what track do you want dozed down?

New Hampshire
Pocono
Homestead
Daytona
Talladega
North Carolina
Las Vegas
California
Kansas
Chicagoland
 
Originally posted by BebiF1
Why would someone want to get rid of daytona or talledega? thats nuts, those are the best two races all year. I think they should doze chicagoland, and add another road course to their schedule.
Click to expand...

Until the "close competition" at those tracks is other than contrived, 86 them.
 
Originally posted by BebiF1
Why would someone want to get rid of daytona or talledega? thats nuts, those are the best two races all year. I think they should doze chicagoland, and add another road course to their schedule.
Click to expand...
BebiF1, I only said lose 1 race at each.

Why not add a street race into the mix, like the open wheelers do?
AND do not tell me that it can't be done. If Nascar wants to do it, it will happen. FUN to watch.
 
Originally posted by BebiF1
Why would someone want to get rid of daytona or talledega? thats nuts, those are the best two races all year.
Click to expand...

yea if you like to watch wrecks not races.
 
What is wrong with Chicago, fast track good market area...yeh so it is a 1.5 . It beats running on Dega or Daytona right now, at least they can race on the 1.5 tracks without plates that just give the" illusion" of real racing.
 
Originally posted by Mopardh9
What is wrong with Chicago, fast track good market area...yeh so it is a 1.5 . It beats running on Dega or Daytona right now, at least they can race on the 1.5 tracks without plates that just give the" illusion" of real racing.
Click to expand...

Chicagoland ain't all bad but I'd rather see a better track be used instead.
 
Chicago and Kansas. One Vegas is enough, we don't need three.
 
Get rid of PIR, and Vegas... Bring in some more Bristols and Richmonds..
 
Im sitll going with New Hampshier its a ugly lookintrack
 
NONE!!!! I liek all the tracks, a few could use improvements but all tracks are great!!!
 
Originally posted by followthe18
Daytona and/or Dega
Click to expand...

How about Daytona & Talladega & throw in New Hampshire for good measure & give the dates up for 4 more short tracks & 2 more road courses?:)
 
RO--- I think you are right.!! <<G>> I really don't want to see "any" of them Dozed up--- because there is always "some Type" of racing that can use the surface... However.... I do think some of these tracks need to "Lose a Date"...and NOT JUST SO TEXAS CAN GET A SECOND RACE.!!! Their times have overlived the Market conditions for the area--and they can't support 2 races any Longer... These New Tracks in Kansas, Chicago-- Colorado--and "Future Oregon"--should be filled first... Then---Whoever can put up the Best Money for the Show---should get the Next Race....
I do think "Nascar" should Limit the Tracks to 5 years of racing to "Build a Reputation" of Good raceing--Big Pay-Offs--and Large if not sell Out Crowds... If after 5 years--they can't produce... Move it.!!:rolleyes:
 
Kansas City has my vote, because it's a replica of Chicago, which is a replica of Las Vegas, which is similar to Texas, which is eerile similar to Atlanta and Charlotte...you get the idea.

I say keep New Hampshire. Maybe only have one race a year there instead of two, but I like the fact that it makes the driver work for his position. It's better than all the cookie-cutters.
 
My VOTE is BRISTOL! TEAR THE DAMN THING DOWN! I hate Short track racing!
 
Originally posted by Cubby
My VOTE is BRISTOL! TEAR THE DAMN THING DOWN! I hate Short track racing!
Click to expand...

Tell us how you really feel, cubby! :D


Bristol ain't going anywhere. Neither race~for a long time!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom