To start off this edition of #3WideBlog, I have to be honest with you all, I didn't watch Sundays NASCAR Sprint Cup Series race at Kansas this weekend. I know, I know, I missed what was dubbed a "great" race by some. But some others thought the race was, again, "boring" or lacking "action. I didn't want to be caught up in this discussion again, so I made the decision to go out with my family instead. Personally I couldn't handle another race on a 1.5 mile track anyway, but I was just glad Dale Earnhardt Jr. didn't finally snap that streak and me miss it. In my opinion there needs to be less of these "cookie cutter" tracks on the Sprint Cup schedule and things need to change.
In the late 90's and early 2000's with the expanding popularity of NASCAR across the United States these 1.5 Mile "cookie cutter" tracks started popping up more and more. The tracks I'm talking about are Las Vegas, Kansas, Kentucky and Chicago. To a lesser extent Atlanta, Texas and Charlotte. Ten of NASCAR's 36 points races are held at these 1.5 mile tracks. This is too much. Four of the Chase races are also held on these tracks, also too much. NASCAR needs some diversity in the tracks it visits.
Personally I enjoy the "dog leg" style 1.5 ovals of Atlanta, Charlotte and Texas, but there is no need for 5 dates on the schedule dedicated to them. I would never touch Charlottes races they are a part of NASCAR's History (Aside from the All-Star Race, which I feel should travel). Texas and Atlanta though need to be changed. One race, at one track, one year then switch for next year. This would bring us down to 3 "dog leg" track races.
Then theres the "D-Shaped" 1.5 mile tracks. Of Las Vegas, Kansas, Kentucky, and Chicago. NOT my favourite. These too should be cut to 3 races. I am sorry for the fans of these areas or these types of tracks, but the masses have spoken. I dont care how they change it, or how they switch back and forth but something has to happen because 5 stops at these types of tracks is too much.
I am a short track fan, So if they took my advice and had 6 races at 1.5 mile tracks instead 10, I would pack those extra openings with different short tracks. I would love to see Sprint Cup series race at Iowa Speedway, a 3/4 mile track with lots of excitement. Or what about any of the 100's of short tracks across the United States. Here's another novel idea, Expand further into Canada!
Either way, in my opinion, NASCAR needs to do some work on their schedule. Bring in some tracks that are unique, and not like something you already have. Go back to "The Rock", revive North Wilkesboro, Build a new track. Anything but another 1.5 mile track, Please NASCAR? Please?
Smitty OUT
I can see your point to some extent... personally, I think it would be really cool if every race was at a different track, so every week you had something different to look at. However, your argument that there are too many dog leg style tracks on the schedule is a bit weak. Five races out of 36 is not much, and if you ask me, Atlanta shouldn't have lost its second date (OK I am biased because it's my home track, but seriously there have been as many great races there as anywhere, and it's a big market). If you look at tracks that have second dates, there are three 2.5 milers (Daytona, Talladega, Pocono), a 2-miler (Michigan), three 1.5 mile tracks (TX, Kansas, Charlotte), and six tracks that are a mile or less (Phoenix, Bristol, Martinsville, Richmond, Dover, Loudon). Of those six, three are less than a mile. That sounds like a pretty good balance to me.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, the idea of swapping races back and forth year to year, i.e. Texas this year, Atlanta the next, then back to Texas the following year... doesn't make sense logistically. It's got to be one or the other because of sponsorship, planning, etc.
More short tracks would be great- I agree. But at the expense of which tracks? Being a long time fan, I'd like to maintain some of the history of the sport as long as it is feasible. For example, though I've never been a huge fan of the racing at Michigan, between it's long standing as a stop on the Cup schedule and the ties to Detroit, it's hard to give up a race there.
Bringing back The Rock, adding Iowa or bringing in a new short track would be nice, but especially considering the quality of the facilities you mentioned you'd like to see knocked off the schedule, I think the options are limited, at best.
I agree with you aswell about every race being at a different track, would definately be interesting. I made no remark about too many "dog leg" tracks, there are only 3, just too many races on schedule being held on them. I think 3 "D Shaped" 1.5 milers and 3 "dog leg" 1.5 milers is a fair balance.
DeleteDaytona and Talladega are untouchable, they are basically the only tracks of their kind and loved by the fans. Grouping Pocono with those two is silly, the racing is completely different, and it is a unique track. On the other hand Pocono doesnt need 2 races. And the 6 tracks all 1 mile or less are all different configurations unlike the 1.5 milers, but they too do not all need 2 dates.
Ok the idea of switching back and forth might not be feasiable but it sure is a novel one. Something has to happen to spice it up though.
More short tracks at the expense of the 1.5 milers, no need to remove heritage of sport, just juggle schedule, remove some dates from 2 date tracks and youre wide open for new things.
I am more than certain if NASCAR gave any hint to a track not on the schedule that they were considering going there, facilities would come up to par quickly
Thank you for your remarks :)
Good discussion... Yeah didn't mean to say that you were suggesting getting rid of the dog leg tracks... just some of the races at them. Also, I certainly didn't mean to group Pocono and Daytona/Dega together as similar in any way other than their length! I guess my point is, a lot of these places, in my opinion, are untouchable. Particularly in this economy, no one is going to build a new track or improve an existing track to the standards of Cup racing. It's just not a good business model, at least now and for the forseeable future. It made sense in the 90s, and unfortunately too many tracks were built and too many seats added at existing tracks. Perhaps that's a subject for a completely different discussion...
ReplyDeleteWhat I will agree with is that there may be too many D-Shaped ovals. And those could be cut down without losing any historically significant tracks/races. I wasn't a fan of adding a second Kansas date until I really did some research on the facility there... It's truly an attraction now with the casino and all the retail around the track. Hard to tell them they need to go back to one race now. California seems to be a track that most people aren't a fan of, so there's a spot that could go to a short track. Rather than taking a race away from California fans, however, I think the only way to do it would be to build a short track out there, or upgrade an existing one. Again, that's going to be hard to do especially when the state of California has no money to spend.
When short tracks (1 mile or less) make up twelve of the 36 races, 33%... and all of those short tracks already have two dates, it is hard to argue for more at the expense of others. If variety is what we need, maybe we keep the same number of short track races, but add more tracks. But that means Loudon, Dover, Phoenix, Martinsville, Richmond or Bristol loses a race date. Loudon is the only one of those that should even be considered, ever, for losing a date. Another thing to remember... This is Sprint Cup racing... the big boys race at the big tracks. That's what was envisioned by Bill France when he build Daytona and Talladega, and it needs to stay that way. Short tracks, where the sport began, need to have a big piece of the schedule pie too, and I'd argue they already do.
I don't know if this is true out not. And I really want to know the truth! The rumor is that major track owners were buying the new tracks that had been built to draw NASCAR races! That these tracks have been bought by current track owners to stop future NASCAR races! I'm speaking of the mile track south of Denver. I was told Mr B. Smith's holding company purchased this track to insure that there would never have a chance to sport a NASCAR race, thereby keeping all the races at their tracks.
ReplyDeleteI'm personally sick of NASCAR's schedule! If they, NASCAR would put tracks like the Rock back in the schedule, happy days may be heading back!