The top 35???

FlFlash said:
I could'nt care less about the Top 35 I've always hated the rule. What concerns me is that only 43-45 cars are showing up for qualiying, where's the car count gone?
Click to expand...

The cars have changed to much from year to year, it used to be a guy like Dave Marcus could buy a 3 or 4 year old car borrow/lease an engine from Childress and go racing. you can't do that right now the body styles are to new, wait a couple of years and car counts should go up as teams dump old cars.
 
It costs too damn much to go racing these days that's why car counts are down. Nascar needs to get over the fact that 43 cars need to start a race, watching at least 10 cars start and park every week is ridiculous.
 
Mopardh9 said:
It costs too damn much to go racing these days that's why car counts are down. Nascar needs to get over the fact that 43 cars need to start a race, watching at least 10 cars start and park every week is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

That's also true to much technology now, if you don't have a R&D department staffed with a bunch of engineers and unlimited cash flow you have very little chance of ever winning.
 
It takes money to run with the big boys. It always has. The people with the most seem to have the best of the best and that's what's usually sitting in victory lane on Sunday. There's always going to be those that can't compete unless everyone's ready for franchising and even then there will be lessor teams.

S&P's have been around forever. Unless you're at the track, they're barely noticeable. You sure as heck don't see them on TV. Television coverage is primarily reserved for the top 10. ;)
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
It takes money to run with the big boys. It always has. The people with the most seem to have the best of the best and that's what's usually sitting in victory lane on Sunday. There's always going to be those that can't compete unless everyone's ready for franchising and even then there will be lessor teams.

S&P's have been around forever. Unless you're at the track, they're barely noticeable. You sure as heck don't see them on TV. Television coverage is primarily reserved for the top 10. ;)
Click to expand...

You see on TV when they go through the running order and on retstarts it is definitely noticeable that there are quite a few cars missing.
 
Mopardh9 said:
You see on TV when the go through the running order and on retstarts it is definitely noticeable that there are quite a few cars missing.
Click to expand...
I understand what you are saying. I can only speak for myself when I say that it's unnoticeable. Sure, there are teams that are doing their start and park deal. Probably some that are there for the easy money and others that are there to earn more money to make a full run here and there. Personally, I can't find fault in that. They've got people they employ and they're just doing their deal. I just don't see how it's really affecting the racing unless they become a moving chicane. Then there's a problem. Whether I'm watching the race or at the race, I spend little time worrying about the guys off of the track. That's just me.
 
On one hand , you have a group saying that the car count is down because it costs so much to race , then ,on the other hand , you have a group saying that there is money to be made in the ' start and park ' business . I'm confused Fender . :confused:
 
ted@economy said:
On one hand , you have a group saying that the car count is down because it costs so much to race , then ,on the other hand , you have a group saying that there is money to be made in the ' start and park ' business . I'm confused Fender . :confused:
Click to expand...

It's simple Ted. The start and parks aren't racing. No pit crew, same tires all weekend, no wrecks, same engine for weeks and weeks. They probably wax the car before each event and hit the track for a few laps and get a paycheck.
 
FenderBumper said:
It's simple Ted. The start and parks aren't racing. No pit crew, same tires all weekend, no wrecks, same engine for weeks and weeks. They probably wax the car before each event and hit the track for a few laps and get a paycheck.
Click to expand...
So why aren't more teams doing that?
 
FenderBumper said:
It's simple Ted. The start and parks aren't racing. No pit crew, same tires all weekend, no wrecks, same engine for weeks and weeks. They probably wax the car before each event and hit the track for a few laps and get a paycheck.
Click to expand...

Sounds better than cutting grass for a paycheck. Maybe I should consider switching careers? :rolleyes:
 
FenderBumper said:
It's simple Ted. The start and parks aren't racing. No pit crew, same tires all weekend, no wrecks, same engine for weeks and weeks. They probably wax the car before each event and hit the track for a few laps and get a paycheck.
Click to expand...
They still have to get in that one/two lap qualifying effort so it's not all just simply showing up and collecting a check. If they do make it in the show there's some money to be made. Looking at last weekends race, $69,767 was paid for last place. Who knows what the cost associated with showing up for the event were, gas/food/lodging/tires/inspection/etc..... It all adds up but there must be something left over in the end. I was just looking at last years Brickyard 400 payout. Robby Gordon collected $133,356 for his five laps of effort. Not too bad.
 
FenderBumper said:
It's simple Ted. The start and parks aren't racing. No pit crew, same tires all weekend, no wrecks, same engine for weeks and weeks. They probably wax the car before each event and hit the track for a few laps and get a paycheck.
Click to expand...

Thats the most idiotic post I've ever seen from you and thats saying alot. You Obviousley have no idea the commitment and hard work it takes to prepare and race on a limited budget.
 
FlFlash said:
Thats the most idiotic post I've ever seen from you and thats saying alot. You Obviousley have no idea the commitment and hard work it takes to prepare and race on a limited budget.
Click to expand...

Well fiffy, you've outdone yourself too. Since when do S&P's race?

You must have bumped your head pretty hard to post that nonsense. lol
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
They still have to get in that one/two lap qualifying effort so it's not all just simply showing up and collecting a check.
Click to expand...

Obviously it's a little more than wax and go, but you get my point. They are making money by NOT racing. Most don't have pit crews, and I wonder how many share a hauler with another S&P to save money.
 
FenderBumper said:
Obviously it's a little more than wax and go, but you get my point. They are making money by NOT racing. Most don't have pit crews, and I wonder how many share a hauler with another S&P to save money.
Click to expand...

There's some good old articles on start and parks when the issue really started to surface in 2008. This one is pretty funny.

http://doorstopnation.com/msrp.html

There was an article couple years back in Motor Trend or Car and Driver I'll try to look it up. It broke done the costs and the money they made.
 
Thegroundpounder99 said:
There's some good old articles on start and parks when the issue really started to surface in 2008. This one is pretty funny.

http://doorstopnation.com/msrp.html
Click to expand...
That's quite an impressive record. I didn't realize that there was anyone that accomplished that. If you add up that column there's some real money there. I wonder how that did actually relate to their expenses?
 
Thanks GP. The article backs up my point on how S&P's make money by NOT racing. You paying attention Flflash?

fixed it.
 
FenderBumper said:
Thanks DP. The article backs up my point on how S&P's make money by NOT racing. You paying attention Flflash?
Click to expand...
I didn't post the article. That was Thegroundpounder99.

One of my favorite parts of that article.....

At Dover in 2001, a regional driver crashed his car after qualifying and wiped it out. He had a second car, but it had no engine. NASCAR allowed him to put the car on the grid. The car completed no laps, of course, and was pushed to the garage with “ignition” problems.

Ignition problems. Yeah, OK. o_O
 
FenderBumper said:
Thanks DP. The article backs up my point on how S&P's make money by NOT racing. You paying attention Flflash?
Click to expand...

Yep I understand you completely, You Are the master of using words to prove your idiotic points, a regular keyboard cowboy.

I however know how it is in the real world and how much people give, work and sweat to go racing and the Love of the sport that makes them keep coming back! Something you can't seem to understand or acknowledge.
 
That is an interesting article and parts of it help both sides of the argument . Some wild statements by (who else? ) Kenny Wallace and an 'unknown blogger ' don't really help. Some interesting stuff by Morgan Shepherd and Derrick Cope . What it comes down to , is your expenses are the same if you don't make the show , and a lot of them don't . That is a heck of a big hit .The proof of the puddin may be in the fact that there aren't ten or fifteen teams out there every week trying to start and park. In any event , I am always on the side of my good buddy , Fender , and I echo whatever he said.
 
FlFlash said:
Yep I understand you completely, You Are the master of using words to prove your idiotic points, a regular keyboard cowboy.

I however know how it is in the real world and how much people give, work and sweat to go racing and the Love of the sport that makes them keep coming back! Something you can't seem to understand or acknowledge.
Click to expand...

There he is blathering about racing again right in the midst of an S&P discussion. :rolleyes:

While you're typing your insults, remember I fire back. You wouldn't want to end up with that dull knife in yet another gun fight with me.
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
At Dover in 2001, a regional driver crashed his car after qualifying and wiped it out. He had a second car, but it had no engine. NASCAR allowed him to put the car on the grid. The car completed no laps, of course, and was pushed to the garage with “ignition” problems.

Ignition problems. Yeah, OK. o_O
Click to expand...

I guess nascar felt that the car should have burned after the crash.
 
Thegroundpounder99 said:
There's some good old articles on start and parks when the issue really started to surface in 2008. This one is pretty funny.

http://doorstopnation.com/msrp.html

There was an article couple years back in Motor Trend or Car and Driver I'll try to look it up. It broke done the costs and the money they made.
Click to expand...

I always wondered why they had to lie about why they parked, why can't they just say I'm a start and Park team and be done with it?
 
Mopardh9 said:
I always wondered why they had to lie about why they parked, why can't they just say I'm a start and Park team and be done with it?
Click to expand...

They did. Then the media started focusing on them and complaining. NASCAR said they would start tearing down engines of lapped cars. Now they make a lame excuse, nascar acts like they solved the problem and they still get their 43 car starting field.
 
FenderBumper said:
They did. Then the media started focusing on them and complaining. NASCAR said they would start tearing down engines of lapped cars. Now they make a lame excuse, nascar acts like they solved the problem and they still get their 43 car starting field.
Click to expand...

I just don't see what the big deal is, they aren't fooling anyone. It's like saying something is $99.99, I mean who are they kidding.
 
Mopardh9 said:
I just don't see what the big deal is, they aren't fooling anyone. It's like saying something is $99.99, I mean who are they kidding.
Click to expand...

Some are fooled. Someone said that NASCAR's TV contract specifies 43 cars. If that's true, NASCAR is sponsoring S&P's, but doesn't want the world to know it.
If the other teams aren't complaining about sharing the purse with them, it doesn't bother me. I would rather see them park than get in the way.

2 years ago, Brian Keselowski came out and said he would S&P in the cup series to sponsor his NW car. It didn't work too well, but NASCAR had no problem with it.
 
There were/are a lot of drivers to poor to race. Earnhardt was one, Dale Jarrett was said to be way deep in debt by the time he made it to cup.



I am not proud of the following, it was dumb, but I have raced on a bank note and a credit card.
Moonlight all night loading trucks on Friday night to pay, to stay up and race out of state on Saturday. BTW My performance was lousy, I believe I had the ability but I also understand why I may be the only one who believes it.



It is also hell on the families. I had two friends from high school who raced too and all three of our l wives hated the racing. It takes all of the time and money.



I wanted to do what Dale sr did, and I am thinking many shade tree dreamers are still chasing the same dream.



So I totally get why Flashes believes it is tough.. Because it is and if Joe Nemechek makes a living with his modest efforts, I am still on his side.


His type isn't an opportunist just hitting the time clock. The dude was running the short tracks in the 80s,and he knows more than most of the ones making the big bucks.



There is probably no one more disgusted over parking a car, these aren't loafers. They dreamed big and there as serious as the guys with the cubic dollars.



I would rather talk with Joe or spend a day learning from him than at least half the guys in the top 35. I am sure he knows more, and is even better than half of them even today.
 
Greg said:
There were/are a lot of drivers to poor to race. Earnhardt was one, Dale Jarrett was said to be way deep in debt by the time he made it to cup.



I am not proud of the following, it was dumb, but I have raced on a bank note and a credit card.
Moonlight all night loading trucks on Friday night to pay, to stay up and race out of state on Saturday. BTW My performance was lousy, I believe I had the ability but I also understand why I may be the only one who believes it.



It is also hell on the families. I had two friends from high school who raced too and all three of our l wives hated the racing. It takes all of the time and money.



I wanted to do what Dale sr did, and I am thinking many shade tree dreamers are still chasing the same dream.



So I totally get why Flashes believes it is tough.. Because it is and if Joe Nemechek makes a living with his modest efforts, I am still on his side.


His type isn't an opportunist just hitting the time clock. The dude was running the short tracks in the 80s,and he knows more than most of the ones making the big bucks.



There is probably no one more disgusted over parking a car, these aren't loafers. They dreamed big and there as serious as the guys with the cubic dollars.



I would rather talk with Joe or spend a day learning from him than at least half the guys in the top 35. I am sure he knows more, and is even better than half of them even today.
Click to expand...

I see your point there Greg and I do agree to a certain extent. I used to race every week. We had a great sponsor and all the equipment to do it right. When the housing market crashed and the sponsor left we didn't have the money to keep it going. It went from you blew a motor get a new one to blow a motor and be out a year. We couldn've shown up with zero chance at winning and being a back marker but that's not what racing is about. I respect the sport to much and the people involved to do that. What good is a uncompetitive racecar driver? Why bring something to the track that's not fit to be there? In my mind it's because they wanna say, "I'm a Nascar driver" more than they actually want to go and race. If they want to race and be competitive at it, take that money they're spending and drop down to a series that you can go out there and be a factor in. I race now maybe a handful of times a year, but I know we have a shot that handful of times. S&P's have exposed and used the sytem long enough IMO.
 
Thegroundpounder99 said:
I see your point there Greg and I do agree to a certain extent. I used to race every week. We had a great sponsor and all the equipment to do it right. When the housing market crashed and the sponsor left we didn't have the money to keep it going. It went from you blew a motor get a new one to blow a motor and be out a year. We couldn've shown up with zero chance at winning and being a back marker but that's not what racing is about. I respect the sport to much and the people involved to do that. What good is a uncompetitive racecar driver? Why bring something to the track that's not fit to be there? In my mind it's because they wanna say, "I'm a Nascar driver" more than they actually want to go and race. If they want to race and be competitive at it, take that money they're spending and drop down to a series that you can go out there and be a factor in. I race now maybe a handful of times a year, but I know we have a shot that handful of times. S&P's have exposed and used the sytem long enough IMO.
Click to expand...

I agree, then you have the guys that get in the way who think they can race with the big boys, they need to drop down to a lower series too. The Cope sisters should be racing in ARCA or ASA something where they might have a chance at actually making a decent showing. By racing or trying to, I should say in NW, they are just making fools of themselves, what serious sponsor with big bucks would want to give them money?! IMO they are using Nascar as a stepping stone to fame as would be "B" movie starlets or glamour models, which they seem to not have enough talent or good looks for either. They aren't racers, not true racers anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom