west coast swing, double headers=terrible idea in practice

hidesert cowboy

hidesert cowboy

Team Owner
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
1,244
Points
293
in the world we live in, sometimes I think nascar just changes stuff to placate the whiners. A few years back nascar decided they should group the west coast races together and call it the west coast swing. For people that don't live in the area this sounds great and convenient. The problem is in practice what does this do to increase attendance for those tracks? IMO it actually harms it, here is why. Several years ago I went to a race in vegas. Later the next week, I get a call saying come to the race in california, we have free tickets, free hotpass, some inside meetings with drivers were also likely to happen, based on who was making this offer to me. I had to decline going, why? because I was gone already the week before and could not take off 2 weekends in a row. If these races were spread out its likely I could have went to both. If you run the 3 western tracks, bang bang bang, how can you expect to capture fan attendance when many of these fans might be able to make 2 or even all 3 races if they were spread apart.

lastly the pocono deal just leaves me thinking what the frick? personally pocono is one of my more favorite tracks. its better than most of the mile and a halfs at least. Its better than all of the larger tracks that have newer pavement. The races have always been pretty close together in the past. Also the races have been fairly well attended over the years compared to other tracks, like say Dover. However I understand most people aren't huge fans of pocono and complain about it. I am interested in, how running back to back races there is going to keep people from complaining or helping attendance. IMO they are creating more complaints and are going to harm attendance. Take a race from kansas, the attendance and the track sucks.
 
hidesert cowboy said:
in the world we live in, sometimes I think nascar just changes stuff to placate the whiners. A few years back nascar decided they should group the west coast races together and call it the west coast swing. For people that don't live in the area this sounds great and convenient. The problem is in practice what does this do to increase attendance for those tracks? IMO it actually harms it, here is why. Several years ago I went to a race in vegas. Later the next week, I get a call saying come to the race in california, we have free tickets, free hotpass, some inside meetings with drivers were also likely to happen, based on who was making this offer to me. I had to decline going, why? because I was gone already the week before and could not take off 2 weekends in a row. If these races were spread out its likely I could have went to both. If you run the 3 western tracks, bang bang bang, how can you expect to capture fan attendance when many of these fans might be able to make 2 or even all 3 races if they were spread apart.

lastly the pocono deal just leaves me thinking what the frick? personally pocono is one of my more favorite tracks. its better than most of the mile and a halfs at least. Its better than all of the larger tracks that have newer pavement. The races have always been pretty close together in the past. Also the races have been fairly well attended over the years compared to other tracks, like say Dover. However I understand most people aren't huge fans of pocono and complain about it. I am interested in, how running back to back races there is going to keep people from complaining or helping attendance. IMO they are creating more complaints and are going to harm attendance. Take a race from kansas, the attendance and the track sucks.
Click to expand...

IMO NASCAR is being steered heavily by its broadcast partners and they care about ratings not attendance. If Nascar was interested in maximizing attendance they would start more of the races earlier. That way it would be easier for people to drive to the race and get home earlier and go to work the next day.

From my understanding the tracks are being well taken care of through the broadcast deal so they have no complaints. As long as things stay the same life will be good but if the tracks ever become dependent on attendance again they could be in a world of hurt.
 
if that is what is steering nascar, BTW I actually agree its the direction the sport needs to move. Move away from spectator part of it and go for the TV audience. That doubly means getting tracks like kansas and new hampshire off the schedule. put the rock, north wilksboro etc back on. If very few people show up than so be it. a better TV product will be more likely to fill the stands. race at IRP instead of the big track, etc. maybe this has something to do with nascar buying ISC,
 
I do have to agree with OP regarding the west coast running consecutive races. It definitely hurts attendance. No way I can swing two race weekends in a row.

That said, I don't care to sit in any of the southwestern tracks grandstands after April 1st or before October 31st... Hell, Vegas last fall felt like a blur at times with that heat.


IanMcVittie said:
IMO NASCAR is being steered heavily by its broadcast partners and they care about ratings not attendance. If Nascar was interested in maximizing attendance they would start more of the races earlier. That way it would be easier for people to drive to the race and get home earlier and go to work the next day.

From my understanding the tracks are being well taken care of through the broadcast deal so they have no complaints. As long as things stay the same life will be good but if the tracks ever become dependent on attendance again they could be in a world of hurt.
Click to expand...

The fact that they have a summer break next year shows that NASCAR is currently working for the networks.


I look at this schedule like a holdover until 2021. I think that's when the big moves happen.
 
hidesert cowboy said:
if that is what is steering nascar, BTW I actually agree its the direction the sport needs to move. Move away from spectator part of it and go for the TV audience. That doubly means getting tracks like kansas and new hampshire off the schedule. put the rock, north wilksboro etc back on. If very few people show up than so be it. a better TV product will be more likely to fill the stands. race at IRP instead of the big track, etc. maybe this has something to do with nascar buying ISC,
Click to expand...

With the current broadcast deal not set to expire for a few years the tracks have no worries. If for some reason the next TV deal isn’t as lucrative as this one there may be some issues. A lot of water will go over the dam between now and then though.
 
StandOnIt said:
Click to expand...

Steve-O doesn't want to admit NASCAR was cucked by NBC and the Olympics. In fact, the 2016 race at Watkins Glen broadcast on USA earned more viewers than the 2017 (NBCSN) and 2018 (NBC) Watkins Glen races, IN SPITE OF Olympic competition. USA is one of the biggest cable networks in the country. If it were NASCAR's decision, you bet your ass they'd take being on USA.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Steve-O doesn't want to admit NASCAR was cucked by NBC and the Olympics. In fact, the 2016 race at Watkins Glen broadcast on USA earned more viewers than the 2017 (NBCSN) and 2018 (NBC) Watkins Glen races, IN SPITE OF Olympic competition. USA is one of the biggest cable networks in the country. If it were NASCAR's decision, you bet your ass they'd take being on USA.
Click to expand...
Yep, races on USA and CNBC wouldn’t be bad at all for NASCAR. USA is currently in ~94.3 million homes, with CNBC not far behind at 93.6 million. NBCSN is quite a bit behind those two at 81.6 million.
 
ToyYoda said:
Yep, NBC has the Summer Olympics next year and that’s when NASCAR is taking their break.
Click to expand...
That's the whole reason for the double header was help get that extra week off, I am willing to bet that if it wasnt for NBC asking NASCAR for a break, there would be no double header.

We all know NASCAR said it was one of the options on the table, but that doesnt mean they are going to use it this soon.
 
jws926 said:
That's the whole reason for the double header was help get that extra week off, I am willing to bet that if it wasnt for NBC asking NASCAR for a break, there would be no double header.

We all know NASCAR said it was one of the options on the table, but that doesnt mean they are going to use it this soon.
Click to expand...
yep Nascar could have staged the race, but they did NBC a favor. Also not known was that moving the schedule by two weeks back or forward was all that was allowed for the current tracks unless they were ok'd by the track, so what they did next year took some doing.
 
StandOnIt said:
yep Nascar could have staged the race, but they did NBC a favor. Also not known was that moving the schedule by two weeks back or forward was all that was allowed for the current tracks unless they were ok'd by the track, so what they did next year took some doing.
Click to expand...
Right, they did NBC favor , yeah, I do wonder how much doing it did take, or maybe they have more wiggle room than we know about. All they really did was just rearrange the deck chairs and I think that is what current contracts allow to a point maybe.
 
I agree running consecutive west coast races is a bad idea for fans. I see the feasibility for NASCAR and it's teams. However, a doubleheader like Pocono on the west coast actually would be a good thing if it was at the same track.. I really don't see how people can be that mad about a doubleheader event that was announced 15 months in advance. It's a great deal as a fan.

I just can't believe some people were wanting Sonoma to be a 4th west coast race in the spring, that's insane to the fans.

I'm not thrilled about the hot weather in Vegas, but I'll be going to the race in September, and hopefully the evening will be nicer this year
 
Even doing Daytona and Atlanta back to back has been a killer for me the last few years. Not from a taking off standpoint, but just sheer dollars. Daytona is a hop skip and jump from me so it's an easy back and forth, but their prices can be astronomical and they charge for every little thing, so it offsets. Atlanta is 6.5 hrs or so, and while I could drive there and back immediately I prefer to give myself the full experience and stay for a few days. Otherwise it becomes more of a chore than anything else, it's not enjoyable.

I'm going to be faced with something totally different now that it's Atlanta and Homestead back to back. Not sure If I'll do both or not, they both require considerable driving from Tampa. And you still have Daytona just a few weeks before...
 
jws926 said:
Right, they did NBC favor , yeah, I do wonder how much doing it did take, or maybe they have more wiggle room than we know about. All they really did was just rearrange the deck chairs and I think that is what current contracts allow to a point maybe.
Click to expand...

I see the schedule mish mash as rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic too. I think the main purpose is to baffle the fans into thinking a cosmic shift has taken place that will make things a lot better. This is only my opinion.
 
AuzGrams said:
I agree running consecutive west coast races is a bad idea for fans. I see the feasibility for NASCAR and it's teams. However, a doubleheader like Pocono on the west coast actually would be a good thing if it was at the same track.. I really don't see how people can be that mad about a doubleheader event that was announced 15 months in advance. It's a great deal as a fan.

I just can't believe some people were wanting Sonoma to be a 4th west coast race in the spring, that's insane to the fans.

I'm not thrilled about the hot weather in Vegas, but I'll be going to the race in September, and hopefully the evening will be nicer this year
Click to expand...

I think that the doubleheader at Pocono is a great deal for rabid fans of the existing fan base. Hopefully it is something those people will appreciate and support as they could make it a yearly event. If the weekend isn’t well supported I think it puts Pocono on the fast track for having 1 race only.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom