver dominating but it's not like #24 hasn't gone on a rampage before.

I agree that Hendrick has had some pretty good cars but I've also seen some other good cars who in one way or another screwed themselves out of winning races.

I think some other big name teams may be hitting the panic button just a bit.