#3WideBlog Opinion: Predetermined Cautions? My Take

     In the wake of recent races having fewer and fewer cautions and more long green flag periods, fans and NASCAR executives have been bouncing ideas around to try and "enhance the product". One suggestion that particularly disturbed me was the thought of predetermined cautions. NASCAR already uses a competition caution under certain conditions, such as the assessment of tire wear, but these are mainly used for safety. In the proposed scenario, a caution would be thrown at a predetermined time purely to bunch up the field in an effort to make the race more "exciting". 

Chairman of Speedway Motorsports
Inc. Bruton Smith (USPresswire)

     Bruton Smith, chairman of Speedway Motorsports Inc., addressed the topic with these comments. “You just can’t sit there and nothing is happening, it ruins the event. It’s damaging to our sport. Look at some of your other sports — they have a mandatory timeout, TV (commercial) time and all these things, and that creates things within the sport." He then went on to say “If you have (cautions) every 20 laps, I don’t care. It adds to the show. Someone once said we were in show business — if we’re in show business, let’s deliver. Let’s deliver that show. Right now, we’re not delivering.” I note with some amusement that these comments come from someone that chairs 5 of the 1.5 mile tracks that have garnered most of the complaints.

    Jeff Gordon wasn't totally against the idea. "I'd rather have that than some mysterious debris caution...The integrity of racing is about letting the race play out, and sometimes that's the most exciting finish, sometimes it's not. Trying to get in the middle of that can be challenging. If you're going to do it, it's got to be something planned in advance, and you take a break. I'm not totally against it."

NASCAR Chairman and CEO Brian France (Getty Images)

     Gladly for myself as a fan, and surely some of the other drivers in the garage, I was pleased that NASCAR chairman Brian France basically shot down that idea from the get-go, in his mid-season press conference held in Daytona prior to the Coke Zero 400. “We've shortened events; It's generally worked well,” France said. “At Pocono it worked well, California worked well, Dover has worked well; We'll look at that". I have to agree with him there, in my opinion knocking a hundred miles off of a few of these events has definitely added a sense of urgency to get to the front faster if you can. France continued, “That we are open to changing The (Chase), wild card did that. It did it in an authentic way. Double-file restarts get us better racing action. Anything that gets something better on the track and doesn't employ a gimmick, we'd be reasonably open to.”. France then went on to say,“What we're not going to do are gimmicky things, I've heard we ought to throw a caution every 10 laps. That's nonsense. We won't do gimmicky things. But we'll do things that incentivize performance, incentivize wins."

     I was more than glad to hear of France's reaction, and also glad to hear NASCAR will not employ any of these "gimmicks" especially the use of predetermined cautions. In my opinion that idea is total nonsense. Just about three months ago everyone was throwing fits at David Reutimann's neck for causing a late race caution at Martinsville, which in turn bunched the field up and caused a separate wreck after the ensuing restart. Now a few months later, because professional drivers can keep their cars between the walls, we all of a sudden need predetermined cautions? Nonsense. If you would like to watch something that has a manufactured story, with a predetermined outcome, flick on the WWE.

Carl Edwards (Getty Images)

     Carl Edwards had some down to earth comments on the subject that I certainly agree with. "It's not gonna be a Game 7 moment every race," he said. "That's what makes some races great. To me, if you start affecting the competition like that, that is analogous to stopping a basketball game if the score gets too far apart and putting the score back even.". He also said, "That, to me is not what auto racing is about. If you let these races play out naturally, and let the racing be racing, sometimes there are some wild things that happen and things happen that are unexpected. That's what makes that true, real drama that happens every once in a while."

     Thank you Carl for some logical comments. I have a hard enough time with the idea of breaking other non-points events into "segments" which is also basically just to bunch the field up as well. However, those are exhibition events, more of a "show" and therefore have far more leeway for that type of tweaking. If those tactics are used in points events, I think NASCAR loses integrity.

    I'll leave you with some other comments that Jeff Gordon made that were a bit more intriguing. "If you really want to know what I would like to see, I would like to see heat races and invert the field and have a 50- to 100-lap shootout. I mean, that is what I grew up racing. It's exciting, it's fun, and I never knew what a 500-mile race was until I came into NASCAR, other than the Indy 500." He then posed a thought-provoking question. "What's more important? History and tradition or the most entertaining form of racing? I don't know. I'm glad I'm not making those decisions."

     I am also glad I am not charged with those types of decisions, but heats and a feature? That's what we've got at most of the short tracks here in Canada but for NASCAR? I'm not sure. I'm confident that NASCAR will do the right thing, and use science or a different rules package (aero, tires, something...) rather than gimmicks to "enhance their product" if they feel any changes are necessary.

Quotes via SBNation.com, Sportingnews.com & USAToday.com