Who is the NASCAR GOAT?

Blaze said:
What they SHOULD have done instead of this Chase, Is just bump the winners points up enough where 2nd place can't get the same amount no matter what and called it a day. Maybe give the winner......20 or 30 more points than the max 2nd could get. Heck maybe more than that, maybe less. But you didn't need a playoff to fix that problem, when that problem is worse now.
Click to expand...

What they should/should've done...

1st - 50 points (5 playoff points)
2nd - 39 points
3rd - 38 points
40th - 1 point

Stage Winners - 5 points (1 playoff point), 2nd - 4 points, 3rd - 3 points, 4th - 2 points, 5th - 1 point.

Also I disagree with the concept of a Championship 4 instead of a head-to-head final 2, but part of having 4 cars in the finale allows the "win and you advance" concept.
 
AuzGrams said:
What they should/should've done...

1st - 50 points (5 playoff points)
2nd - 39 points
3rd - 38 points
40th - 1 point

Stage Winners - 5 points (1 playoff point), 2nd - 4 points, 3rd - 3 points, 4th - 2 points, 5th - 1 point.

Also I disagree with the concept of a Championship 4 instead of a head-to-head final 2, but part of having 4 cars in the finale allows the "win and you advance" concept.
Click to expand...

Having no playoffs at all is what should have been done IMO.
 
AuzGrams said:
I'm on the fence about that... there is a lot of people with short attention spans and all that anymore.
Click to expand...

How many people with these short attention spans would not be fans under the old system but under the current system they're into it? There's no publicly available stats on this available anywhere I reckon.

It also encourages people to watch fewer races if they treat the title as the be all, end all as they do in stick-and-ball sports. If you're a Kyle Busch fan and are only really interested in if he wins the title, why would you watch any races from March to August?
 
Privateer said:
It also encourages people to watch fewer races if they treat the title as the be all, end all as they do in stick-and-ball sports. If you're a Kyle Busch fan and are only really interested in if he wins the title, why would you watch any races from March to August?
Click to expand...

Because the guy has racked up a lot of playoff points and is the regular season champion most likely? The title race isn't an end it for all for everyone anyway I don't think.
 
Privateer said:
How many people with these short attention spans would not be fans under the old system but under the current system they're into it? There's no publicly available stats on this available anywhere I reckon.

It also encourages people to watch fewer races if they treat the title as the be all, end all as they do in stick-and-ball sports. If you're a Kyle Busch fan and are only really interested in if he wins the title, why would you watch any races from March to August?
Click to expand...
Entertainment is the #1 answer. A great race is a great race regardless of who the winner is.
We have all witnessed drivers winning a race when in fact they never had a chance except for a real late caution and a messed up restart.
 
jaqua19 said:
Sure. But like I said, NASCAR doesn't care about fans who are gone. They care about the fans they will have in 10-20 years, I would guess. A year long point system is not the way to make this sport popular with that demographic. As much as some of us don't like the playoffs, the playoffs are what is going to attract and keep fans under 20 years old, and THAT is who NASCAR cares about.

Be water. Go with the flow. Revman said it best, it's racing.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with your assessment of the current situation. But how many of the new younger generation were never exposed to Nascar because there parents quit watching it when the playoffs began?
Nascar is not attractive enough to just pull in people who were never exposed to it when they were younger. You need them to already be interested in the team/driver/manufacturer drama through some current fan, most likely a parent.
 
Switchback said:
I don't disagree with your assessment of the current situation. But how many of the new younger generation were never exposed to Nascar because there parents quit watching it when the playoffs began?
Nascar is not attractive enough to just pull in people who were never exposed to it when they were younger. You need them to already be interested in the team/driver/manufacturer drama through some current fan, most likely a parent.
Click to expand...
I agree. I'm not defending the system, moreso just trying to normalize why what we have is what we got.

They may modify it, but playoffs are here to stay, and they have to at this point.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
Switchback said:
I don't disagree with your assessment of the current situation. But how many of the new younger generation were never exposed to Nascar because there parents quit watching it when the playoffs began?
Nascar is not attractive enough to just pull in people who were never exposed to it when they were younger. You need them to already be interested in the team/driver/manufacturer drama through some current fan, most likely a parent.
Click to expand...

My take is that if NASCAR turned their back on the past to capture a new future, it will take them 30 years to make back the money they have lost in the last 15 by doing so, and at the end of the day, isn't that what this is all about? Let's also face the fact that during the 90's NASCAR got more popular by BEING popular. It fed off itself. When NASCAR chased away the current fans, the sport became less attractive to the new fans. It's kind of like being a Kardashian, you're famous for BEING famous. If they stopped TRYING to be famous, in two years nobody would remember who they were.
 
I never thought of it as points racing, I just always thought of it as the formula to win championships was to be consistently pretty good EVERY week. For all of my life, that's the way pretty much every form of racing was. Some might have rewarded winning more than others, but every system I can think of was basically some variation of the same thing. I would certainly take that over someone winning early in the season, and then not doing squat for the next twenty plus races. Today's system actually makes it FAR EASIER to get by with mediocre performance than in the old days. Ryan Newman proved it, Jimmie Johnson proved it, and if the current system would have come one year sooner, Dale Jr. would have proven it by not winning at all. Maybe my point of view is because I viewed the old NASCAR season as a test of endurance, and NOBODY loves endurance sports car racing more than I do. You couldn't just be good in spots, you had to grind it out EVERY WEEK, and those days when you should have finished 15th, but scraped out an 8th place made a difference. Now it's all just instant gratification.
 
Why are the talking heads hammering points down our throats every other sentence if it isn’t points racing?
Ooooooooh, stage points!!!!!!! Ooooooooh, playoff points!!!!!!
 
Formerjackman said:
I never thought of it as points racing, I just always thought of it as the formula to win championships was to be consistently pretty good EVERY week. For all of my life, that's the way pretty much every form of racing was. Some might have rewarded winning more than others, but every system I can think of was basically some variation of the same thing. I would certainly take that over someone winning early in the season, and then not doing squat for the next twenty plus races. Today's system actually makes it FAR EASIER to get by with mediocre performance than in the old days. Ryan Newman proved it, Jimmie Johnson proved it, and if the current system would have come one year sooner, Dale Jr. would have proven it by not winning at all. Maybe my point of view is because I viewed the old NASCAR season as a test of endurance, and NOBODY loves endurance sports car racing more than I do. You couldn't just be good in spots, you had to grind it out EVERY WEEK, and those days when you should have finished 15th, but scraped out an 8th place made a difference. Now it's all just instant gratification.
Click to expand...

Ryan Newman didn't prove anything, he finished 2nd at Homestead & I don't understand why you're bringing up Dale Jr's 2013 season when it's not comparable.

Also this playoff point system makes things much less of a crapshoot of who actually is in Miami. No doubt the 2014-16 system had flaws that I feel NASCAR addressed.

Who has actually won a race early and mailed it in under this playoff point system?
 
Last edited:
AuzGrams said:
Ryan Newman didn't prove anything, he finished 2nd at Homestead & I don't understand why you're bringing up Dale Jr's 2013 season when it's not comparable.

Also this playoff point system makes things much less of a crapshoot of who actually is in Miami. No doubt the 2014-16 system had flaws that I feel NASCAR addressed.

Who has actually won a race early and mailed it in under this playoff point system?
Click to expand...
Nobody.
 
jaqua19 said:
So this thread inspired to do something a little fun.

I typed up an Excel spreadsheet and created a formula to calculate/rank the top 30 winners of all time - my unofficial GOAT ranking. The formula is by no means fool proof, but what it is, is..

The mean of career wins and championships, minus the number of seasons raced, + the number of championships.

(Mean of wins& titles)-(seasons raced)+titles. To factor in the pre-modern era, I doubled the # of seasons for those drivers. Petty's win number made his calculated score a HUGE outlier.. so for him, I decided to make his score the average of the top 4 driver scores + the standard deviation of them.

It was a bit tricky for Kyle Busch, Keselowski, and Logano, champions who aren't very close to being finished. The nature of the formula relies on an almost complete career..using their actual season #s would put them at the top, so I took a guess at how many seasons they would be racing, and it placed them in a more appropriate area. Kyle Busch would maybe be a bit higher, but I'm satisfied with it. As wins and titles cumulate, the formula would bump their ranking score. Active drivers wouldn't be accurate represented until they are finished, or we have an idea of when they will be.

Harvick ranks above Kyle using this formula due to the seasons, but Kyle will only need a few more wins to pass him, and will continue to move up the list.

Edit, didn't realize the 84 typo for Johnson, his score would be 31.25, making him #2. unless he wins again.



Here!

Feel free to make suggestions / add points for non statistical factors, llike talent, competition, woulda coulda, influence etc
b283fef8d8258b3dd73fd6c174c47f91.jpg
bc76721202746809887785d35c6b0f27.jpg


Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Kyle Busch is listed with 2 championships.
 
AuzGrams said:
Ryan Newman didn't prove anything, he finished 2nd at Homestead & I don't understand why you're bringing up Dale Jr's 2013 season when it's not comparable.

Also this playoff point system makes things much less of a crapshoot of who actually is in Miami. No doubt the 2014-16 system had flaws that I feel NASCAR addressed.

Who has actually won a race early and mailed it in under this playoff point system?
Click to expand...

How about Austin Dillon last year? After winning the Daytona 500, He racked up a grand total of ONE more top five and TWO top tens by the time the playoffs started, yet there he was, with a chance to race for a championship. If he could have lucked into another win during the playoffs, he might have been able to ride it all the way to Homestead. People who have a chance to win a championship should have to be good over 36 weeks, not three or four.
 
AuzGrams said:
Ryan Newman didn't prove anything, he finished 2nd at Homestead & I don't understand why you're bringing up Dale Jr's 2013 season when it's not comparable.

Also this playoff point system makes things much less of a crapshoot of who actually is in Miami. No doubt the 2014-16 system had flaws that I feel NASCAR addressed.

Who has actually won a race early and mailed it in under this playoff point system?
Click to expand...
I think Newman did prove something. He fought and clawed his way into the playoffs and was able to stay with it and make it into the final round. Nobody gave him a chance to make it in much less be there for the last race, but in retrospect, I think he earned his spot.
 
Larsonfan1995 said:
The greatest of all time to me is David Pearson. If he ran full seasons his whole career Petty wouldn't have 7.
Click to expand...

I will refrain from naming him GOAT because so many variables but he’s my favorite driver who raced primarily stock cars (is that term even used any more?) in what were Grand Nationals and became Cup racing.

Just recently I heard a racing writer say that when they were voting for HOF inductees in the first class, Richard Petty said it was wrong to vote him in and not David Pearson cause DP was a better driver. Even I’m not sure about that but yes DP was just incredible.
 
StandOnIt said:
I think Newman did prove something. He fought and clawed his way into the playoffs and was able to stay with it and make it into the final round. Nobody gave him a chance to make it in much less be there for the last race, but in retrospect, I think he earned his spot.
Click to expand...

I agree but you know you got people whining about the system.
 
Formerjackman said:
How about Austin Dillon last year? After winning the Daytona 500, He racked up a grand total of ONE more top five and TWO top tens by the time the playoffs started, yet there he was, with a chance to race for a championship. If he could have lucked into another win during the playoffs, he might have been able to ride it all the way to Homestead. People who have a chance to win a championship should have to be good over 36 weeks, not three or four.
Click to expand...

That's not mailing it in, it's pretty evident the 3 team doesn't have any speed. That's another hypothetical situation regarding another win.
 
harkin said:
I will refrain from naming him GOAT because so many variables but he’s my favorite driver who raced primarily stock cars (is that term even used any more?) in what were Grand Nationals and became Cup racing.

Just recently I heard a racing writer say that when they were voting for HOF inductees in the first class, Richard Petty said it was wrong to vote him in and not David Pearson cause DP was a better driver. Even I’m not sure about that but yes DP was just incredible.
Click to expand...
Petty said that about Pearson?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
NASCAR Apologist said:
.....The playoff has been a raging success.
Click to expand...

I wish we had no stages and no chase.

I think a driver should be rewarded for getting out in front and doing his best to stay there without artificial breathers, only true yellow flags for REAL events/debris should allow drivers who have fallen behind to catch up.

I find it ironic that as the cars have increased parity that NASCAR feels the need to create even more.
 
Formerjackman said:
Well call it what you want, but I don't care if a guy leads 499 laps and finishes second, he shouldn't be able to get within about 20 points of the actual race winner. If the winners and the top 5 and top 10 guys were properly rewarded, the cream would rise to the top without offering all of the other gimmicks. The system we have exists for ONE reason. To keep as many players in the game as long as possible so the fans who stop watching when their driver is out of championship contention will stick around. The same reason the NBA and the NHL allows 2/3rds of the teams to make the playoffs.
Click to expand...

I really disagree with the first sentence. If someone leads all the laps except 1 lap...however that happened... and winds up 2nd...I want them getting rewarded Big Time for it in points. They've already lost the race win and playoff rollover points associated with it. This system has at least incentivized overall race performance, not just showing up at the end (via late race caution or however). That I can appreciate.
 
Privateer said:
Titles post-Matt Kenseth do not mean near as much as they do before. Sorry for repeating a regular talking point, but seriously, they don't. A title before NASCAR changed the rules meant you were THE BEST, period. After the changes, it meant you had a nice run at season's end. And the 2017 onwards titles mean even less than the ones from 2004-2016, because we're only valuing performance in one race and ignoring the other 35. Look at last season, Truex, Kyle Busch, and Harvick were all way better drivers last year than Joey Logano. You cannot come up with any argument to state otherwise. Yet, that's irrelevant and Logano is champion because his team had a better car at Homestead. NASCAR is allowed to determine their champions however they want, but it does mean 5-in-a-row Jimmie Johnson titles ado not mean as much when discussing careers as say Dale's run in the early '90s. The irony is that one of the best drivers of the modern era, Kyle Busch, has the most joke championship win in NASCAR Cup racing history. Then you have things like Truex's title win in 2017, where heading into the playoff end of the season, I think "if Truex does not win this title, it is a disgrace", because he was clearly the best guy all year. I should not be thinking that as a fan.

Champions post-Playoffs introduction (no notes after driver means they would've won under new and old system):

2004 - Kurt Busch, pre-2004 rules: Jeff Gordon
2005 - Tony Stewart
2006 - Jimmie Johnson
2007 - Jimmie Johnson, pre-2004 rules: Jeff Gordon
2008 - Jimmie Johnson, pre-2004 rules: Carl Edwards
2009 - Jimmie Johnson
2010 - Jimmie Johnson, pre-2004 rules: Kevin Harvick
2011 - Tony Stewart, pre-2004 rules: Carl Edwards (2-time champ)
2012 - Brad Keselowski
2013 - Jimmie Johnson
2014 - Kevin Harvick, pre-2004 rules: Jeff Gordon (7th title win)
2015 - Kyle Busch, pre-2004 rules: Kevin Harvick
2016 - Jimmie Johnson, pre-2004 rules: Kevin Harvick (3-time champ)
2017 - Martin Truex Jr.
2018 - Joey Logano, pre-2004 rules: Kyle Busch
Click to expand...

The "but they would have raced it differently" camp must still be on vacation :)
 
Turtle84 said:
The "but they would have raced it differently" camp must still be on vacation :)
Click to expand...
Nah, why beat a dead horse that can't let go of the past and accept that a champion is champion, regardless of the system?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
jaqua19 said:
Nah, why beat a dead horse that can't let go of the past and accept that a champion is champion, regardless of the system?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I don't think wanting an equal weight full season body of work to determine a championship is being unreasonable or unable to let go of the past.

That's a legitimate gripe imo.
 
Turtle84 said:
I don't think wanting an equal weight full season body of work to determine a championship is being unreasonable or unable to let go of the past.

That's a legitimate gripe imo.
Click to expand...
Matt Kenseth won the 2003 title in legitimate, fair and square fashion, but some folks prefer the glitz and glamour associated with having, say, eight wins a season and winning a title despite, say, six retirements. I would like to see the old, season-long format return, but this current playoff format is the best iteration of the playoffs I've seen.
 
Turtle84 said:
I don't think wanting an equal weight full season body of work to determine a championship is being unreasonable or unable to let go of the past.

That's a legitimate gripe imo.
Click to expand...
Of course it is. But saying it's a lesser championship isn't objectively true. You could say it's less weighted and takes less season long impact, but they all use the same rules. 2019's champion is just as legitimate as 1998. Champ is a champ regardless of the format..agree to disagree though..I enjoy your posts

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom