- Apr 21, 2016
@ToyYoda has written an interesting and thoughtful post, but I disagree with most of it. Each race is a positive earnings event for the industry. Fewer races means less money, not more... less sponsorship, less admissions, less TV money. Yes, expenses would be lower, but revenue would be lower by a greater amount, I believe.There would be some advantages to shortening the season though. Say for example the schedule got contracted to a 28 race season ending on Labor Day Weekend....there would be fewer races that teams would have to secure sponsorship for, it would make the individual races more meaningful since there would be fewer of them, NASCAR would be the only major sport to have their playoffs in July and August...
I agree with the part about fewer races means each is more meaningful to many fans. But, to make your plan work economically, the financial results of each race has to improve by a very substantial amount... to offset the lost earnings from the races that no longer exist.
The other part I don't get is... what happens from late August through the Daytona 500? I mean, football remains the same under both scenarios. NFL is not going to expand to a third network on Sunday afternoons. The absence of Nascar means what... more TV time devoted to cornhole tournaments and roller derby? I'm like DPK... I'm not sure running from the NFL gets Nascar anything good. Not sure it makes sense to race in the snow in March but then shut down (with massive layoffs too) during the generally gorgeous fall weather?