Report: NASCAR returning to Nashville in 2021

StandOnIt said:
So you are saying that your smarter than Nascar..got it.
Click to expand...

Sometimes, I sure as hell do. In the case of Brian France, it's not even debatable. In this case, our priorities are just different. My point has always been to do everything possible to put out a spectacular product, and a lot of the other stuff takes of itself.
 
I figured as much. And you think your idea of a superior product is better than what Nascar can come up with...got it.
 
StandOnIt said:
I figured as much. And you think your idea of a superior product is better than what Nascar can come up with...got it.
Click to expand...
To a fan watching for entertainment and a company trying to make money, a 'superior product' isn't necessarily the same thing.

See Indianapolis, for example. It regularly ranks low in this small-but-fan-driven community's rankings, but the networks pay big bucks to show it.

Fans and drivers agree Rockingham was a 'superior product'; NASCAR, Penske, and SMI apparently felt Texas was better.
 
Last edited:
Formerjackman said:
For some reason, I keep forgetting that there is only two people here that are allowed to have an opinion on anything. I saw a number of races there in Cup type cars (ARCA) as well as Trucks, and saw a bunch more (ARCA, XFINITY and Trucks) on TV, and while it's possible to get an interesting race once in awhile, it's generally been uninspiring at BEST. I feel the EXACT same way about Kentucky, which is a shame, because I love it as a facility, and it's close enough to me that if I thought the racing was worth a damn I would go there, but it isn't, so I don't.
Click to expand...
I wasnt talking about you
 
Charlie Spencer said:
To a fan watching for entertainment and a company trying to make money, a 'superior product' isn't necessarily the same thing.

See Indianapolis, for example. It regularly ranks low in this small-but-fan-driven community's rankings, but the networks pay big bucks to show it.

Fans and drivers agree Rockingham was a 'superior product'; NASCAR, Penske, and SMI apparently felt Texas was better.
Click to expand...
Yeah not knowing all that is involved from all angles some think a magic wand can be waived and "poof" race anywhere any time and only on the tracks I deem worthy. :punkrocke
 
StandOnIt said:
Yeah not knowing all that is involved from all angles some think a magic wand can be waived and "poof" race anywhere any time and only on the tracks I deem worthy. :punkrocke
Click to expand...
My point was that @Formerjackman 's idea of a superior product as a fan isn't invalid just because it doesn't match NASCAR's. Hell, my opinion is closer in line with his than NASCAR's.
 
Can't wait to hear once again year after year how crappy the race will be at Indy when it comes around. Bottom line it makes money..priorities.
 
How many short tracks every year are eliminated with a stroke of the pen by a politician? So lets go that direction right?
 
Formerjackman said:
NASCAR WAS there, and they left for 35 years because A, they weren't getting along with the track promoter, and B, they they wanted to get out of the south. Bristol, came a heartbeat away from the same fate during the same period, for the same reasons. NASCAR could have stepped up and taken control of the track in 1985 for loose change and didn't do it, so them making goofy choices now to try and get back into that market is not going to gain any sympathy from me. I fail to see how making a five year commitment to the superspeedway helps the cause of a Cup race at the short track much at all, which was the point of the whole exercise as far as I'm concerned. Once again, if Nashville is such an important market, (and I'm not saying it isn't) why didn't they step in to keep the races at the superspeedway?
Click to expand...

This is such a bad statement to make. I'm in my mid 20s and the Nashville metro has DOUBLED in size from when I was born. Why do you think I'm in Charleston, SC now? I didn't all of a sudden decide on palm trees & warmth, the city is exploding and they needed someone in my position badly within the company. Places like Charlotte, Nashville, Charleston, Raleigh, Orlando, everywhere in Texas, Myrtle Beach are growing at an exponential rate.
 
Formerjackman said:
NASCAR WAS there, and they left for 35 years because A, they weren't getting along with the track promoter, and B, they they wanted to get out of the south. Bristol, came a heartbeat away from the same fate during the same period, for the same reasons. NASCAR could have stepped up and taken control of the track in 1985 for loose change and didn't do it, so them making goofy choices now to try and get back into that market is not going to gain any sympathy from me. I fail to see how making a five year commitment to the superspeedway helps the cause of a Cup race at the short track much at all, which was the point of the whole exercise as far as I'm concerned. Once again, if Nashville is such an important market, (and I'm not saying it isn't) why didn't they step in to keep the races at the superspeedway?
Click to expand...
The differences between Jim France and Brain France are many.
 
StandOnIt said:
Yeah not knowing all that is involved from all angles some think a magic wand can be waived and "poof" race anywhere any time and only on the tracks I deem worthy. :punkrocke
Click to expand...

What we have is solely at the feet of the France family. They have driven the bus since day one, so there is NOBODY else to point a finger at. They race where they race, and they don't race where they don't race solely because of the decisions thew France family have made, not just today or yesterday, but 10, 20 30 years ago.. Without a wink and a nod from the France family, none of the new tracks that have been built in the last 30 years would have been built, whether they were ISC tracks or not. Nobody was sticking their neck out THAT far without some assurances, and if NASCAR had their priorities in the right place, we could have had a lot more interesting tracks than we got. All Bill France would have had to say was, "If you have any desire to have a NASCAR date, build THIS instead of that", and it would have been done. NASCAR COULD have saved racing at the Nashville Fairgrounds 35 years ago for next to nothing in current dollars, but in their infinite wisdom they decided they didn't need the track or the town. Pocono and Dover basically exist ONLY because the France family have deemed it in their interest. Darlington still exists ONLY because NASCAR didn't want to take the PR hit. Martinsville still exists only because of the legacy of the relationship between Bill France SR and H. Clay Earles. If they had been a little more attuned to making decisions on what was best for the product and the brand say between 1990 and 2005, they would have less a need to make decisions based more on the bottom line today. NASCAR has been painted into somewhat of a corner, and for they most part, the France family were the ones holding the paint brushes.
 
Mispeedway15 said:
This is such a bad statement to make. I'm in my mid 20s and the Nashville metro has DOUBLED in size from when I was born. Why do you think I'm in Charleston, SC now? I didn't all of a sudden decide on palm trees & warmth, the city is exploding and they needed someone in my position badly within the company. Places like Charlotte, Nashville, Charleston, Raleigh, Orlando, everywhere in Texas, Myrtle Beach are growing at an exponential rate.
Click to expand...

It's all relative. NASCAR was a major market for NASCAR then too, when they weren't in near as many other major markets, but they turned their back on the town. I would say that NASCAR is suddenly warming up to Nashville ONLY after getting luke warm interest in places like NYC and Las Vegas, and wanting to avoid looking like a one town industry (Charlotte).
 
I've got a great idea. Get the Iracing guys to go scan the track at the Fairgrounds, hand it over to the engineers and let them knock down the superspeedway and replace it with a replica. The costs would be greatly reduced using exisiting infrastructure and tada, we've got another short track and a facility with updated aminities. Everybodys happy.
 
They should just keep this and then if Nashville gets fixed make Bristol a one race track. I won't lie the Spring race is basically dead up in Bristol, attendance has been quite paltry
 
Dover Motorsports have said they can expand up to 50k if demand is there. Hopefully it is. I suppose at worst it doesn’t work out and they get a second Dover weekend back. At best, it’s a huge hit and we wind up with two unique tracks in one market. Somewhere in the middle is the market being adequate for one date at either the Fairgrounds or the Superspeedway.

With any luck we’ll get a car that can race well enough the next few years in Lebanon to sustain a crowd. They should evaluate bringing the short oval package next year.
 
Snappy D said:
In my view, Bristol should always be a 2 race track until the end of time. I never have viewed a bad race there in my years of being a fan.
Click to expand...

Agreed but no one is going to the Spring races it seems anymore. Darlington is another legendary place with one date
 
Spotter22 said:
I've got a great idea. Get the Iracing guys to go scan the track at the Fairgrounds, hand it over to the engineers and let them knock down the superspeedway and replace it with a replica. The costs would be greatly reduced using exisiting infrastructure and tada, we've got another short track and a facility with updated aminities. Everybodys happy.
Click to expand...

I've basically said the same thing for years. During the building binge in the 90's they SHOULD have been copying tracks that actually produced good racing instead of generic D shaped 1.5s. Nashville, Kentucky and Chicago would ALL be excellent candidates to cut down and recreate Rockingham, since it's unlikely NASCAR will ever race there again, and even if they DID, what's wrong with TWO tracks like that? Same goes for North Wilkesboro. Atlanta should be converted back to its original configuration too. New Hampshire should have been BUILT as a short track.
 
rd45usa said:
Drone footage from May 22 of the track,
Click to expand...

The track itself looks like it is in good shape, the rest is going to need some freshening up. With a thousand acres of land, there is plenty to work with. Curious to see what they come up with.
 
rd45usa said:
Drone footage from May 22 of the track,
Click to expand...


Looks like it needs a pretty substantial amount of work. Repave the aprons, SAFER wall all the way around on the outside wall and a bit on the inside wall (substantially more than what was the norm in 2011), probably a lot of IT work to get the media center up to snuff. And of course if they want 50,000 fans and they had room for 25,000 that's doubling the number of bathrooms, showers, camping, parking, etc.

I applaud NASCAR and Dover for making the effort. It's not ideal but it shows they're willing to spend the $$$ to get into a market they want to enter. Maybe they build a new track up in the Pacific northwest or beef up Portland to get a race up in that area.
 
Speedbowl14 said:
Looks like it needs a pretty substantial amount of work. Repave the aprons, SAFER wall all the way around on the outside wall and a bit on the inside wall (substantially more than what was the norm in 2011), probably a lot of IT work to get the media center up to snuff. And of course if they want 50,000 fans and they had room for 25,000 that's doubling the number of bathrooms, showers, camping, parking, etc.

I applaud NASCAR and Dover for making the effort. It's not ideal but it shows they're willing to spend the $$$ to get into a market they want to enter. Maybe they build a new track up in the Pacific northwest or beef up Portland to get a race up in that area.
Click to expand...
They have said it if there is more interest than seats available they are going to erect temporary seating.
 
Mispeedway15 said:
Agreed but no one is going to the Spring races it seems anymore. Darlington is another legendary place with one date
Click to expand...
People not showing up to tracks...You can say that about a lot of places really. And I always believed Darlington should have two but that’s a different discussion.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
I recall they biult 1.5s with the notion of drawing Indy and other series.
Click to expand...

THANK YOU! SERIOUSLY IS EVERYONE THIS UNINTELLIGENT ON HERE? Lol quite crying about the lack of short track development, does nobody remember that IndyCar was actually a bigger series than NASCAR for a long time?
 
Why Nascar is supposed to have a crystal ball and be able to see 20 years into the future doesn't everybody know that? Dover was filling their track of 135 thousand seats at the time.
 
Mispeedway15 said:
THANK YOU! SERIOUSLY IS EVERYONE THIS UNINTELLIGENT ON HERE? Lol quite crying about the lack of short track development, does nobody remember that IndyCar was actually a bigger series than NASCAR for a long time?
Click to expand...

By 1990, NASCAR had clearly passed Indycar, even though Indycar was hugely popular up until the split. After 1995, CART and the IRL combined were but a fraction of NASCAR. The joke of building tracks for both series is that anybody with a brain knows that the two types of cars really don't like the same thing, and the fact that first CART, and later the IRL and now the reborn Indycar have moved farther and farther away from ovals anyway. Most of these tracks were built in an era when the Cup races were drawing 100,000 plus, and the IRL crowds could have fit in a phone booth, so my attitude would have been that either they adapt to tracks that cater to NASCAR, or build their own tracks. The fact that they are racing at Richmond means they can adapt, and the fact that they COULD be racing at Phoenix and Milwaukee, two tracks ideally suited to them and aren't, means that I have little to no concern about what Indycar wants IF it has a negative effect on the NASCAR product.
 
For the record, I'm posting what I recall, in response to the question of why 1.5s were build instead of other layouts. I'm not weighing in on whether the decision was a good one, only what I remember as the reason. Indeed, I may be recalling incorrectly.
 
Mispeedway15 said:
THANK YOU! SERIOUSLY IS EVERYONE THIS UNINTELLIGENT ON HERE?
Click to expand...
Yes, we are. You may find the discussion to be more enlightened at these sites:

The New Yorker

Reporting, Profiles, breaking news, cultural coverage, podcasts, videos, and cartoons from The New Yorker.
www.newyorker.com www.newyorker.com
www.theatlantic.com

The Atlantic

The Atlantic covers news, politics, culture, technology, health, and more, through its articles, podcasts, videos, and flagship magazine.
www.theatlantic.com www.theatlantic.com

Highlights Kids

The place for children of all ages to play games and discover new jokes, surveys, answers to science questions, and fun crafts and recipes from Highlights.
highlightskids.com highlightskids.com
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Yes, we are. You may find the discussion to be more enlightened at these sites:

The New Yorker

Reporting, Profiles, breaking news, cultural coverage, podcasts, videos, and cartoons from The New Yorker.
www.newyorker.com www.newyorker.com
www.theatlantic.com

The Atlantic

The Atlantic covers news, politics, culture, technology, health, and more, through its articles, podcasts, videos, and flagship magazine.
www.theatlantic.com www.theatlantic.com

Highlights Kids

The place for children of all ages to play games and discover new jokes, surveys, answers to science questions, and fun crafts and recipes from Highlights.
highlightskids.com highlightskids.com
Click to expand...

Considering the first two sources listed, you would probably learn more actual knowledge from the third source.
 
Mispeedway15 said:
THANK YOU! SERIOUSLY IS EVERYONE THIS UNINTELLIGENT ON HERE? Lol quite crying about the lack of short track development, does nobody remember that IndyCar was actually a bigger series than NASCAR for a long time?
Click to expand...

Yeah from 1919-1990...

When did the 1.5 mile tracks get built? Oh yeah the later 90s and early 00s after Indy/CART imploded and NASCAR was hotter than a dehydrated flock of sheep in the middle of the Sahara.

My understanding was the 1.5 mile tracks were built because you could fit 100,000+ seats on the frontstretch and sell tickets at premium prices. Shorter tracks with seats in the corners wouldn't go for as high of prices. This was largely been reflected in real life at Charolotte, Richmond, Dover, New Hampshire, back when I was looking at tickets in the late 00s and onward. But many of those seats don't exist anymore so I don't have data to back this up. Still is the case at Martinsville...turn 3/4 stands stupid cheap like $60 a ticket while the same row on the frontstretch costs close to $100.
 
StandOnIt said:
Why Nascar is supposed to have a crystal ball and be able to see 20 years into the future doesn't everybody know that? Dover was filling their track of 135 thousand seats at the time.
Click to expand...
This. Indy Car and CART were so fractured and why would a NASCAR built/owned track be thinking about those two fractured series on life support ( life support at the time)? You hit the nail on the head... from the Split on the notion Open wheel was just as popular than NASCAR, thats just revisionist and quite frankly a wrong interpretation of history
 
Guess we're all morons for not thinking that "Well the 1.5 mile ovals" were built for Indy Car as well. Lol the fact is Open Wheel was on life support in the mid- late 90's until the reunification and facing an exodus of drivers as well ( Jeff Gordon, Tony Stewart, Kenny Irwin Jr, Kasey Kahne to name a few). SMI and ISC probably couldnt have cared less about IRL/CART at the time. I would imagine they built the tracks they did at the time because they were packing fannies in every kind of seat. The amusing thing about about us not being intelligent is failing to comprehend that Indy Car/CART left some really bad ass tracks that had a CULT like following among the fan bases like Cleveland Burke LakeFront Airport, Edmonton, Portland, Milwaukee Mile, Michigan, Twin Ring Motegi, and Surfers Paradise. I mean you still had those on a schedule you wouldnt have to worry about what NASCAR was building, track for track line up you had a better selection. But unintelligent and all.
 
Snappy D said:
why would a NASCAR built/owned track be thinking about those two fractured series
Click to expand...
Pretty sure NASCAR (ISC) only built two of the six Brobs in the late '90s and early '00s - Chicago and Kansas. SMI build Texas and Vegas, and Kentucky and California were build by other companies.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
Pretty sure NASCAR (ISC) only built two of the six Brobs in the late '90s and early '00s - Chicago and Kansas. SMI build Texas and Vegas, and Kentucky and California were build by other companies.
Click to expand...
My point being that I dont think they were projecting potential attendance in regards to CART/INDY CAR when track building was happening. I might be wrong though, very wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom