Will we ever get rid of the playoff?

Wrangler1 said:
My bold prediction for 2018 is that Brian will add a 4th stage to each race for a green white checkers. It will be marketed as the Last Chance Dash and produce game 7 moments each and every week!
Click to expand...
Please restrict such comments to peer-mails and other private messaging systems. Brian generates enough stupid ideas without us giving him any public help. :rolleyes:
 
Snappy D said:
I read somwhere, sorry can't find the article but that back in 2004 when The Chase was originally introduced was that NASCAR always wanted to have the 2014-2016 version of the system but industry backlash was so huge, that they decided to install it in increments
Click to expand...
Whoever wrote that was giving NASCAR way too much credit for possessing advance planning skills.
 
Simple Fan said:
That's what's great about a playoff though. Someone could spoil the playoff drivers fun and force a driver to points race which a lot of you seem to be fans of. I don't see how having all the cars in the field takes away from a playoff, to me it only adds intrigue.

As for a championship caliber driver getting knocked out in the last three races, so what? If they can't perform good enough to advance to the final then they don't deserve to be there anyway. Winning is the most important part of racing and a playoff puts a big emphasis on winning which is how it should be.

I think the bonus point are bogus and don't really do anything. I like the stage racing but the bonus points are irrelevant to me. Winning is all that really matters.
Click to expand...
I never did understand the Ricky Bobby "if you ain't first you're last" winning is everything mentality. There's no shame in taking a 10th place car and finishing 4th with it.

Winning is important, but it shouldn't be the end all be all in a 1 vs. 39 sport. The 2017 changes have swung the pendulum a little bit back in the direction of consistency, which is a good thing.
 
ToyYoda said:
I never did understand the Ricky Bobby "if you ain't first you're last" winning is everything mentality. There's no shame in taking a 10th place car and finishing 4th with it.

Winning is important, but it shouldn't be the end all be all in a 1 vs. 39 sport. The 2017 changes have swung the pendulum a little bit back in the direction of consistency, which is a good thing.
Click to expand...

There is tremendous skill in taking a mediocre car and putting it in the top 10. It's a shame the networks don't show some kind of "biggest movers" chart every so often during the race. Hell, there should be a cash prize for the biggest mover during the race.
 
ToyYoda said:
I never did understand the Ricky Bobby "if you ain't first you're last" winning is everything mentality. There's no shame in taking a 10th place car and finishing 4th with it.

Winning is important, but it shouldn't be the end all be all in a 1 vs. 39 sport. The 2017 changes have swung the pendulum a little bit back in the direction of consistency, which is a good thing.
Click to expand...

I think it would be far more difficult to take a 10th place car and make it a 6th place car as opposed to unloading well and then checking out in clean and winning the race.
 
ToyYoda said:
I never did understand the Ricky Bobby "if you ain't first you're last" winning is everything mentality. There's no shame in taking a 10th place car and finishing 4th with it.

Winning is important, but it shouldn't be the end all be all in a 1 vs. 39 sport. The 2017 changes have swung the pendulum a little bit back in the direction of consistency, which is a good thing.
Click to expand...

For me winning is all that matters. Could care less if Kyle Busch took a 10th place car and finished 4th, he didn't win. They race to win not be consistent.
 
NJJammer said:
There is tremendous skill in taking a mediocre car and putting it in the top 10. It's a shame the networks don't show some kind of "biggest movers" chart every so often during the race. Hell, there should be a cash prize for the biggest mover during the race.
Click to expand...

They show the biggest movers all the time. No need to give a prize for that though.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
I think it would be far more difficult to take a 10th place car and make it a 6th place car as opposed to unloading well and then checking out in clean and winning the race.
Click to expand...

Difficult maybe but not as rewarding as winning the race.
 
Simple Fan said:
For me winning is all that matters. Could care less if Kyle Busch took a 10th place car and finished 4th, he didn't win. They race to win not be consistent.
Click to expand...
You're depriving yourself of seeing much of the best racing on the track. TV makes this mistake all the time. Those 6 drivers a quarter of a second apart may only be competing for 23rd, but they're going to put on much better show for the last five laps than the guy with a 6-second lead.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
You're depriving yourself of seeing much of the best racing on the track. TV makes this mistake all the time. Those 6 drivers a quarter of a second apart may only be competing for 23rd, but they're going to put on much better show for the last five laps than the guy with a 6-second lead.
Click to expand...

I'm not depriving myself of anything. I see that racing same as anyone else and yeah it can be good racing. Doesn't change thef act that winning is the most important thing in racing. Sure 22nd and 23rd could put on the best show of the race but in the end they didn't win which should have been their goal. I dont see how,winning by six seconds takes away from a win, it may have been easier but it still feels better than finishing 23rd.
 
Simple Fan said:
For me winning is all that matters. Could care less if Kyle Busch took a 10th place car and finished 4th, he didn't win. They race to win not be consistent.
Click to expand...
They race to get the best finish possible. Look at Kyle Busch and Joey Logano at Vegas a couple weeks ago. That wasn't a race for the win, but that position was obviously pretty important to both of them.
 
We're after different things. I don't care how the drivers feel at the end of the race; I want to be entertained during it. A spread of several seconds between each of the top five drivers doesn't entertain me. There's nothing going on until they have to pit. Three cars fighting for the Lucky Dog position for several laps entertains me; they're doing something.
 
Simple Fan said:
Difficult maybe but not as rewarding as winning the race.
Click to expand...

Obviously you are in the race to win it and that is the ultimate prize whether you luck into it or do it with skill. As a race fan I can't tell you how much I enjoy seeing a driver with an ill handling car just driving the wheels off it to get all he can without wrecking it. They don't show much of that sort of thing on TV anymore but when I used to attend races sometimes the best part of it was watching a driver just muscle his car around and taking positions.
 
One of the best times I've had at the track was watching Mr. Excitement at Charlotte, getting a lap back in those pre-Lucky Dog days. He got an excellent restart from the inside lane, then held the leaders off for several laps before another caution saved his bacon (and boy, did he have a lot of bacon). I remember his spotter telling him, "Jimmy Spencer, you are one hard-driving son of a bitch!!!" He didn't win, but he had the crowd on its feet.
 
Charlie Spencer said:
We're after different things. I don't care how the drivers feel at the end of the race; I want to be entertained during it. A spread of several seconds between each of the top five drivers doesn't entertain me. There's nothing going on until they have to pit. Three cars fighting for the Lucky Dog position for several laps entertains me; they're doing something.
Click to expand...

Skoalbandit33 said:
Obviously you are in the race to win it and that is the ultimate prize whether you luck into it or do it with skill. As a race fan I can't tell you how much I enjoy seeing a driver with an ill handling car just driving the wheels off it to get all he can without wrecking it. They don't show much of that sort of thing on TV anymore but when I used to attend races sometimes the best part of it was watching a driver just muscle his car around and taking positions.
Click to expand...


I enjoy racing just as much and yeah the racing in the back can be entertaining. Seeing a driver handle a loose racecar is great stuff as well but has nothing do with the mind set that winning is the most important thing about racing. I can enjoy the whole race from 1st to 40th but winning is still all that matters.
 
Simple Fan said:
I enjoy racing just as much and yeah the racing in the back can be entertaining. Seeing a driver handle a loose racecar is great stuff as well but has nothing do with the mind set that winning is the most important thing about racing. I can enjoy the whole race from 1st to 40th but winning is still all that matters.
Click to expand...

I am sorry for not making myself clear as winning a race is the most important thing whether you are better than everyone else or luck into a win. Every race will have 39 losers so instead of watching someone like Truex who unloads perfectly once or twice a year ride around in clean air for 3.5 hours I would rather watch guys that are racing each other and/or the track. I want to be 100% clear in stating that I do not believe that taking a 10th place care and finishing in 6th place is better than winning the race although in many cases it is tougher to do and more entertaining to watch.
 
Skoalbandit33 said:
I am sorry for not making myself clear as winning a race is the most important thing whether you are better than everyone else or luck into a win. Every race will have 39 losers so instead of watching someone like Truex who unloads perfectly once or twice a year ride around in clean air for 3.5 hours I would rather watch guys that are racing each other and/or the track. I want to be 100% clear in stating that I do not believe that taking a 10th place care and finishing in 6th place is better than winning the race although in many cases it is tougher to do and more entertaining to watch.
Click to expand...

Most definitely, we are on the same page, I enjoy those aspects of a race to and I'm not just watching the leader for 500 miles. Some of the best racing does happen in the back I don't deny that but at the end of the day they are out there to win and that should be the goal. I want to my driver win though and I know he can every week so thats what I expect. Anything less is a failure even if he did put on a driving clinic that was entertaining.
 
ToyYoda said:
I never did understand the Ricky Bobby "if you ain't first you're last" winning is everything mentality. There's no shame in taking a 10th place car and finishing 4th with it.

Winning is important, but it shouldn't be the end all be all in a 1 vs. 39 sport. The 2017 changes have swung the pendulum a little bit back in the direction of consistency, which is a good thing.
Click to expand...
Not really....winning still gets you in the Chase which is the main goal, all the stages do is bunch the field...like the phantom cautions.
 
I agree with the notion that it'll take a big, new "stakeholder" that has no interest in such a system to bring about such a dramatic change. It's apparent that Brian views the Chase, Playoff, whatever you want to call it as his baby and a large part of creating his own legacy.

But I think ultimately the chances of that happening aren't very good. In other sports the playoffs have only expanded through the years and they show no signs of slowing down; the NFL will probably expand to fourteen teams in the near future. The purists' sport, MLB, has a ten-team playoff now. F1 got rid of its double points finale but that wouldn't compare to entirely doing away with a playoff format. It would be awfully unprecedented in American sports.
 
Simple Fan said:
For me winning is all that matters. Could care less if Kyle Busch took a 10th place car and finished 4th, he didn't win. They race to win not be consistent.
Click to expand...
If you're consistently good all year, but only win 1 or 2 races that means a hell of a lot to me....it means you know how to set up your car, you know what it takes to build good engines, and you know how to manage in race situations.....consistency needs to be rewarded not scoffed at.
 
The 93/94 Rusty/Dale battles was some of the best racing I can remember. Rusty dominated the short tracks.
 
Mopardh9 said:
If you're consistently good all year, but only win 1 or 2 races that means a hell of a lot to me....it means you know how to set up your car, you know what it takes to build good engines, and you know how to manage in race situations.....consistency needs to be rewarded not scoffed at.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Look at 1996. I'm one of the biggest Gordon fans around, and I have absolutely no problem with him finishing 2nd to Terry Labonte that year despite winning several more races.
 
AuzGrams said:
Obviously Homestead-Miami with only 2 doesn't seem right, but does 4? 2 drivers for 1 spot in Homestead seems a lot better IMO, and in the event of wreck maybe there's a repair rule or backup rule.
Click to expand...

I'm anti-playoffs period, the whole concept is ridiculous for reasons already mentioned a thousand times before. It won't change no matter how long they do it.

But...

NASCAR would have been smarter to make the Homestead Bowl a battle of two. As with most of what they do, they're being shortsighted to make it four because four gives them a greater chance of having marquee stars as finalists. The best thing any Chase ever produced was the 2011 finale, which would have been less intense, not more intense, if more than two drivers were in contention. If they have to contrive to recreate something every year, that should be it.
 
gnomesayin said:
I'm anti-playoffs period, the whole concept is ridiculous for reasons already mentioned a thousand times before. It won't change no matter how long they do it.

But...

NASCAR would have been smarter to make the Homestead Bowl a battle of two. As with most of what they do, they're being shortsighted to make it four because four gives them a greater chance of having marquee stars as finalists. The best thing any Chase ever produced was the 2011 finale, which would have been less intense, not more intense, if more than two drivers were in contention. If they have to contrive to recreate something every year, that should be it.
Click to expand...

Yep agreed. People will use the "but what happens if BOTH wreck!" argument, which is true, I'm not sure how you figure that out. But 8>4>2 makes sense for all 3 series.
 
Dale Earnhardt's championship seasons with the exception of 1987 and 1990 didn't have a lot of wins when he won his Cups, but he had many top 5's and top 10's which was more impressive to me because it showed RCR had dependeple cars, could make set up changes during the race and Earnhardt took care of the equipment. There were years Bill Elliott or Mark Martin won more races but weren't consistent enough in the overall body of work to win a championship. In 2003, I wasn't a particular fan of Matt Kenseth but I rooted against him every week to wreck or break and it just didn't happen. That dude's team, equipment, calls in the pit and his driver skill were just on another level which won him a Cup with only one win. I had no problem with it at the time because the eye test told me he was the best driver on the best team all year
 
Snappy D said:
Dale Earnhardt's championship seasons with the exception of 1987 and 1990 didn't have a lot of wins when he won his Cups, but he had many top 5's and top 10's which was more impressive to me because it showed RCR had dependeple cars, could make set up changes during the race and Earnhardt took care of the equipment. There were years Bill Elliott or Mark Martin won more races but weren't consistent enough in the overall body of work to win a championship. In 2003, I wasn't a particular fan of Matt Kenseth but I rooted against him every week to wreck or break and it just didn't happen. That dude's team, equipment, calls in the pit and his driver skill were just on another level which won him a Cup with only one win. I had no problem with it at the time because the eye test told me he was the best driver on the best team all year
Click to expand...
Exactly...and this is the way it should be!
 
2 Sweet said:
Agreed. Look at 1996. I'm one of the biggest Gordon fans around, and I have absolutely no problem with him finishing 2nd to Terry Labonte that year despite winning several more races.
Click to expand...
Not even a full decade later and Gordon wins that championship. It took too long for them to give bonus points to race winners. I'm not sure 185 was even enough.
 
Ryan Newman's 8 wins in 2003 season. Finished sixth overall.
Denny Hamlin's 8 wins in 2010 season. Finished second overall to Jimmie Johnson.

Wins are IMPORTANT but consistency over the long haul of a season should win CHAMPIONSHIPS.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Not even a full decade later and Gordon wins that championship. It took too long for them to give bonus points to race winners. I'm not sure 185 was even enough.
Click to expand...
I think the Latford scale would have been fine if the winner could top out at 200. They should have given 190 for the win plus the 5 for leading a lap, plus potentially another 5 for leading the most.
 
NJJammer said:
Ryan Newman's 8 wins in 2003 season. Finished sixth overall.
Denny Hamlin's 8 wins in 2010 season. Finished second overall to Jimmie Johnson.

Wins are IMPORTANT but consistency over the long haul of a season should win CHAMPIONSHIPS.
Click to expand...
Newman's '03 season is somehow one of the least-respected seasons in NASCAR history. People forget the guy also had more Top 5s than anyone and had more Top 10s than anyone besides Kenseth. He got wrecked out in so many incidents not of his doing that year.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Newman's '03 season is somehow one of the least-respected seasons in NASCAR history. People forget the guy also had more Top 5s than anyone and had more Top 10s than anyone besides Kenseth. He got wrecked out in so many incidents not of his doing that year.
Click to expand...
Looking back at racing statistics, that season stands out as an anomaly. To have so many wins, top 5s and top 10s and to finish SIXTH! So were most of those DNFs wrecks or blown motors?
 
NJJammer said:
Looking back at racing statistics, that season stands out as an anomaly. To have so many wins, top 5s and top 10s and to finish SIXTH! So were most of those DNFs wrecks or blown motors?
Click to expand...
He's always had the most retarded luck on plate tracks.





Taken out by Steve Park on lap 1 at Fontana:



Taken out by Harvick at Homestead:



Got into something with Jr. at Atlanta with just a few laps left. Hard to pin blame on anyone here (4:46:30) -

 
FLRacingFan said:
He's always had the most retarded luck on plate tracks.





Taken out by Steve Park on lap 1 at Fontana:



Taken out by Harvick at Homestead:



Got into something with Jr. at Atlanta with just a few laps left. Hard to pin blame on anyone here (4:46:30) -

Click to expand...

Thanks for the education as I wasn't following the sport until 2010.
 
FLRacingFan said:
Newman's '03 season is somehow one of the least-respected seasons in NASCAR history. People forget the guy also had more Top 5s than anyone and had more Top 10s than anyone besides Kenseth. He got wrecked out in so many incidents not of his doing that year.
Click to expand...

I think that was the year Matt Borland somehow managed to make Newman's fuel cell bigger........:D
 
I hope not. The system makes them race harder when it counts. Only thing I don't like is sometimes tracks are better suited for some teams giving them an advantage at different parts of the playoff. Astounds me Harvick doesn't have 3 titles now with the last 3 playoffs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom