NASCAR Death Bed

Thegeneral23 said:
this is what i been saying since i started watching NASCAR going on 3 years now lol.. alot of these people that be at the track are not fans they just to fit in.. the stupidity at the track i hear from people is unbelievable, me and my girlfriend just look at each other and shake our heads lol.. i really think it was just something alot of people did because of popularity and to fit in with there family. a cool factor! the people that call in to the nascar channel just proves it even more too with the stuff they say.. i had a women in front of me after the championship race in HOMESTEAD turning in her headset .. she asked the woman beside her who won the race and the woman and man said i think martin jr and the girl that asked a question had a truex shirt on hahahaha.. its just a sport to me that i really just think alot of people watched to fit... they dont have a clue whats really going on
Click to expand...
I think you'll find all sports have a large number of followers who don't really understand what they're seeing, at least not beyond a superficial level. Heck, that's true outside of sports too.
 
Mopardh9 said:
Never said they would, why would they. All I'm pointing out is there was a waiting list to get Bristol tickets, now they are giving them away. I'll always watch and follow Nascar, but it doesn' mean I have to like it. Without critics how would the sport get better?
Click to expand...

I think many people watch cup races with the hope of being entertained and that is the way I started out but over the last 15 years or so that has changed. The reason someone watches something is not important to me as long as they are getting what they feel is some sort of value. I watch Nascar because I feel I receive value although it is not in the traditional sense.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I think you'll find all sports have a large number of followers who don't really understand what they're seeing, at least not beyond a superficial level. Heck, that's true outside of sports too.
Click to expand...
i never heard or seen that while at a basketball game or football game or watching sports with others.. just nascar sorry. NASCAR is different man.. you have a million women there dressed in cowboy boots with big hats and stuff its all a look to fit in.. you wouldnt see that in no other sport. people there with shirts off and stuff .. **** its hot at football games and baseball games in the summer to, but you not going to see people with there shirts off at those events. its all a look and something to be a part of to fit in! First race i went to in martinsville a guy checking out at the tent buying a dale jr shirt told me jr was running slow because he was using other teams equipment and outsiders equipment hahahaha..
 
FLRacingFan said:
I hate to go to bat for Boston of all cities but they had a home playoff hockey game last night and a home basketball playoff game earlier today. Not the weekend where their fans are going to prioritize baseball.
Click to expand...

To a true Red Sox fan, which btw I'm not, opening day at Fenway is like going to the Vatican to see the Pope.
I do know one guy and his wife who have been to opening day every year for the past 30+
years
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Nobody ever drew 30K or 50K on a rain-delay Monday. I've been to Charlotte, in the middle of a metropolitan area, on a rain delay SUNDAY after the October night race and still had my pick of seats. They would have been lucky to have 30K there in the early 2000's.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I was at infamous Mayfield/Sr Monday race at Pocono and the place was at least 75% full by lap 25 or so! I was also at Dover in 2007 when Truex got his first win on a Monday in front of a sizeable crowd. The 1991 spring 'Dega race that Gant won with a little help from Rick Mast was also in front of a big crowd! You can go rewatch the races on youtube! I remember plenty of big crowds on Monday back in the day. I remember North Wilkesboro pushing the entire race weekend back a week or two and still having a packed house.

You can't tell this is a Monday! Just watch the first 15 seconds....
 
Last edited:
Thegeneral23 said:
this is what i been saying since i started watching NASCAR going on 3 years now lol.. alot of these people that be at the track are not fans they just to fit in.. the stupidity at the track i hear from people is unbelievable, me and my girlfriend just look at each other and shake our heads lol.. i really think it was just something alot of people did because of popularity and to fit in with there family. a cool factor! the people that call in to the nascar channel just proves it even more too with the stuff they say.. i had a women in front of me after the championship race in HOMESTEAD turning in her headset .. she asked the woman beside her who won the race and the woman and man said i think martin jr and the girl that asked a question had a truex shirt on hahahaha.. its just a sport to me that i really just think alot of people watched to fit... they dont have a clue whats really going on
Click to expand...

Interesting comments as Nascar is about as cool as a Gomer Pyle marathon these days so I can't imagine anyone showing up at a race because it is the in thing to do. There was a time when Nascar was all the rage and got to have lunch at the cool kids table but those days left 15-20 years ago and in many quarters Nascar is met with derisive and dismissive comments that are often times inaccurate.
 
It's hard to gauge the Bristol crowd based on the rain that was forecast. I think had the forecast called for sunny and 70 on Sunday, I still think the place would have been half full at best. It's not a must-see event like it used to be, plus out of town people hate being goughed for hotel rooms.
 
MRM said:
It's hard to gauge the Bristol crowd based on the rain that was forecast. I think had the forecast called for sunny and 70 on Sunday, I still think the place would have been half full at best. It's not a must-see event like it used to be, plus out of town people hate being goughed for hotel rooms.

One nice thing for the fans with most race dates is that you don't have to lock yourself into buying a ticket in advance to see the race. Depending on where you live you can decide to head to the track the morning of the race and get good seats.

I think the closest thing to a must see race for Nascar is the 500 as it packs in 100K and that is still impressive even though it used to have 160K . Even the finale doesn't sell out and I am not sure the track even seats 40K.
Click to expand...
 
The Nascar building boom of the 1990's was a heck of a party, spearheaded by Bill France Jr., Bruton Smith, and Roger Penske. All three made sizable fortunes by being in early. Roger wised up to the overcapacity and sold out early, but Bill and Bruton thought the party would never end. The hangover is still going on.

Some on here who pine for the "Early Nascar Lifestyle" must have been very resentful of how those entrepreneurs guided Nascar evolution, because to this day a few of them continue to get gleeful pleasure from every empty seat, every ratings decline. Lifestyle fans don't care about racing; they only care whether or not the ambiance remains circa 1985... when men were men, grease under the fingernails, just "regular Joe's" who often had other jobs during the week to make ends meet.

Those who care about racing and those who care about the Nascar Lifestyle will never understand nor accept one another. They constantly talk past each other, and discussions are mutually unsatisfactory. It is what it is.
 
LewTheShoe said:
The Nascar building boom of the 1990's was a heck of a party, spearheaded by Bill France Jr., Bruton Smith, and Roger Penske. All three made sizable fortunes by being in early. Roger wised up to the overcapacity and sold out early, but Bill and Bruton thought the party would never end. The hangover is still going on.

Some on here who pine for the "Early Nascar Lifestyle" must have been very resentful of how those entrepreneurs guided Nascar evolution, because to this day a few of them continue to get gleeful pleasure from every empty seat, every ratings decline. Lifestyle fans don't care about racing; they only care whether or not the ambiance remains circa 1985... when men were men, grease under the fingernails, just "regular Joe's" who often had other jobs during the week to make ends meet.

Those who care about racing and those who care about the Nascar Lifestyle will never understand nor accept one another. They constantly talk past each other, and discussions are mutually unsatisfactory. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

most of the track building took place in the 60's over 50 years ago. Most of the larger tracks east and west were built in that time. But around here, history has been skewed
 
StandOnIt said:
most of the track building took place in the 60's over 50 years ago. Most of the larger tracks east and west were built in that time. But around here, history has been skewed
Click to expand...

I think he was mostly referencing the grandstand building boom. I would say the 5 year span from 1995 to 2000 was the height of the erector set building. Tracks completely transformed themselves during that period by adding more seats. You also had the second wave of track building taking place.
 
LewTheShoe said:
The Nascar building boom of the 1990's was a heck of a party, spearheaded by Bill France Jr., Bruton Smith, and Roger Penske. All three made sizable fortunes by being in early. Roger wised up to the overcapacity and sold out early, but Bill and Bruton thought the party would never end. The hangover is still going on.

Some on here who pine for the "Early Nascar Lifestyle" must have been very resentful of how those entrepreneurs guided Nascar evolution, because to this day a few of them continue to get gleeful pleasure from every empty seat, every ratings decline. Lifestyle fans don't care about racing; they only care whether or not the ambiance remains circa 1985... when men were men, grease under the fingernails, just "regular Joe's" who often had other jobs during the week to make ends meet.

Those who care about racing and those who care about the Nascar Lifestyle will never understand nor accept one another. They constantly talk past each other, and discussions are mutually unsatisfactory. It is what it is.
Click to expand...

Nascar is a textbook case of expanding to quickly and never understanding why people started showing up to begin with. I think a lot of it had to do with Jeff Gordon and his popularity but when he couldn't win 3 championships every 4 years people bailed out just like they bailed out on Dale Jr when people figured out he was never going to get remotely near his father's accomplishments. Of course there is a lot more to it but those are 2 things I believe contributed to the rise and fall.

I would love to discuss the Nascar lifestyle but I have no idea what it is so I am wide open for enlightenment. I have heard people speak of the "Monster lifestyle" and "edgy brands" but I don't know what they mean so if you or someone else can let me know I would be much obliged.

I don't know of any person that wishes to go back to a certain period of time in Nascar but instead just wants the enjoyment they got from it years ago. That may be possible for some and impossible for others but in either case there is a constituency that is not the least bit shy in denigrating Nascar as the more they add gimmicks and changes the more people tune out. Basically it is disenfranchised people giving Nascar the big Eff You and this approach is not unique in any aspect.

I do think it is possible for people to have a good discussion on these types of topics but things always go off track due to straw man arguments, personal attacks and inflexibility of thought. I could cite several examples but I think we know most of them by heart at this point.

I may be wrong but I believe that most people don't care about actual racing more than they care about value for the time and money invested in it. I believe this is true for many things in life as people don't care about the root but do care what it produced.

So here is a post full of opinion, devoid of snark and requesting clarification of a term used. I await the thoughtful answers of you and anyone else that cares to give one.
 
StandOnIt said:
most of the track building took place in the 60's over 50 years ago. Most of the larger tracks east and west were built in that time. But around here, history has been skewed
Click to expand...

You missed the point as way back when unique tracks like Martinsville, Darlington, Rockingham and Wilkesboro were built but during the building boom tracks were made to cram the largest number of fans in. We got Homestead, Kansas, Cali, Kentucky, Joliet, Texas and Vegas which some may like but overall are not well received.
 
AtomicPunk55 said:
You missed the point as way back when unique tracks like Martinsville, Darlington, Rockingham and Wilkesboro were built but during the building boom tracks were made to cram the largest number of fans in. We got Homestead, Kansas, Cali, Kentucky, Joliet, Texas and Vegas which some may like but overall are not well received.
Click to expand...

Vegas was built in 72 and recently expanded to get two events, California (auto Club) was built after the 1972 2.5 mile Ontario speedway closed. as said most of the building of the larger tracks were built in the 60's and early 70's
 
StandOnIt said:
Vegas was built in 72 and recently expanded to get two events, California (auto Club) was built after the 1972 2.5 mile Ontario speedway closed. as said most of the building of the larger tracks were built in the 60's and early 70's
Click to expand...

The only thing the tracks you mentioned have in common with when they were built to what they are today is proximity. They were part of the building boom of the 90's.
 
StandOnIt said:
Vegas was built in 72 and recently expanded to get two events, California (auto Club) was built after the 1972 2.5 mile Ontario speedway closed. as said most of the building of the larger tracks were built in the 60's and early 70's
Click to expand...

The 1.5 mile track at Las Vegas opened in 1996. A road course and drag strip were what was built in 1972. California opened in 1997.

I don't dislike either track. California was modeled after Michigan, of course. Vegas is one of the best of the 1.5s. But they were both of the design aesthetic of the 1990s.
 
gnomesayin said:
The 1.5 mile track at Las Vegas opened in 1996. A road course and drag strip were what was built in 1972. California opened in 1997.

I don't dislike either track. California was modeled after Michigan, of course. Vegas is one of the best of the 1.5s. But they were both of the design aesthetic of the 1990s.
Click to expand...

me neither and the old Riverside races I have seen on YouTube are pretty cool also. Autoclub was built after Ontario was closed, the 2.5 mile Ontario track was built in 1970 and Nascar raced there in 71. 155,000 seat capacity. Each of these inaugural races drew attendance second only to their established counterparts, the USAC Indianapolis 500, the NASCAR Daytona 500, the NHRA U.S. Nationals, and the U.S. Formula One race at Watkins Glen.
 
I wasn't alive, but Ontario seems to have been awesome. The Indy of the West. I'm unaware of this iteration of California / Auto Club Speedway that existed in the 70s and 80s. Construction began in 1995 and wmthe track opened in 1997.
 
gnomesayin said:
I wasn't alive, but Ontario seems to have been awesome. The Indy of the West. I'm unaware of this iteration of California / Auto Club Speedway that existed in the 70s and 80s. Construction began in 1995 and wmthe track opened in 1997.
Click to expand...
my original statement was that the majority of the larger venues were built in the 60's and very early 70's. Ontario 70 was one of them, Phoenix in 69, Michigan 67, Atlanta 60, Charlotte 61, Daytona, 59, Talladaga 69, Riverside late 50's. My point being that these tracks didn't just suddenly appear and take away all of the short tracks. The economy and the popularity of racing back then supported the building of them. More larger tracks were built afterwards sure, but these tracks were built in Big Bill's era for the most part. not all of them he built, but Nascar either did race on these soon after they were built, or raced on them later.
 
StandOnIt said:
my original statement was that the majority of the larger venues were built in the 60's and very early 70's. Ontario 70 was one of them, Phoenix in 69, Michigan 67, Atlanta 60, Charlotte 61, Daytona, 59, Talladaga 69, Riverside late 50's. My point being that these tracks didn't just suddenly appear and take away all of the short tracks. The economy and the popularity of racing back then supported the building of them. More larger tracks were built afterwards sure, but these tracks were built in Big Bill's era for the most part. not all of them he built, but Nascar either did race on these soon after they were built, or raced on them later.
Click to expand...

The only problem is that you changed horses as Lew was speaking of the building boom of the 90's which has nothing to do with short tracks or what happened in decades prior. Several tracks were either, built, rebuilt or brought up to Nascar specs in order to capitalize on the fleeting popularity Nascar enjoyed and now are hard at work enhancing things for the fans experience lol.
 
AtomicPunk55 said:
Nascar is a textbook case of expanding to quickly and never understanding why people started showing up to begin with. I think a lot of it had to do with Jeff Gordon and his popularity but when he couldn't win 3 championships every 4 years people bailed out just like they bailed out on Dale Jr when people figured out he was never going to get remotely near his father's accomplishments. Of course there is a lot more to it but those are 2 things I believe contributed to the rise and fall.

I would love to discuss the Nascar lifestyle but I have no idea what it is so I am wide open for enlightenment. I have heard people speak of the "Monster lifestyle" and "edgy brands" but I don't know what they mean so if you or someone else can let me know I would be much obliged.

I don't know of any person that wishes to go back to a certain period of time in Nascar but instead just wants the enjoyment they got from it years ago. That may be possible for some and impossible for others but in either case there is a constituency that is not the least bit shy in denigrating Nascar as the more they add gimmicks and changes the more people tune out. Basically it is disenfranchised people giving Nascar the big Eff You and this approach is not unique in any aspect.

I do think it is possible for people to have a good discussion on these types of topics but things always go off track due to straw man arguments, personal attacks and inflexibility of thought. I could cite several examples but I think we know most of them by heart at this point.

I may be wrong but I believe that most people don't care about actual racing more than they care about value for the time and money invested in it. I believe this is true for many things in life as people don't care about the root but do care what it produced.

So here is a post full of opinion, devoid of snark and requesting clarification of a term used. I await the thoughtful answers of you and anyone else that cares to give one.
Click to expand...

Hell of a post right here. I would add that there is the component of "good racing." What the hell does that even mean? Gluck's rating tweets bother me because there is no definition. How do you rate what many perceive differently. For example, when I left Fontana, I had no idea that Martin won by 11 seconds. I will not bore you with how I watch a race, but my focus was on so many different things that I missed this stinker of a race. I am not a fan of "good racing" or "bad racing." I am a fan of racing--however it plays out. When you mix this with longing for the good ole days, we have a sport that is ripped to shreds by its own fans. This is a problem. Can't sell anything to new fans when the old fans hate what they see because they feel that we are all on the same page. We are not.
 
I would love to see them reconfigure most of the 1.5 mile tracks to something similar to Darlington. Or a modern North Wilkesboro. Too many 195-205MPH mile tracks. But they are getting around The Lady In Black pretty damn fast too. Maybe go back to bias ply tires.
 
Maybe Nascar should re-think these 1.5 tracks. Add chicanes or just lop off one end of the track.
I know my memory is getting faulty but I think these tracks and Nascar's attempts to make them exciting has turned many off.
KTMLew01 said:
I would love to see them reconfigure most of the 1.5 mile tracks to something similar to Darlington. Or a modern North Wilkesboro. Too many 195-205MPH mile tracks. But they are getting around The Lady In Black pretty damn fast too. Maybe go back to bias ply tires.[/QUOTE] and 650 HP engines.
Click to expand...
 
Clip of the winning pass. Check out the crowd.


Look at the stands - yikes!

gty_947094228_99226293.jpg
 
I am really happy about the Roval at Charlotte as whether it is a boom or a bust I appreciate the idea behind it. Tracks with 2 dates should be strongly encouraged to provide a different track layout for a second date as we no longer need tracks that maximize seating we need tracks that maximize racing. People used to tune in and watch Nascar because it was Nascar but over the years a lot of non fad fans have abandoned ship and the group that will watch and accept almost anything is deceasing. Instead of adding gimmicks each year Nascar would be well advised to attempt permanent fixes that will resonate with the current fan base and attract newbies.
 
NASCAR erred again. Issued a penalty on Hemric's car and had to eat crow and for the second week state they got it wrong.
tenor.gif
 
AtomicPunk55 said:
It took me a minute to catch on but I see where you are going with the deathbed stuff. Roush used to have so many sponsors it had to race 5 cars but now can only scrounge enough together for 2 cars that are not regular threats to win. Ouch!
Click to expand...

Not quite...this thread has become a spot for good news as irony to the thread title.
 
Speedbowl14 said:
Not quite...this thread has become a spot for good news as irony to the thread title.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what the member was up to but I saw the deathbed angle of a once proud championship winning organization that could not maintain 4 cars and then 3 and now is down to 2 cars.
 
AtomicPunk55 said:
It took me a minute to catch on but I see where you are going with the deathbed stuff. Roush used to have so many sponsors it had to race 5 cars but now can only scrounge enough together for 2 cars that are not regular threats to win. Ouch!
Click to expand...
Ouch? Roush slips back to midfield and contracts from 4 cars to 2 cars. While others race to the front. SHR expands and wins a lot. Same with Gibbs. And Penske. Wood Brothers expands. JTGD expands. Seems to me like the normal ebb and flow of competition. Is that what you guys mean by deathbed news? WTF?

The "spin from the usual suspect" sounds a lot like Chicken Little crying about the sky falling. Ya need some new material.
 
Towmater said:
NASCAR erred again. Issued a penalty on Hemric's car and had to eat crow and for the second week state they got it wrong.
tenor.gif
Click to expand...
Whats wrong with admitting they made a mistake? I hear stuff like this all the time after a basketball or football game but its too late for them to fix it when its over. Good job NASCAR.
 
Spotter22 said:
Whats wrong with admitting they made a mistake? I hear stuff like this all the time after a basketball or football game but its too late for them to fix it when its over. Good job NASCAR.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with admitting the error. It is the fact that it is 2 LARGE errors in 2 weeks. BTW, I never stated it was wrong to admit to one's mistakes. I happen to believe one should.
 
Loose tire outside of the pit box more than an arms length away isn't rocket science. Although it might be to some.

batmannthink.gif
 
The sponsorship extension, which covers about 85 percent of No. 17 inventory through 2021, according to the team, allows Stenhouse Jr. to set his sights on one goal — getting back to Victory Lane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom