I keep hearing from longtime NASCAR fans lamenting about how the sport has changed so much that they’re losing interest.
I don’t doubt two things. First, I don’t doubt that the sport has changed and that it will continue to do so. Second, I don’t doubt that there are fans who feel like they’re losing interest.
What I am far less certain of, however, is whether those two things are as directly connected as the folks who I hear from seem to believe.
“Ten years ago I never missed a race,” these fans will say. “My buddies and I would go to six or eight races a year and we never missed a race on television. We didn’t watch the start and the end of the race and take a nap or run errands in the middle, either.”
Something got me thinking about that this weekend. North Carolina and N.C. State were playing a basketball game at noon on Saturday, and 10 years ago I would have built my entire day around that. But this time, it was 12:30 or so before I even remember they were playing.
I still think college basketball is a great sport, and I try very hard not to be a fuddy-duddy. But if you caught me when I wasn’t thinking about it, though, I might let it slip that I don’t think the crowds are as intense or the games are as nail-biting as they were when I was following them more closely.
If I make myself think about it, though, I realize UNC and N.C. State dislike each other less now than they did in “my day” and I know the Tar Heels and Duke haven’t had any epiphany of “détente” in their rivalry.
I also understand that NCAA basketball is a bigger, more complicated sport now than it was when I was in school in the early 1980s (OK, very early since I graduated in 1981). The arenas are bigger. Television money is bigger. I read somewhere the other day that North Carolina’s basketball program is now valued at $26 billion to top a list, even though I have no idea how they figure something like that out.
That’s all happened to NASCAR, too, and for the life of me I’ve never understood how that can be considered anything but a positive.
I know plenty of fans think it’s bad when NASCAR isn’t growing, as it appears not to be right now. The third option is to say exactly where things are, and stagnation equals decline in almost every kind of business.
Change is going to happen, both in the sport and in our lives. Why don’t some fans “care” about racing as much as they once did, spend as much money and/or time following it and devote as big of a slice of their devotion to it as they once did?
Fans change too. It doesn’t really how old you are, but 10 years ago it’s far more likely that you took more “adventuresome” trips than you do now.
Think about how you felt about cars when you were 10 years younger. You might not have had enough money to buy the car you wanted, but chances are if you could have you would have had a car that seemed racier than they one you were driving.
Now, you’re probably more likely to be able to buy something closer to what you want, chances are you’ll still pass on the sports car because what you need is dependable transportation with nicer accoutrements than you once could afford.
Maybe you were still single 10 years ago and you could stay up two straight nights roaming around the infield or the campground “partying” with your buds and handing out beads to attractive women.
These days, even if you didn’t know your wife would kill you for doing that you’d be in bed for week trying to recover from stuff like that.
Maybe 10 years ago you were home on Sunday afternoons and didn’t have much better to do that sit around with a couple of your buddies watching the race all afternoon, telling lies and talking about how rich you were all going to be one day. Now, you’ve got a couple of kids and they want to go see grandma on Sunday afternoon.
As ratings have dropped recently, people who study these things say the decline is most noticeable among older viewers.
It seems like to me that’s the pressure that all sports and entertainment businesses face in our world. Even if you have loyal customers, you have to work harder and harder to keep convincing them it’s time to get off the couch or leave the house and spend money to come see a race rather than putting it in the kids’ college fund.
Isn’t that why advertisers seem so drilled in on getting the 25-year-old consumer interested in buying or consuming a product?
Monday, January 14, 2008
It is certainly not the way it used to be
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
108 comments:
David, why do you keep insisting that the falling ratings and attendance are for any other reason than NASCAR's leadership?
There is a common level of discontent with NASCAR that has grown substantially since Brian France took over. If that is not established fact, it's a better explanation than any you have been throwing out there.
No one likes the Chase, no one likes the CoT, the officiating has become very suspect, and people are fed up with the broadcasts. Who has been responsible for all of it in the last five years? NOT THE FANS!
Stop saying we're the problem.
David, I think I've got to agree with you here.
I remember when going to a high school basketball game had so much thrill because you were watching local stars. Then, you go through high school, realize they aren't as high and mighty as before, and lose interest.
Are there problems with the sport? Definitely.
But are people losing interest completely based on those facts? Fat chance.
I still trust Brian France knows what he's doing, and that there would be some major discontent in the exec board in Daytona if he didn't. The fans' whole problem with France might be completely eliminated if he didn't assume the role because of his family name.
NASCAR simply does need a better emphasis at catching already-made fans, an independent sanctioning body, and some sanity with ESPN. Note, though, that fans come first on that list, and if NASCAR doesn't do anything to keep them around, they won't stay around.
People change, times change, so NASCAR must change and effectively adapt.
However, David, please don't change your insightful thinking into the NASCAR world.
Several reasons I can think of why racing was more interesting before are this. Back in the day we had multiple owners that spent all of their time, talent, and money on one car, one crew, and one driver. It was much more interesting to watch one driver beat another. Now with all the teams it can get pretty stupid. Can you imagine Cale slowing down so that Richard or Bobby could get their lap back? Or how about Earnhardt doing the same for Waltrip? I didn't think so. Then NASCAR made every car identical to each other so now there is very little reason to pick a Chevy over a Ford or Dodge or whatever. It just doesn't matter anymore which manufacturer can make the best car for the racetrack. The third thing is cost. Daytona tickets today are way overpriced and where you once could park for free, it now costs you fifty dollars. That adds up to a ton of money when you are in town for speedweeks and have to pay every day to park your car. The seat is the same seat it was twenty five years ago and so is the parking lots and the restrooms. No improvements in any of those. The one thing I will not complain about is TV coverage. I remember for years the only way to get race coverage was on the radio through MRN. They are still the best however.
My situation is much as you describe, David. I'm in my thirties with younger kids who are not ready for the test of endurance that going to a NASCAR race is even for an adult. Watching on t.v. works for me right now, but even that is done as a juggling act on Sunday afternoon. The race is on and I usually check things from time to time between shooting hoops in the driveway with my son and reading a book or playing a board game with my daughter. Also, I love all the coverage that sporting events get now, but I have to think that it has made us a lot lazier as fans. For example, when I was a kid, Saturday baseball was a big deal. There was usually only one game on t.v., and, because it was THE game, we watched it with our full attention. There are a lot more things on t.v. now as well as more live events from which we can choose to attend. That makes it tougher to decide just how to invest our time. The cost of things has also become prohibitive for middle class families as well. But that goes for all pro sports, though, not just NASCAR.
David, again you are right on... which of course means you are going to be lambasted by those who seem to know everything about what is 'wrong' with NASCAR. Oh, and I'm sure there will be personal attacks as well, especially from those who arent capable enough to have an intellegent conversation.
I am especially suspicious of those fans who use the terms 'always' and 'everyone', and 'no one' like the first poster did.
Please, for goodness sake, stop saying 'no one' likes the Chase. I do, which completely invalidates that statement and your entire argument. And I'm not the only one. The CoT? I think the jury is still out, but again, to say 'no one' invalidates the argument completely.
'Back in the day' you had only a handful of cars finishing on the lead lap. Yes, we all remember some of the exciting finsihes, but can anyone argue that we had some great finishes in 2007? Daytona, Martinsville? Memories are usually nicer, its only human to block out the not so good stuff. I recall the 'good old days' of high school and college, but when I really think about them, I realize that they werent quite as great as I recall.
Yes, there are issues in NASCAR, like every other sport... ratings go up, they go down, attendance goes up, it goes down, ticket prices go up (and stay up). Lets look at whats good though... how many drug scandals have we had in our sport? Steroids? Murders? Assaults? Rapes? Very few indeed.
So I say to all of you whiney fans... theres the clicker. Shut the TV off. Stay clear of NASCAR web sites. Stop buying the products. If you really think things are that bad, leave... if 'everyone' agrees with you then the message will be sent loud and clear to Brian France and then - and only then - will your perceived problems be fixed. As long as you continue to hang around and whine but still buy tickets and products and watch the races on TV, you give them no reason to believe that there really is an issue.
Any takers? I didnt think so...
WAH!
David, stop with the spin and admit that NASCAR's ratings are falling because the competitive product is weaker than it used to be. The COT, the phony playoff format, the lack of lead changes, lack of different winners (teams and drivers), lack of a sensible economic structure in the sport (where are the spending cap and revenue sharing programs this sport needs?), lack of sensible marketing, speedway fratricide - all of this has conspired to make the sport less enjoyable for people, and tageting the 18-25 demographic never works for any sport.
Geoff Miller, that there isn't publically known discontent at the executive level of NASCAR doesn't mean there isn't doubt about Brian France there or that he even knows what he's doing; there's no guarantee he'll even be here in four years.
David said: "Maybe you were still single 10 years ago and you could stay up two straight nights roaming around the infield or the campground “partying” with your buds and handing out beads to attractive women."
David, this is a sexist remark. Don't you know that about half of the NASCAR fans are female? You need to apoligize to us ladies.
Anonymus has it dead on David.
Name 3 things Brian France has done for the fans since taking over Nascar. Everything he does is in the name of making money or boosting up the corporate image of Nascar. Nascar doesnt give a shit about the fans out there, cause if they did they wouldnt charge $300 to get season packs at Chicago, they wouldnt have the COT, and they wouldnt have implimented the chase. Id say the only decision he has ever made that has been for the best interests of the racing fan has been green white checker finishes. Other than that everything else reeks of money and entertainment. The on track product right now is not what it used to be even 5 years ago. Too few organizations are winning and the gap in the competiion is higher now than it has been since the 80's. On TV the "show" is secondary to the racing. The broadcasts are boring, all the networks do is focus on the top 4 guys. And since the cars are too aero dependant they get spread out in about 5 laps and you have crappy racing, but the networks wont show anything but that show it seems boring.
You can blame old age all you want, but IM 25 and single and I reconize the problems Brian France and his TV partners have caused this sport. I just hope to god after another year of sagging ratings and attendence issues they find someone else to replace cause hes junk and has been from day 1.
Anoymous said: "David, why do you keep insisting that the falling ratings and attendance are for any other reason than NASCAR's leadership?"
Better question... why do people like you insist the opposite? Just because you're disgruntled, just because you and many others have sipped too much of the MSM's Kool-Aid doesn't make what you say true.
Try this on for size... there are am\\many other factors in NASCAR's decline including gas prices and ticket prices at some venues.
Plus, and most importantly, all sports are loding a part of their fan base.
Example: On March 19, 2006, a rained-out NASCAR telecast got a higher television rating than ABC’s presentation of the Los Angeles Lakers-Cleveland Cavaliers game (featuring Kobe Bryant versus Lebron James).
Example: The 2007 NBA Finals featured LeBron James making his first appearance as the so called “second coming” of Michael Jordon finished with a record-low 6.2 television rating and 11 share on ABC according to Nielsen Media Research.
Example: Sports Illustrated’s Joe Weisman has detailed World Series Neilson ratings from 1968 through the 2005 season and they have shown a steady decline.
The decline doesn't stop with sports:
Example: 15 or so years ago, the leading prime-time network program, ”Seinfeld,” averaged a 20.4 rating; in 2003 the top show, ”C.S.I.,” generated a 16.3, and last year ‘American Idol’, the top rated prime time show, averaged a 17.3 rating, down from the previous year as well.
None of this is to say NASCAR can't improve some things but for people to constantly whine and complain and place all blame on the "EVIL" Brian France is Head-in-The-Sand delusional.
Full Throttle
Well, I really don't think my age has anything to do with NASCAR becoming a boring sport. When you have "TOP DRIVERS" admit that they were bored racing at Talladega, yawning, and all the other remarks they made how can you blame it on our ages? They are "AFRAID" to race because they will either be penalized by the "Great Mr. France" or maybe lose points in the stupid chase. Which makes for a boring ending to the season. The whole Talladega race was a waste of time and money. They raced in a straight line the whole day, WOW!!!! Time off work, traveledout of state, spent alot of money, for what? Because I am too old? I don't think so. Mr. France has taken too much control and ruined nascar!!
Well said Marc...
Unfortunately, you are letting the facts get in the way of an otherwise silly argument!
Is anyone surprised that any pro sport is about money and entertainment? Well duh!
Again... if its that bad people, shut it off. Your local dirt track is probably more what you are looking for and God knows, they could use the attendance.
Another Mr. Anon" speaks... "They are "AFRAID" to race because they will either be penalized by the "Great Mr. France" or maybe lose points in the stupid chase. Which makes for a boring ending to the season. The whole Talladega race was a waste of time and money."
If I had a dime for every rant written like this one I could attend all 38 Cup events.
First of all Chase or no Chase being afraid to race, not that that is true but for the sake of argument, lets say it is, how is it different from oh say 2002 for example?
Wouldn't drivers racing at Talledega AND in contention to win the Cup also be "afraid" to lose points? Sure they would, but you'd never see the point would you?
Secondly, and with regards to the Chase: What's better the Cup Chase last year or the championship run in the 2007 Busch Series?
As I'm sure you know (but unwilling to admit to yourself) the vast majority of Cup champ runs prior to the Chase years were decided well before the final races and by at most 1-3 drivers.
The Chase "may" have it's problems, BUT it DOES provide 10, and now 12 drivers with a realistic chance to win the Cup.
In most previous years that was far from what happened. But what to hell don't let a little factual reality seep into a good anti-NASCAR rant, right "Mr. Anon?"
Anonymous wrote:
"When you have "TOP DRIVERS" admit that they were bored racing at Talladega, yawning, and all the other remarks they made how can you blame it on our ages? They are "AFRAID" to race because they will either be penalized by the "Great Mr. France" or maybe lose points in the stupid chase. Which makes for a boring ending to the season. The whole Talladega race was a waste of time and money. They raced in a straight line the whole day, "
No it was not a waste. There was some great racing that happened that day. Drivers like Waltrip and Stremme were trying to get the second line going all day, with varying degrees of success, (yes I was there). It was the big buck coporate drivers, that chose not to come out and play, not because they couldn't, but because they wouldn't. You can't blame that on Brian France and NASCAR. I'm not defending BF, because I think he has lost the oil pan drain plug on more than a few issues. Drivers, however, CHOOSING to ride around all day in single file has been going on for as long as I can remember.
Diane, take a deep breath and step away from the Cosmo. David wasn't making a sexist remark. He was just stating what occurs at the tracks on race weekends. This is an activity, that unlike yourself, many women seem to like, and even relish as they try to accumulate as many beads as possible. If you can't handle reading facts about race weekends, maybe you need to stick with NASCAR.COM, or maybe wear a nomex fire suit when you read David. Different strokes for different folks.
I have turned off and I haven't bought a ticket in the last couple of years. I do check the agate page to see who won each week, but no longer care if I actually see the race.
It's my opinion, notice I said my opinion not that it's right or wrong just the way I see it, that NASCAR has changed for the worse.
Sorry, but I preferred seeing races at Rockingham and Wilkesboro to Loudon and Los Angeles.
I liked pulling for drivers from Conover and Spartanburg rather that ones from California.
I can relate to men covered in grease, lint and smell of corn mash better than I can ones covered in makeup and sun tan oil.
I preferred watching Stock Appearing cars, well, appearing stock.
That doesn't mean what I like is what the "Days of Thunder" Crowd wants out of their racing.
I've got my memories, and I'll keep my money.
Oh, and by the way, the Chase does suck.
10 or 12 drivers don't deserve to have a shot at winning the championship. I don't care if it's decided a race or two before the end.
The old system needed adjustments, but not the Chase.
The Chase provides drama and excitement. I don't care about that. The champion is supposed to be the best driver over the course of the year, not the best driver over the course of a few weeks.
I'm in my 30's now, have kids, and would LOVE to spend my Sunday's glued to the television watching NASCAR, and sharing my passion with them. Unfortunately, when they question me about the integrity of the sport (such as bad calls, or bad behavior), it makes it somewhat difficult to explain these things away the way NASCAR does.
Also, I read something a while back that discussed the hatred so many fans have toward the leadership and officials. You don't see that any any other sport. The NBA may be quickly catching up, but I content NASCAR still leads the pack here. No one likes to see a blown call, but I believe that in most other professional sports, the fans still believe the officials are unbiased; truely attempting to call a "fair" game. Why is NASCAR so hated then? I believe that it's because, whether they directly say it or not, the fans get the message, "shut up and watch". I think, in part, the ratings decline IS due to fans tuning out. I don't know if Brian France is directly to blame for every problem, but with all of the officials and fans that could have been consulted, I think his argument for the new chase was pretty weak, 'I thought of it while driving!".
If the Chase is so bad, then why have the NHRA and professional Golf adapted it?
Can someone who hates the Chase please explain to me the difference between that and playoffs in the 'stick and ball' sports? Using the same logic, we shouldnt have any playoffs at all... whichever team finished with the best regular season record should be the champion.
Of course everyone will tell me that NASCAR is different than stick and ball sprots, which of course it is to certain degree, but why should that matter? Is it possible people just enjoy hating BF and NASCAR?
Playoffs in stick and ball sports suck, but they can't be avoided because every team doesn't play every other team.
That's what made racing special. NHRA going to their Countdown is as stupid as NASCAR, and the drivers hated it. A couple of prominent teams threatened to boycott the end of the season.
Can you honestly say that when Pittsburgh won the Super Bowl a couple of years ago they were the best team in the NFL that year? No. They were the best team in January. If New England gets upset in the championship game or Super Bowl, someone else will go down as this season's champion, but no one can argue that the Patriots were the best team this year.
As said earlier, playoffs are for the modern short attention span fans that demand instant gratification. They don't always crown the best team champion.
Georgia wants a college football playoff so they could contend for the national title. How can you contend for a national championship if you weren't even one of the two best teams in your own conference?
Ok, thats not an unreasonable argument about playoffs. But the same people who hate the Chase as much as they do wouldnt miss the Superbowl February 3. And they get pumped for March Madness. And they cant wait until the October for the World Series.
Of course, in the NBA and MLS, each team does play each other, MLB, NHL and NFL thats not the case.
I agree that totally that the playoffs dont do anything to show who the best team for an entire season is, which is my point exactly. Imagine how dreary sports would be right now if it werent for the NFL playoffs. Imagine how anticlimactic baseball would be if the season just ended without a playoff. And imagine if college hoops crowned a champion the way college football does.
For me, a die hard sports fan? I say NO WAY! And as a die hard NASCAR fan who recognizes just how boring the last 1/3 of the season would have been had there not been a Chase, I also say NO WAY! If you hate the Chase and want to boycott, then dont even bother with other playoffs either. To do otherwise would be the height of hypocracy.
Marc was right on in comparing the Chase with Busch 2007, NASCAR was right on in preventing that from happening in Cup, and Busch (er, Nationwide) should be next. BTW... food for thought. A Chase format would work quite well in the Nationwide Series for those of you who want to keep cup drivers from keeping the 'little guy' who runs all races from having a legit shot at the championship.
By the way, using the Pittsburgh analogy... they were the best team in January, but what about the rest of the year? Who was the best team? The Colts? Jaguars? Bengals? Seahawks? Broncos? All had better records than the Steelers, but if they cant win through 100% of the season and win the big games when they count, are they really the best?
Jeff Gordon was dominatnt the first 1/2 of the season, Jimmy Johnson the second half... why should JJ be penalized because he was dominant at the end of the season when Gordons point lead was already too large to catch? All Gordon had to do was drive conservatively for the remainder of the year, at least he was forced to keep trying for wins because of the Chase. If Gordon couldnt with the 'big' races against Johnson, which he didnt, was he really the best and should he be the champion? In my humble opinion - no. If the Patriots cant win the next 2 games, the 2 biggest of the year, do they deserve the title of champion? In my humble opinion - and I am a HUGE Pats fan from New England - no.
NASCAR, like everything else in this country has become to "politically correct" to even be considered racin.
No bumping or rubbin without a black flag or fines. Whatever happened to drivers settling their "differences" behind the garage instead of being called to the "trailer" for a discussion.
NASCAR leadership wants MONEY, thats the bottom line. NASCAR is like every other corporation in this country, concerned with the bottom line and to hell with the workin folks who made Nascar successfull
nh_nascarfan, the difference is in other sports it is team versus team - in racing it is individual versus individual. Therein lies why playoff formats don't work in racing.
marc, gas prices etc. are not a reason because they fluctuate and are often oversold in their ecomomic effect. NASCAR's specific problems are problems that if addressed properly will indeed bring the fanbase back. Saying "well all sports are suffering declines" ignore that other sports chased away their fanbases - the NBA with a weakened competitive product, a result of overselling Michael Jordon that destroyed the team-always focus of the Bird-Johnson era; the NHL with its atomic war; MLB with rampant cheating, a corrupt and all-too-powerful players union, and incompetent leadership.
"What's better, the Cup Chase or the 2007 BGN Series?" The BGN Series because it was not a contrivance. As for drivers being afraid to race, you mention 2002 without noting that being afraid to race with regard to points was substantially less prevalent than today. The Chase promises 10 to 12 drivers with a shot at the championship but the reality is it does nothing of the kind while denying 30-plus other drivers any shot at the top ten in points or even a wildcard championship shot.
I have been a NASCAR fan for 30 years and I am only 45. I have never been interested in stick and ball sports very much...and I still am not. I have been very disappointed in NASCAR racing over the past 5 years or so primarily because the personality of the sport now is so vanilla. Remembering the rivalries between Richard Petty and David Pearson, Darrell Waltrip and Cale Yarborough, Dale Sr. and Jeff Gordon puts a smile on my face. So do the antics of Tim Richmond, Buddy Baker, and AJ Foyt. To them racing was either checkers or wreckers. Domination by one team does not bother me. They've done their homework. Just like the Wood Brothers, Junior Johnson, Petty Enterprises and others did during their heyday. Let the guys race. Let them get mad. Give us some excitement again. PLEASE!
warren, we need lead changes more than drivers who aren't "vanilla" to get excitement. The sport isn't lacking personality, it's choking on it between the buffoonery of Kevin Harvick and Tony Stewart and the stupidity of Michael Waltrip. Vanilla is much better than that.
Individual versus individual? Please... NASCAR is the very definition of team sport. How far would any champion - today or yesteryear - have gotten without great people helping them or great equipment provided by great people. Would Jimmy Johnson have won the championship if he were driving for BAM racing? If you think so, you are a bigger fool than you have already proven yourself. There was some fantastic pit strategy that came from TEAM Lowes last year during the Chase that contributed greatly to Johnson winning. And what about the great 'individual' who loses a lap because of a messed up pit stop?
And since when is fighting behind the trailer a good thing? Unprofessional for sure. In one post I hear people talking about not letting their kids watch NASCAR because of lack of integrity by the officials, yet people want drivers handling their differences in a completely unprofessional manner. Lesson to your kid? He/she has a disagreement with a coworker and screams at them in the stock room or worse, punches them out. Result? Fired. Or worse, jail. Monkeesfan is right about one thing, there needs to be more professionalism in all sports, NASCAR included; and if professioanlism translates into 'vanilla', so be it. I would rather my kid idolize the behavior of Jimmy Johnson, Jeff Gordon or Dale Jr than that of your typical NFL or NBA thug any day.
NASCAR said: "Also, I read something a while back that discussed the hatred so many fans have toward the leadership and officials. You don't see that any any other sport. The NBA may be quickly catching up, but I content NASCAR still leads the pack here."
Well...except for MLB parading around over-bloated "athletes" for the last decade plus.
Except for the NBA and it's referee betting scandal. (not to mention the overlooking of rules that allowed five foot something players to dunk the ball. Can you spell five steps in the paint? OF Spud Webb?)
tbyrd said: "I liked pulling for drivers from Conover and Spartanburg rather that ones from California."
Ah yes, provincialism rears its ugly head. Say tbyrd is it safe to say you're not a fan of any MLB player not from NY or specifically Cooperstown, NY? I mean really... all those non-New Yorkers playing a "New York sport" must make you go crazy!
monkiesfan said "nh_nascarfan, the difference is in other sports it is team versus team - in racing it is individual versus individual. Therein lies why playoff formats don't work in racing."
Wow, since when has the NFL changed the schedule so all 30 teams play each other during a season?
And he would continue: "marc, gas prices etc. are not a reason because they fluctuate and are often oversold in their ecomomic effect."
And just when have they fluctuated at anything below 2.25 per gallon in the last year? And please, show me the data that suggest fuel prices are "oversold" on their effect on consumers. Go ahead educate us Daly, show us the data, not just your opinion.
And I noticed you glossed over the effects ALL sports are having in relation to TV ratings with nothing more than "WELL, they did this wrong."
How does that explain the drop across the board in TV news ratings, TV ratings for even the TOP entertainment shows, and the overall drop in theater gate receipts?
How convenient to avoid the obvious, and provable. But typical of you.
Daly The Dense continues... "The Chase promises 10 to 12 drivers with a shot at the championship but the reality is it does nothing of the kind while denying 30-plus other drivers any shot at the top ten in points or even a wildcard championship shot."
So in your warped mind having 12 drivers after Richmond in 2007 within 60 points of each other gives them "nothing of the kind" and I guess, no chance of a Cup Championship.
As opposed to what last years Busch series that had a spread of 690 between first and second with 10 events to run. Or say the pre-Chase year of 2000 when LaBonte led the twelfth place Mike Skinner by a whooping 939 points with 10 events left.
Daly... have you taken up a new paying position as salesman for "Delusion R Us?"
'Cause that's exactly what your peddling, delusions.
marc, "provinsionalism" isn't always a bad thing - what's wrong with rooting for the home team or the hometown athlete? The data that gas prices are oversold as far as hurting a sport's popularity is shown in that driving hasn't decreased to any significant extent, and prices do go down. It's also that recent spikes in gas prices aren't worse than comparative spikes relative to inflation in the past - the 1970s, remember them? And yet fans went to the races anyway.
You mention drops in ratings for TV news - those drops are because more and more people get news from blogs, the internet, etc. Drops for ratings for television series is because the medium has been in a creative ennui for well over a decade.
It's ultimately about the competitive product. Give people a compelling product and they will respond. You're the one avoiding the obvious, marc, so don't lecture me or anyone else about "the obvious."
Having 12 drivers within 60 points of one another after Richmond means nothing. It is an illusory competitive spike brought about by an arbitrary re-rack of points. Of those twelve drivers, not once in the Chase error - oops, era - has there ever been a scenario where more than two had any legitimate championship chance after five Chase races, and nowhere has there been any possibility of the point lead changing hands in the final race. So the Chase is a fraud.
"As opposed to...." Never mind "as opposed to...", marc - the Chase is a fraud, period. There is not supposed to be a playoff format in racing.
marc, since you're going to end posts with questions of dubious crediblity, do you have any grasp of reality? Because if you did you would not hold the stupid opinions you do.
SimianFAN "marc, "provinsionalism" isn't always a bad thing - what's wrong with rooting for the home team or the hometown athlete?"
Correct... but that's not what most that sip that "whine" want. They have a strong, but misguided desire, to "return NASCAR" to its "roots."
All the while being ignorant of the fact NASCAR's "roots" include road courses (on the west coast) going back decades. Forgetting NASCAR's "roots" include "invasion" of sporty car types and open wheel types going back decades.
They want the return of Hickory Motor Speedway, Bowman Gray Stadium or many others that out-lived their time. Get over it, I'd like to see Tiger Stadium or the Polo Grounds return. They won't, every sport grows on moves, NASCAR is no different.
"You mention drops in ratings for TV news - those drops are because more and more people get news from blogs, the internet, etc."
Surprise... surprise. You have half a clue, but rail to apply it fairly. The same can be said of NASCAR fans.
Excuse me while I retrieve my cluebat.... a large segment of the fan base use DVR's. Guess what Nielson doesn't to this point count anything recorded on them in it's ratings system.
"It's ultimately about the competitive product. Give people a compelling product and they will respond. You're the one avoiding the obvious, marc, so don't lecture me or anyone else about "the obvious."
Such is life... the deniers, like yourself peddle the non-competitive tripe day in and day out. Except that's exactly what it is tripe.
Call it non-competitive all you want... while ignoring finishing orders that have more cars on the lead lap than at any time in NASCAR history. Ignore the fact at any event any one, on average, 10-12 cars are in contention for the win with 50 miles left.
While doing all that bury your head in the sand a bit deeper. Pul-lease!
"Having 12 drivers within 60 points of one another after Richmond means nothing. It is an illusory competitive spike brought about by an arbitrary re-rack of points."
You hate the Chase. So what, it still doesn't change the fact 12 drivers are well within striking distance of a Cup Championship, something that has NEVER happened until the Chase format was instituted.
Then you add this lunacy: "has there ever been a scenario where more than two had any legitimate championship chance after five Chase races,..."
Name more than a handful of pre-Chase years where that wasn't true. In fact name a single year, aside from '92 that had more than two with five races left.
Rub the sand out of your eyes.
"and nowhere has there been any possibility of the point lead changing hands in the final race. So the Chase is a fraud."
OK, enough toying with you. Does this make you ill-informed, disingenuous, or a flat-out liar?
Count'em guy, after race 35 no less than five had a legit shot at the title.
"marc, since you're going to end posts with questions of dubious crediblity, do you have any grasp of reality? Because if you did you would not hold the stupid opinions you do."
Sorry guy. Opinions, even yours, aren't stupid, just different.
On the other hand, your opinion ARE facts. At least that's your normal operating procedure.
And that's where in most, if not all cases, your flat-out incorrect. You you would purport them as opinions you would catch a lot less fire, but you state them as known facts and are proven to be wrong time after time.
Marc, Why can't you let people have their own opinion? You have taken just about every persons comment and torn it apart to suit your views. Your views are just that yours. If you have so many facts on the matter then write your own article and debate it. Did David ask you to defend him and his article? What these people have written is what they feel, what gives you the right to tell them they are wrong? If they are disgusted with NASCAR that is their right, it sure doesn't give you the right to call them whiners. Maybe you have the money to pay for the increasing prices to go watch the drivers ride around in a line, if they don't that is their choice. If I remember correctly the TOP drivers did state they were bored. Yes, Waltrip, Sadler and the others with nothing to lose were actually racing at Dega. However HMS, and the other stayed in the back til the end. To a HMS fan I can see their frustration. If you can't rub the sand out of your eyes.
graceann - "Marc, Why can't you let people have their own opinion? You have taken just about every persons comment and torn it apart to suit your views. Your views are just that yours."
Guess you missed the last lines of my previous post. Here's a refresher "Sorry guy. Opinions, even yours, aren't stupid, just different.
Opinions are not facts. Period!
Secondly I have commented on exactly three different commentors here and two of them may be the same as they are signed by the infamous (and gutless) "Mr. Anonymous."
Given there are 30 comments I'd say your are being just a bit over dramatic.
You continue: "If you have so many facts on the matter then write your own article and debate it." Did David ask you to defend him and his article? What these people have written is what they feel, what gives you the right to tell them they are wrong?
Facts you ask? Sure, I have plenty of them and to answer your implication I have written about them and have done so on a highly recognized blog.
And frankly the rest of this excerpt is poppy-cock! This is a BLOG. A blog is used by a writer, in this case David Poole, to stimulate public debate. By a blogs very nature and presence on line gives me, and YOU btw, the right to comment on at as long as permitted to do so by Mr's Poole. Invitations not needed.
Funny, you make the claim I have no right to say some commentors are wrong. (their FACTS are wrong, not their opinions) YET, you are attempting to disallow my commenting, or demean them because you have some misguided notion that I'm stiffling opinion.
Funny that. And sad, very sad.
And BTW... one last snark.
What gives you the right to defend the "whiners," did Mr. Poole give you permission?
I am not the one trying to impose my views on people expressing their opinion's. I am not telling people they are whining or ranting. You may have only posted 3 times but how many posts did you point out and list your "fact" or correct them in some manner? Like I said they have their reasons, just like you. Why would you have to take their points and place yours for reference to try to prove your right? I agree this is a blog, it is their right to voice their disgust, as it is your right to voice yours. It is not a competition. Your comment does not have to be placed against theirs to make a point. Say what you have say and let it go.
Monkeesfan wrote "...it's choking on it between the buffoonery of Kevin Harvick and Tony Stewart..."
Need you be reminded that "the buffoonery of...Tony Stewart" helped stop the phantom cautions that so many fans have complained about?
NH Fan ... I am a hard core Braves fan.
The Doubleday/Cooperstown myth is about as fictional as Stock Cars being stock. The legend has Doubleday inventing baseball in Cooperstown in 1839. The only problem was, he wasn't in Cooperstown in 1839. He was in school at West Point.
As for someone's comment about Hickory, it is no longer suitable for a Cup race but the Busch/Nationwide Series is missing out by not racing there. I'm proud to say I've been to Bowman-Gray, too.
Just like Big Brian...Comparing other sports as far as TV ratings and empty seats.If you have to bring other sport facts to a NASCAR blog topic,IMO that is lame and like Brian,avoiding the real facts.Not a bunch of #'s and stats and %!The real facts lie in the voices of us whiners and I would love to get from behind this pc.Your big and bad with those terms behind your pc to call someone gutless and whiners.Just curious nh and marc,who made ya'll the authority on Nascar and the spokesmen for Brian France?
The facts that matter are the facts that the attendence is down and the TV ratings are down.There are reasons for that and I don't need to know the TV ratings of the NBA.NBA?? are you kidding?I'll give you credit on one thing you mentioned and that is we don't have the thuggary that is present in alot of sports.But that is it.You don't like the term "everyone" or "all" hate the Chase or whatever?Ok,How about a hole heck of alot don't like it and don't like alot of what has happened in the last couple of years with the sport.You must be a HMS fan.
I don't mind the Chase as bad as the top 35 qualifying issues and the COT.
You argue that there were great finishes in 07.I agree,but news flash here...it was only the last few laps and the majority of all races up untill the last 10 laps sucked.Can you deny the complete Bristol race with the COT was a joke?Bristol used to be the comman cure for boring racing,now what?
I can't bring alot of facts to debate you.Your opinion is yours and mine is mine.Too bad I don't have any #'s that agree with us "whiners" vs. the ones such that call us whiners and think Nascar is just fine.
Thanks for the advice on what to do with the remote.I got a better idea!
Thing is "alot"of us will continue to watch and go to a race or 2.I will as I find ways to entertain myself even if the racing is boring.Tailgating,fantasy racing and pulling against the 24 and 48 and OW's keep me and my remote busy.So you're right as far as nothing changing....give it time if we have another couple of years of the same ol' product being put on the track.Have a nice day and "I'll be your Huckleberry!"
For the record... I'm not an HMS fan, I am however a Jr fan... and was well before his move to HMS. That being said, I have no problem with any opinions that are posted out here. My issue is that most opinions are not based on true fact, and be very clear what the term fact means. It is NOT what you feel or what you perceive, it is based on truths - data if you will. We can all see that NASCAR ratings are down and many theorize as to why; some feel that everybody is running away in droves because of the 'competetive product on the track' and because 'nobody likes the Chase'. Yes, there are those that feel that, but they certainly do not explain everything, but there are those people out there that would like to pin all of the blame on those issues... as though it validates their own opinions. Find someone who agrees with you? They are well educated! If they disagree? They are stupid. The problem is there is a mob mentality on these blogs, everyone can write about whats wrong with NASCAR but when someone challenges those theories - and they are only theories - with facts, they get chastised. Monkeesfan is the leader of this mob, spewing out his opinions as facts, but when ever someone challenges him with actual fact, he increases his drivel to further 'back up' his claims. On a side note, its funny how someone called Monkeesfan - a contrived rock band - can complain about the Chase being contrived. People dont want to compare NASCAR to 'stick and ball' sports, and on the field/court/ice/track, that is true, but off the field the concept is the same... people compete under a set of rules, there is a winner and a loser, there is a playoff, there is a champion crowned. The athletes are over paid, TV ratings are critical to success, putting fannys in seats is a constant challenge, and the bottom line is always the bottom line. Right now NASCAR is the number 2 sport in the country, so like him or hate him, BF is doing something right.
By the way, I am not a NASCAR or BF apologist, I recognize that, like ALL sports, there is room for change but things arent as bad as people write here.
marc, there is nothing misguided about returning NASCAR to its roots. Just what its roots entail may be a matter of dispute, but to call returning to its roots misguided is itself misguided.
Its roots did not include road courses; they were never more than two races on the tour until 1986 and certainly were the least relevent of its tracks. Now short tracks like Hickory and Bowman-Grey did outlive Winston Cup, but not Sportsman or Truck Series level. "Every sport grows and moves." But not every sport benefits from "growth" and "movement."
marc, you remain clueless. You rail against citing the competitive product, but that is the blunt truth of the matter, your denials notwithstanding. You draw the false dichotomy of "finishing orders with more cars on the lead lap than ever before" as though any of them other than the leader are in real contention; you also ignore the shrinkage of the number of competitive teams (with its concurrant near-extinction of new winning teams and comeback teams), the dearth of lead changes, the dearth of passing, and so forth.
We hate the Chase because it is a hoax, a hoax of "improved competition" when it is anything but improved or competition. They are not within striking distance of the title outside of one or two drivers; if they really were within striking distance we would see six-plus-car title fights down to the last race and the point lead would change hands in the final race. We see nothing remotely close to this. We see through the sham of the Chase, marc, and you don't. So you're not qualified to lecture anyone about it.
"Name me a year other than 1992 where there were more than two in contention with five races left." One cannot cite such an example, and it is irrelevent, because it was about winning races more than just getting points. 1976 was an exciting point race even though it was clinched before the season finale at Ontario because the point lead changed hands eight times during that season. 1984 was an exciting point race, even though it illustrated the weakness of the Latford Point System's refusal to reward most race wins, because the point lead changed hands several times during the year and never got close to a 100-point spread. The Chase has never seen any kind of legitimate point race.
And in those pre-Chase seasons the top ten usually saw shuffling down to the final race, something arbitrarily ended because of the Chase format.
2004 proves nothing, because Kurt Busch only had to finish the final race to win the title; he was not going to fall out of it. When he won the pole with a conservative setup, the point race ended right there.
Opinions not based on reality are not relevent nor legitimate, marc. You haven't proven your case and you haven't discredited mine nor anyone else's. Accept that fact, change your opinions, and move on.
marc, here's what gave graceann and others the right to discredit you - you're wrong on racing. Period.
simianFAN - "2004 proves nothing, because Kurt Busch only had to finish the final race to win the title; he was not going to fall out of it. When he won the pole with a conservative setup, the point race ended right there."
And of course drivers tooling along minding their own business NEVER get taken out by others do they? At least in your fantasy that MUST be maintained.
Drivers NEVER suffer mechanical breakdowns do they? Not in YOUR world and Kurt would never in a million years "fall out of it."
But lets for the sake of honesty go back to what you said, shall we?
"and nowhere has there been any possibility of the point lead changing hands in the final race. So the Chase is a fraud."
Not even close... A second place finish or better guaranteed Busch the title (third if he led a lap) no matter what others did.
With the slightest bit of looking you would find many online articles that show your incorrect. This one for example: "In Miami, the event was such a see-saw that I completely wrote three magazine stories (Busch wins, Jeff Gordon wins, Jimmie Johnson wins) because my deadline was extremely tight and the points kept changing."
No where in that account a literally dozens of others (easlily found ones BTW) will you find that Busch only had to start and finish 43rd that day.
Sorry guy, I was correct with my first impression, your being disingenuous. And the fact you continue to peddle this tripe makes you a liar. Sorry I don't drink the Kool-Aid your sipping.
Nothing unusual for you.
nh_nascar fan said - "The problem is there is a mob mentality on these blogs, everyone can write about whats wrong with NASCAR but when someone challenges those theories - and they are only theories - with facts, they get chastised. Monkeesfan is the leader of this mob,"
Gee... that wasn't hard to figure out was it? "simianfan" has a long history of that behavior that goes back approx three years that I'm aware of.
His opinions are his facts and they must be imposed on the crowd at all costs no matter how ignorant it makes him look.
graceann - "I am not the one trying to impose my views on people expressing their opinion's. I am not telling people they are whining or ranting. You may have only posted 3 times but how many posts did you point out and list your "fact" or correct them in some manner?"
Quote me. Quote where I tried to suppress anyone's opinions. However you did an excellent imitation of suppressing an opinion when making some fallacious claim about whether I was "invited" to "defend Poole."
Til you can quote me saying no one can or should not express their opinion your being ignored.
See ya.
marc, you're pinning your argument on fantasy. Kurt Busch was not going to lose the 2004 title because in that final race there was no weakness in his racing that could cost him. He was too strong to suffer any kind of calamity you wistfully describe. The point race ended when he won the pole with a conservative setup.
Those magazine articles you cite are bogus. The points at no point changed; it was all Kurt Busch all the way. Those who actually thought we'd have a point race were deluding themselves as you do.
"Quote me where I try to suppress someone's opinions." Every time you write.
You're 0-for-2, marc.
And marc, why are you quoting an ignoramus like Marc Crossman when his premise is shot down in the responses to his article?
simianFAN - "And marc, why are you quoting an ignoramus like Marc Crossman when his premise is shot down in the responses to his article?"
A typically asshatted response from you. Shoot the messenger and ignore the facts stated. The "premise" as you call it may have been "shot down." However the passage I quoted was NOT. What was quoted was FACT, not your imagined and supportive delusions.
Show me, with a link, that proves what you say. Show me an article, any article aside from your own writing that states the 2004 Chase was over when Busch qualed for the Homestead event. (along with "facts" that claim it was impossible for him to breakdown or be innocently part of a wreck that cost him the title)
Just one, that's all I ask. (should I hold my breath while waiting?)
You can ignore all you wish, I could care less. My point was made.
marc, neither Crossman nor yourself posted any facts that are worth taking seriously. You quoted a passage whose premise was shot down by the responses posted directly to that very passage, so what you're doing is being foolish. What you quoted was not fact, not by any stretch of the term.
You ask for a link - ow you're just being idiotic. It isn't about a link, it's about reality. Just go back to that race; Kurt Busch qualified with a conservative setup. He won the pole. That meant there was no weakness in his race approach nor strength in anyone else that could stop him from winning that title. None. If there had been any such weakness he'd have qualified mid-pack and had to race harder to win the title.
It's as simple as that, marc. There was no possibility that he was going to lose that title. The Chase was a failure right then and there.
Mokeesfan: "Just go back to that race; Kurt Busch qualified with a conservative setup. He won the pole. That meant there was no weakness in his race approach nor strength in anyone else that could stop him from winning that title. None. If there had been any such weakness he'd have qualified mid-pack and had to race harder to win the title.
It's as simple as that, marc. There was no possibility that he was going to lose that title. The Chase was a failure right then and there."
Monkeesfan is a moron right then and there.
In all of the postings I have read of his, this has to be one of the most non-credible.
Engines blow. Tires blow. Wrecks happen. Even to guys on the pole. Even someone who has never watched NASCAR knows that. Yes, he probably drove a very conservative race; as does any driver under any systems (old or new) who are trying to protect a point lead, but he was by no means a guaranteed champion.
Sadly, Monkeesfan, any shred of credibility you had (which was next to none) was just finally squashed in your complete inability to even objectively admit that 'racing incidents' occur because doing so completely negates your argument.
The fact that it didn’t happen to Kurt Busch in no way negates the fact that it could have, therefore negating your entire argument. It also negates the illogical conclusion you draw from it, that the Chase is a scam. It does, however support Marcs point that it was still anyone’s championship on the last race.
Folks, here is the difference between FACT and OPINION.
Opinion: ‘I like Pizza’
Fact: Pizza is a round, flat food that has tomato sauce, cheese and other toppings that is baked and served by the slice.
When you are looking at a dinner table, you are able to determine that a food is pizza based on the facts – a round, flat food covered with tomato sauce & cheese; it must be pizza.
You might notice a plate of hamburgers sitting there, but merely stating that you like pizza does not make the hamburgers into pizza, no matter how hard you try.
The same holds true for Monkeesfan and some of the others out here; no matter how hard they try to will their OPINIONS of what is happening in NASCAR doesn’t make it true. No matter how much you try to convince us that a plate of hamburgers is in fact pizza, that doesn’t mean its pizza. The facts just don’t back it up.
Sadly, when presented with actual facts, i.e. ‘Monkeesfan, its ground beef formed into pattys and grilled and served on a hamburger bun, therefore it must be a hamburger’; the response is just repeated attempts to fool people into believing otherwise “NO I SAID ITS PIZZA DAMMET, SO ITS PIZZA AND IF YOU CANT SEE THAT THEN YOU ARE A FOOL!”.
The problem is Monkeesfan still hasn’t – and never has – presented any true FACTS to back himself up to prove that it actually is a pizza.
Graceann, opinions are fine. Some people base opinions on fact, some choose not to. Some can’t be based on fact, such as enjoyment of pizza. That’s called personal taste. But this discussion is not about personal taste. You can say you don’t like the CoT, for example, that’s your personal taste. But please don’t sit there and represent your personal taste as true fact (wishing hamburgers were pizza doesn’t make it so); the whole point of these discussion boards is to have well educated, intelligent discussion about NASCAR. Problem is, when true, undisputed facts – not opinions – are presented, they are shot down as wrong, or irrelevant, or even stupid. That is the M.O. of Monkeesfan and many others out here, they just won’t let fact get in the way of a good belief.
Problem is there is a mob mentality out here that for whatever reason insists that everyone must hate NASCAR and that Brian France is the devil and the CoT is terrible, and you get the idea. Heaven forbid that you disagree with the mob, lest you be chastised. Heaven forbid you bring actual logic and fact to a discussion; if you don’t buy into the paradigm that NASCAR sucks then you are chastised and ridiculed.
This is a great example of political correctness in America run amok. God forbid you challenge any of the ‘main stream liberal beliefs’; for example if you don’t support affirmative action then you are banded a racist. Ever try to have a fact based discussion with a die hard liberal? Same as Monkeesfan… throw up a smoke screen and try to distract away from the facts. Real facts, based on data and studies, not just opinions and feelings about how something ‘should’ be.
Yes, opinions are indeed fine – but at least back yourselves up with some true facts.
nh_NASCARFan - "Monkeesfan is a moron right then and there."
You noticed!
He's has a special affliction called FDS (France Derangement Syndrome) that cause the mind to confuse fact with fiction and fact with his opinion.
It's cognitive dissonance in the extreme and he's proud to display it in any and all NASCAR forums whether they be blogs or forums proper.
When faced with indisputable facts, as he did with my Crossman quote, he obfuscates his response by first demeaning Crossman, then only commenting on all parts of that link except the pertinate quote that positively disproved his delusions.
In short he's demonstrably proven to be one of the most inaccurate, disingenuous commentors in the whole of the auto racing blogosphere and one of the prime reason why he's been banned in certain segments of it.
Nascarfan: I don't beleive that Poole stated anywhere in his column for comments to be facts only. I do however think most of these poster did say IMO. I did not say in ANY of my posts that they factual. These people posted why they were no longer attending as many races or tuning in on tv any more. Their comments were then being compared to facts. You cannot compare a persons feelings to facts. I never said any one was wrong I just said they all deserved the opportunity to voice their comments without being called names by others on this blog. You don't attack people who post just because their views differ from yours.
anona - "Nascarfan: I don't beleive that Poole stated anywhere in his column for comments to be facts only."
He didn't say to only post opinion either.
Question: would you rather have comments posted that have demonstrably proven false statements to stand unchallenged? If that what you expect of any media source? If so pardon me if I don't reside in your world.
More from "anon" - "These people posted why they were no longer attending as many races or tuning in on tv any more. Their comments were then being compared to facts."
In a way yes, however a more accurate depiction would be to say other reasons were given. To lay blame solely on Brian France for everything from TV ratings to attendance isn't a fair assessment. NASCAR doesn't operate in a vacuum no matter how much the deniers would think so. Outside influences have just as much effect on NASCAR as they do on other sports and other parts of society.
But the "whiners" as I call them not only deny that but call anyone that points it out an apologist for France, NASCAR or far worse.
IF yum place yourself in my description of "whiners" so be it. If you don't that's good also.
nh_nascarfan, saying that "engines blow, tires blow," is making the exact same mistake that marc is making - overselling the actual risk to Kurt Busch's championship chances in that race to justify the Chase format. You want to attack my credibility, come up with some kind of credible reason to think Kurt Busch could have lost that championship. The fact he won the championship does negate that "it could have happened" because it was unlikely going into that race.
So instead of attacking my crediblity, rethink your own, because only a fool thinks Kurt Busch could have lost that championship.
And nh_nascarfan, your attempt at differentiating facts and opinions is itself devoid of facts and opinions; it's stupid drivel. Facts are facts; if there's reason to doubt something, then that is made clear.
marc, the pertinent quote in Crossman's piece didn't prove anything to start with because his whole piece was inaccurate. Kurt Busch was not going to lose the title in 2004 because there was no weakness in his racing that could cost him. You want to attack me for inaccuracy you need to come up with something accurate yourself.
Example of your serial distortion is your continued attempt to lay blame for NASCAR troubles on outside infleunces instead of the poor judgement, policies, and leadership of Brian France. It doesn't work because outside influences are not as powerful as you delude yourself into thinking. Brian France is the reason the sport is suffering because his policies are failures, his leadership is slipshod, and his understanding of racing is lacking. It's that simple - it's fact, not opinion.
simianFAN "yadda...yadda...yadda"
Anyone hear something relevant?
I thought not.
Monkeesfan: "You want to attack my credibility, come up with some kind of credible reason to think Kurt Busch could have lost that championship."
Hmmmm... aliens could have come and hijacked his car. Herein lies the problem with Monkeesfan, the very existance of reality completely negates his argument. Yes, Monkeesfan, nobody EVER cuts a tire, blows an engine or gets caught up in a wreck. You are of course correct because you said it, how wrong am I?
Of course I wont bother to provide actual data of pole winners and point leaders who have blown a tire, wrecked, or blown an engine because its facts that will support that it was a very real possibility that it could have happened to Kurt Busch, thus meaning that several other drivers could have been crowned champion. That goes against Monkeesfans entire ability to be objective and have intellegent discussion.
Monkeesfan: "Facts are facts; if there's reason to doubt something, then that is made clear."
I doubt the sky is blue, its red. I douby humans need to breath oxygen to live. I dont need to pay my mortgage in order to keep my house. Hey, this is a weird world Monkeesfan lives in, but just wanting something to be a fact makes it a fact. Very nice.
Monkeesfan: "Kurt Busch was not going to lose the title in 2004 because there was no weakness in his racing that could cost him. You want to attack me for inaccuracy you need to come up with something accurate yourself."
Hindsight is always 20/20. I predict the Giants will upset the Cowboys last week. Hey, it works! Any fool can look at past results and claim they knew for sure what was going to happen; Monkeesfan is indeed any fool.
"Problem is there is a mob mentality out here that for whatever reason insists that everyone must hate NASCAR and that Brian France is the devil and the CoT is terrible, and you get the idea. Heaven forbid that you disagree with the mob, lest you be chastised. Heaven forbid you bring actual logic and fact to a discussion; if you don’t buy into the paradigm that NASCAR sucks then you are chastised and ridiculed." You can post all your facts, stats, articles and talk down to those of us you feel are beneath you. You say our opinions are not worth posting because they are whiny drivel. The one thing that you overlooked that was so obvious, these people that make such useless posts are actually the people that buy the tickets and watch on tv. One thing I would like to know, is it fact or opinion: Brian France blames NASCAR decline on Earnhardt JR. Wonder where he got his facts? Maybe that was just his opinion.
Graceann...
Nobody is looking down upon you or anyone with an opinion. Opinions are fine, everyone has them. But you need to understand the difference between fact and opinion. The issue is when people state their opinions as fact, even when there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary. None of the posts are useless, and yes, you are correct - ALL OF US buy tickets and watch TV, which is indeed what NASCAR wants. I freely admit that I do because I enjoy the product; others out here I'm not so sure of. There is so much hate and animosity towards NASCAR and BF that it makes me wonder why so many people who have NOTHING good to say about NASCAR still bother to watch. If a restaurant is bad, why would you continue to still eat there? You are 100% correct when you state that the fans ultimately buy tickets and watch tv, but until everyone shuts the TV off on Sunday, stops logging into NASCAR.com and doesnt buy anymore tickets, NASCAR will never get your message; because like any corporation, that is the only way to express your support or disappoval. As long as people continue to watch and buy tickets and hit the website and buy their die casts and t shirts, then the real message that is sent is that everything is ok. Unfortunately, people like to claim that every time ther isnt a sell out or ratings are down that its because of fan discontent related to mismanagement, but when you look at facts, data and the big picture, it can be very well argued that their are other reasons for the declines, reasons backed up by fact. Want to send a message? Put your money were your mouth is and just stop watching. Stop buying tickets. Stop buying stuff. And if youre lucky, the mob masses will follow and you will have made your point.
Something tells me though that on February 17, you will be watching the 50th running of the Daytona 500, just like I will.
Otherwise... for all the whiners out there... put your money where you mouth is and dont watch Daytona!
BTW Graceann...
'One thing I would like to know, is it fact or opinion: Brian France blames NASCAR decline on Earnhardt JR. Wonder where he got his facts? Maybe that was just his opinion.'
Its neither, directly. Its a theory. A theory is an opinion based on supporting facts/data that allow one to formulate a reason. Once enough facts come in and there are no facts that discredit the theory, then it is accepted as fact. I cant - and wont - comment on it because I dont have any facts to allow me to formulate a decision either way.
Once upon a time everyone 'knew' the world was flat. That was accepted as fact. Columbus had a theory that the world was round. He backed his theory up with data which changed the paradigm; enough data supporting his theory caused the 'world is round' theory to be accepted as fact.
Like BF or not, I am sure of one thing though... he has access to numbers and data that none of us will ever be able to look at.
I know the difference between the two. The only problem I have with this blog is when some one posts an opinion they get quoted with a reference on something. The only thing the person is trying to do is post his/her opinion. They may not be factual, they may be, who cares. They are simply expressing their freedom of speech, there is no need to be corrected every time some body posts on this blog. We are not in school. Maybe some on here feel like we need to be but its not really any of their concern. Nobody is 100% perfect, why can't they just post their opinion, there are better ways to post the truth or facts without calling names and insulting people.
nh_nascarfan, the reason there is so much hatred of Brian France and the present NASCAR direction is because neither he nor present NASCAR leadership care about the sport as much as we do; they don't invest properly into the competitive product. Brian France doesn't even understand the sport because he's never invested any serious time into it until now; he grew up in LA, away from the sport and away from any serious understanding or care about it. He was never qualified for his job.
To say "he has data and facts that none of us have" is ludicrous, because no facts or data can justify Brian France's present polices. They can't justify the COT or the Chase or the lucky dog or speedway fratricide or not cutting down the multicar monster or any of that.
You can't say "until everyone shuts off the TV" because the onus is not on the audience to tell Brian France he's wrong; the onus is on Brain France to get the message and change course. He is wrong in what he does and he has to change. We care about the sport too much to let it destroy itself; we don't want to hurt the sport. Speaking out is what is necessary - tell these idiots that they're wrong and have to change course. As it is, declining attendence and TV ratings are beginning the process you say has to happen for them to listen. As people who love the sport it should not come to that.
As for Kurt Busch, you keep repeating the discredited "it could have happened" mantra because there never was any actual threat to his championship in that race. Depending on him to blow a tire or something like that is reaching for a reason to think he could lose. That's not how it works. Kurt Busch won the title when he won the pole for that Homestead race with a conservative setup; that showed everyone he was too strong to lose the title.
marc, the reason you don't hear something relevent is because you want to ignore the truth staring straight at you. So how about shutting up and thinking for a change?
graceann - First I see your have failed, or not bothered to quote anything on one of my comments that imply or flatout state I don't desire to either read or have posted anything that doesn't concur with my point of view.
Why is that? Could it be, like your false comment about how I demeaned or ridiculed every commenter here, your comment was based on emotion and not any ralistic facts on hand?
Secondly is this from your latest "You can post all your facts, stats, articles and talk down to those of us you feel are beneath you. You say our opinions are not worth posting because they are whiny drivel."
Again, who has said opinions are not worth posting? Quote them. They may not be worth reading, but that's up to each individual isn't it?
"The one thing that you overlooked that was so obvious, these people that make such useless posts are actually the people that buy the tickets and watch on tv."
And so? You can buy tickets and watch all you care to. Here's one thing I've learned from long-time observation.
Many, I repeat, many that whine cry and moan about NASCAR swear they will never watch or buy a ticket again. Funny thing though a large percentage of them still comment, and on specific current events long after they swore to never watch again. In short they were full of porcine excrement and just blowing off steam for little to no reason.
"Brian France blames NASCAR decline on Earnhardt JR. Wonder where he got his facts? Maybe that was just his opinion."
And here is a classic example of someone reading something and only seeing what they want to see, in this case it's France's fault and nothing else.
Here is BF's actual quote: "It would have helped if he would have been competitive," said France. "He didn't win an event and he certainly didn't make our playoffs. And that's unhelpful if you're trying to build ratings."
Is what he said wrong? No, and a little history lesson shows that the 2005 Chase ratings were down from 2004 partly because Jr. and Gordon both missed the Chase.
Was it the only thing he said that effected ratings? NO, he also noted the lack of diversity and noted " "We need to be effective on diversity because those are the casual fans that we are seeking," he said. "They're not going to give us a fair look, come to our events, watch us on television, follow us on the Internet.
"We've got some work to do."
He went on in the same article noting Jimmie Johnson not having the same size fan base as Jr as hurt to sport.
gracann, your basing your thought on the France quotes on things taken out of context and dismiss other things he said in the same interview.
I'd be willing to bet you've never read the entire interview but have relied on unfair blog and forum postings that have done the same.
"I know the difference between the two. The only problem I have with this blog is when some one posts an opinion they get quoted with a reference on something. The only thing the person is trying to do is post his/her opinion."
I agree with that to a point. However if that opinion as expressed is based on a totally false premise or idea and can be demonstrably proven to be a correction is in order.
Example your opinion is the sky is blue, an obviously false belief and opinion that opens you up to being corrected.
Marc, you oversell the number of people "blowing off steam for no reason." A lot (I suspect the majority) in fact are pointing out real flaws in the sport. Here lies the first problem you have - refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of complaints about the sport.
Brian France's quotes show why he's not qualified for his job. Graceann is correct in her take on his quotes because in them he is indeed assigning blame for NASCAR's ratings slumps to competitive struggles for Dale Junior. No pro sport worth its salt is that dependent on one competitor to drive its ratings. Moreover, Junior won six races in 2004 but the ratings declined, and was competitive throughout 2006 yet the ratings kept declining. So yes, he is wrong - totally.
He's also wrong about diversity because it is a sham goal. There has never been any evidence that lack of "diversity" has ever hurt a sport. Racing grew enormously without diversity; now he's trying to push it (with no noticable success from NASCAR's Drive For Diversity program) and the popularity is declining. The correlation between the sport's popularity and "diversity" is a bogus one.
France also oversells "casual" fans, since there really is no such thing to begin with; they're either fans or they aren't, and they aren't going to ignore a spoprt because it doesn't have "diversity." No, Brian, you don't have work to do on diversity, you have work to do on your competitive product.
Graceann didn't take his quotes out of context.
simianFAN - your ignorance, and cognitive dissonance (not to mention France Derangement Syndrome) is ignored.
Marc, I hate to disappoint you but I did read the article not a blog. The one thing that I don't understand about France is that every CEO knows to make a company successful you have to make the consumer happy. You must also have a marketable product. You never ever announce to the public that their favorite product is flawed, {not by their fault} but the #4 product will someday be as good.{so switch to it} There am I talking in a language that you understand? France criticized Jr's performance & praised Jimmie Johnson to the public. Jimmie Johnson will never be as popular as JR & will never be as hated as much as Gordon. He can hire as many people as he wants to try to make him popular but it is not gonna happen & France tooting his horn will not help either. Gordon has the fan base & recognition he has because of his performance & association with Sr. In my OPINION France dodged the question, he passed the buck. Jr. has respect from the NASCAR fans because he has not forgotten where he came from, Jimmie sits on a high horse. The same as Brian does, not the man before him. Your actions speak louder than your words. Maybe Jr. not being in the chase did effect the ratings and sells to a certain degree, but there were empty seats and low ratings before the chase began. Now as far as the Chase affecting the decline. They have "tweaked" it to make sure the top drivers make the chase. Problem is that did not happen, a couple a dark horses showed up and out performed them. Before you say that is incorrect it would have looked pretty bad on NASCAR to have had Kasey Kahne not make the Chase in 06 with 6 wins & others drivers in the Chase not performing. This however backfired because it knocked Tony Stewart out of the Chase so it was "tweaked" again to 12 drivers. That didn't help either cause Jr. missed again causing a decline in ratings and tickets sells. There are other issues in the series but frankly I am getting bored.
marc, you keep whining about my "ignorance" and can offer no credible evidence that your argument is accuarte and mine isn't. That makes you more than a fool, it makes you a disgrace, and Graceann's points further prove you to be a bunk peddler. Stop lecturing me and everyone else and start reexaminining your opinions, because they do not have any bearing on the truth. Sit down and shut up.
SimianFAN - "Sit down and shut up."
And THATt is the very essence of ninety nine percent of your posts on every blog and forum you post at, agree, or shut up.
Sorry you don't have the ability as I did when I tossed your lying ass for the same ignorant childish act you've displayed here.
Monkeesfan, Marc has done a fantastic job at providing true fact to back up his statements, you have offered nothing but opinion, none of which has been backed up by anything even close to a fact. Therein lies the difference. Unfortunatly, you are so delusional that you fail to see that.
NH_nascarfan, Marc has provided no credible evidence to support his arguments; I haven't offered opinions, I've offered facts, and he has not offered anything that refuetes any point I've made. He defends Brian France's policies; they have been failures - that is not an opinion, it is a fact, shown by the mediocre quality of the competition and the resulting declining popularity.
Marc, the only ability you have is to "toss" people who prove you wrong. here's how you establish some credibility - tell the truth. That's what I do and what others here do.
SimianFAN - "He defends Brian France's policies; they have been failures - that is not an opinion, it is a fact, shown by the mediocre quality of the competition and the resulting declining popularity."
Quote where I "defended" France. Go ahead oh Great Purveyor of Truth and NASCAR Justice.
A single quote should be readilty available in this thread right? Should be an easy assignment. Even for you.
And BTW, not that I believe this but... it would seem Eddie Gossage, the president of Texas Motor Speedway, lays "all the blame" on Dale Jr. for NASCAR ratings and loss of attendance.
“Nobody sells more tickets and nobody drives television ratings more than Dale Earnhardt Jr.,” Eddie Gossage, the president of Texas Motor Speedway and a longtime race promoter, said in a recent telephone interview. “And as a sport, we need him to do well. If he’s doing well, it’s the Tiger Woods effect.
“If he’s in contention going into the final round, look at the Sunday TV ratings, and that golf tournament is up, up, up. So if Junior’s doing good, that’s going to have a positive effect on the gate and a positive effect on the television ratings. Very important.”
Now go ahead cut him up. Explain how Gossage is just a pawn of the "NASCAR Spin Machine" or other such childish tripe your feeble mind can conjure up.
NH_NascarFan you have to understand one thing about "MonkeesFan", SimianFAN or Mike Daly or some other title he prefers, he has little to no connection to reality.
(NOTE all of the following are documented positions he's taken over the course of the last 2-3 years)
He firmly believes there is NO NASCAR track that's worth a damn except Talladega (and possibly Bristol I don't remember).
No NASCAR race is valid unless its starting line-up has no restriction on number. 50, 60, 100, it's all good in his mind, damn the safety factor.
He believes the rule against racing back to the yellow flag is less safe than an immediate freeze.
He has some demented view the restrictor plate should go the way of the T-Rex and Do Do Bird, 'cause it makes a better race when cars can go 225mph or more at Daytona and Talledga and well... a car would NEVER come close to landing in the grandstands. Accept when they do.
Daly's latest is providing us with his wit and [lack of] wisdom on the subject of age limits for Sprint Cup. He believes NASCARs wrong and the mandated age should be "25 or older. These kids almost always lack the maturity to handle it."
So ya see NH_NascarFan SimianFAN is a dedicated loon. Whether that's because of a mental deficiency, or just an overriding desire to "stand out" from the crowd, or worse case just plain NUTS is open for debate.
What isn't debatable is his ability to take the most polarizing position possible no matter what the subject matter is or where its being discussed.
But you have to admit, for shear comic value, he's as good or better than Mr. Bean.
That in itself is rather ironic considering Bean is a master at finding the worst possible solutions to solve the easiest problems.
And BTW NH NASCAR Fan you're more than welcome to drop by my blog for a more reasoned auto racing discussion anytime.
SimianFAN, not so much he was banned for idiotic behavior nearly two years ago as shown in this thread and remains to this day the single "banning" I've had to impose.
Marc, re-read your posts about Brian France. You gave him the benefit of the doubt every time; you called it "unfair" of fans to criticize him or blame him for NASCAR's declining popularity. You stood up for the Chase format.
If that's not defending Brian France's policies, then what the hell is your idea of such?
Quoting Eddie Gossage, as big a fool as Brian France, doesn't buttress your argument, Marc. Junior was in the Chase in 2006 and the ratings dropped anyway. There is no "Junior factor" here.
Marc,
1 - Talladega - most lead changes, most leaders, superior racing. Fact.
2 - Bristol - narrow, uncompetitive. Fact.
3 - 43 car starting fields - not large enough anymore; safety factor a fiction. Fact.
4 - Racing back to the yellow was never unsafe; we've seen crashes with "freezing the field" and the rule has corrupted the competition by putting the wrong driver into victory at Talladega at least three times (2004, 2005, 2006) and Michigan (2004). Fact.
5 - You're falsifying my view of restrictor plates.
6 - We've seen the lack of maturity in these below-25 kids for years. Fact.
7 - You "Banned" me because you were proven wrong in your blog.
0-for-7, Marc.
0 fer Life, monkeesFan.
And BTW, that shows unmitigated audacity to claim you were banned for that reason when that post is linked to for all to see your nonsense.
"Marc, re-read your posts about Brian France. You gave him the benefit of the doubt every time; you called it "unfair" of fans to criticize him or blame him for NASCAR's declining popularity. You stood up for the Chase format.'"
Your ability to lie, mischaracterize and obfuscate what someone has said and do so in the very same thread were it has allegedly occurred is simply astounding.
No. Simple NO. This from the VERY FIRST post I left:
"Try this on for size... there are many other factors in NASCAR's decline including gas prices and ticket prices at some venues.
Plus, and most importantly, all sports are losing a part of their fan base."
The operative phrase of course is "many other factors" that you (along with your fellow France Derangement sufferer graceann) refuse to see, acknowledge, or comprehend (I vote for the later). Even the most simplest minds would understand that phrase offers an alternate reason, or reasons for the loss of ratings and attendance.
But not in the little self righteous world populated by pompous asses such as yourself.
You "sir," and I use that term in the lightest possible terms, are a flat-out liar.
Geesh, I get it now! Any one that disagrees with Marc is wrong. Anyone who doesn't have an article or some time of proof is a liar and shouldn't be allowed to post otherwise. Gosh if those were the rules you could have listed them somewhere so the rest of us could see them. We would have known then that only arrogant posters were allowed. Then you could have had it all to your self, since you seem to know it all. It is annoying when someone throws a speedbump in your path. LOL
Wrong again, Marc, because any objective reading of the post you linked discredits you instead of me.
You hide behind "many other factors" but refuse to understand that NASCAR is not losing fans because of outside circumstances. It is manifestly not true that all sports are losing a part of their fanbase. MLB (in spite of itself) has actually seen increases in attendence; the NFL, the top dog in pro sports, has actually seen an increase in its popularity, to the point that a "meaningless" Week 17 game between the Patriots and NY Giants and access to it caused such a fuss that it wound up simulcast on three different national networks plus several local stations and drew enormous ratings for all the networks involved.
BTW, the NFL changed leaders and unlike NASCAR the new guy in charge has so far kept the ship going smoothly.
No, Marc, all sports are not losing a part of their fanbase. Those that are have only themselves to blame, because their declines are due to poor leadership and a weakened competitive product. NASCAR is losing popularity because Brain France's policies are a failure. That is the blunt truth of the matter you remain in denial about. You want to characterize atacking Brian France as unfair, but it isn't unfair. The man is a fraud who doesn't understand racing, never gew up in racing (he's from LA, which should have disqualified him there because LA is irrelevent to racing), and has never shown that he even cares.
His policies have not worked and there is no prospect that they ever will. So you're 0-for-the-argument again, Marc.
graceann - "Geesh, I get it now! Any one that disagrees with Marc is wrong."
Case closed. Diagnosis?
Acute France Derangement Syndrome that manifests itself in the inability to understand comments that plainly say "there are many other factors in NASCAR's decline including gas prices and ticket prices at some venues" and somehow morphs that into meaning it's the ONLY reason and NO one beside me has offered a reason and OBTW.... no one else has a right to comment.
gracann that is utter nonsense born of a lack of logic, lack reading comprehension and the extreme ability to only see what you want to see.
Again graceann, take the challenge I offered both you a simianFAN that both have failed to provide. (gee I wonder why)
Provide a quote by me anywhere in this thread that plainly states no one but me has a valid opinion, the suggestions I offered are the only valid ones.
I dare you!
You don't mind if I maintain my normal respiration rate do you? 'Cause holding my breath waiting for something impossible to produce isn't conducive to good health.
simainFAN - "It is manifestly not true that all sports are losing a part of their fanbase. MLB (in spite of itself) has actually seen increases in attendence;"
There you have a classic example of an apples and oranges comparison.
You know very well I never claimed MLB attendance was up or down. I plainly spoke of and linked to the indisputable evidence TV ratings were down.
Nice try you FAILED AGAIN.
"the NFL, the top dog in pro sports, has actually seen an increase in its popularity, to the point that a "meaningless" Week 17 game between the Patriots and NY Giants and access to it caused such a fuss that it wound up simulcast on three different national networks plus several local stations and drew enormous ratings for all the networks involved."
Meaningless?
Nice try, it was a "bit of history," as they say. It was a big deal because they were going for the undefeated season. If it weren't for that the game would have remained on the NFL Network.
I'll be kind and assume you forgot that. (yea, riiiight!)
Jimmie Johnson going for a second title with ten wins is NOT a big deal? It should have been, it has not been accomplished since when? I am leaving these answers for you OH GREAT INTELLIGENT ONE. Face it, Jimmie and Jeff did nothing to draw attendance or ratings, this was a CEO's greatest nightmare. They had nothing else to do but place blame on Earnhardt. Stewart & Harvick have been stifled to the point of not caring anymore. They all make comments about staying away from the drivers in the chase, so the don't interfere with their races. You have not said no one has a valid opinion, but you refuse to even try to see what they are trying to say. Just because it differs from yours or doesn't not show France in a positive light you think they are wrong. That is not fair to them, you do not give every one a fair chance. I am not saying NASCAR is 100% wrong but I am not saying it is perfect. Everything can use improvement, that is something you fail to see, that is all these people are saying. Lighten up, live doesn't revolve purely on fact.
Marc, I actually went over to your blog... nice job! I'll be checking in regularly.
Graceann: 'Geesh, I get it now! Any one that disagrees with Marc is wrong.' - if you look closely at this thread, as well as most previous ones, you will actually see that Monkeesfan is the true culprit here. Problem is, you believe him, so you cant/wont see that. What Marc & I have attempted to do is open a rational, non-delusional discussion, discussion that involvs fact and data. But instead of discussing those actual facts, Monkeesfan dismisses them as 'irrelevent' and 'bunk' without so much of a comment as to why, the fact that he cant/wont actually engage in intellegent conversation about real data shows how full of hot air he really is.
It is interesting the fact that Marc hasnt let down with him, for each delusional statement that comes from his keyboard, Marc hasnt let it go, instead completely shooting him down, and Monkeesfan doesnt know how to handle the fact that there is someone completely knocking him down and discrediting him (not hard to do). Usually, people just get tired of his ramblings and just stop posting, at least until David posts another blog. Monkeesfan is under the deranged thought process that if he is the last to post, then he got in the last word and therefore 'wins'. What he fails to realize is that he is tiring, its like trying to have an educated, adult oriented discussion with a four year old. Most people just give up out of sheer frustration over his ignorant rants, Marc has had incredible staying power.
The latest rants led by Monkeesfan just prove this point, he gets more deranged as the thread progresses, and most importantly, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that he has a complete inability to differentiate between fact and opinion.
Examples:
'1 - Talladega - most lead changes, most leaders, superior racing. Fact.' - No, opinion. Any time you use the word superior or similar, it implies OPINION. Other such words are 'like', 'hate', good', 'bad'. The very fact that there are people who dont like superspeedways and prefer short tracks or road courses back this up. Yes, Monkeesfan, its your OPINION, not fact.
'2 - Bristol - narrow, uncompetitive. Fact.' - Ditto. See above.
'3 - 43 car starting fields - not large enough anymore; safety factor a fiction. Fact.' Not just an opinion, but an opinion based on who knows what... the majority of tracks can not support more than 43 cars on pit road, and there is a legit safety issue. But I get off topic if I go into that, just think for yourselves just what the consequences were if they didnt cap the number of cars out there.
'4 - Racing back to the yellow was never unsafe; we've seen crashes with "freezing the field" and the rule has corrupted the competition by putting the wrong driver into victory at Talladega at least three times (2004, 2005, 2006) and Michigan (2004). Fact.' - Ok, here is a true fact, based on the fact that I was an eye witness. NHIS 1999, Dale Jarret almost killed by cars racing back to the yellow. Sorry, but its not important enough of a sport to sacrifice any driver for the sake of your entertainment.
'to the point that a "meaningless" Week 17 game between the Patriots and NY Giants and access to it caused such a fuss that it wound up simulcast on three different national networks plus several local stations and drew enormous ratings for all the networks involved.' - Marc already covered this, but it bears repeating because it is such an obvious example as to how Monkeesfan reaches to try to prove a point. Marc is 100% spot on with the fact that the only reason people outside of NY/NE were watching was because the Pats were going to possibly make history. The NFL even admitted as such when they finally agreed to allow it to the regular networks, its because they did not want to deny the fans the opportunity to witness history. As far as losing ratings, NASCAR does not exist in a vacuum, there are plenty of reason besides the 'ineptitude' of BF that can cause a decline, but those reasons would invalidate his rantings so it probably best to ignore them. By the way, if I watch the race on NASCAR hot pass, like I do now, it doesnt count towards the ratings like it would if I watched on traditional TV. If I TiVo it, it doesnt count either. And I know at over 3/gallon for fuel, I may not be making my annual pilgrimage to Martinsville in late March. But dont let those facts discourage your point, because they are indeed irrelevant because they dont support your rantings.
'His policies have not worked and there is no prospect that they ever will.' - another factless, baseless statement with no fact to back it up.
Oh well... graceann, go ahead and accuse me of not letting Monkeesfan speak. He will, and quite often. I disagree with him not because of his 'opinions', but because of his 'opinions THAT HE PRESENTS AS FACT'
As I contemplate graceanns last post, it occurs to me what the issue is. BF stating that Jr not making the chase has an effect on ratings and attendance in no way diminishes the significance of what Johnson and Gordon did. This observation seems to be the root of the problem, as I see it... graceann, you are seeing things in an either/or situation, which is the same black & white logic that Monkeesfan uses. Problem is, Nascar is not in a vacuum, just as Jr, JJ and Gordon are not either. Despite the great seaons that both HMS drivers had, BF stated quite an obvious point - that a large chunk of Jr nation just didnt care. Considring that the number of Jr fans far outnumbers those of other drivers - even great ones like Gordon, Johnson and Stewart - if they dont watch the race or attend the race because their guy is out of it, its going to affectthe numbers. I dont have data to back it up (but I will look today), but I will theorize that the ratings for the last Homestead race in 2006 were higher than in 2007, and my theory behind that - and no, I can not support the theory and refuse to present it as an unquestioned fact - is the fact that in 2006 Jr was still mathematically alive for the championship, while in 2007 he was just another field filler.
It would be foolish to judge BF as a fool for recognizing what the 'Junior factor' does for ratings, attendance and merchandise sales; this year alone Motorsports Authentic's finished in the red with their worst year ever and had to lay off a huge chunk of staff... why you ask? The Junior factor. Nobody was buying what were about to become outdated items, and the majority of the new stuff wasnt released until Christmas. That's not my opinion, that's the reason given by M.A., and their numbers showing a drop in Jr sales backs that statement up.
Does anyone out there think the NFL wouldn't rather have the Patriots in the Superbowl rather than the Chargers? Not because they like the Pats, but because of the ratings draw.
Could anyone argue with MLB wanting a Red Sox-Yankees ALCS next year rather than a Kansas City-Seattle?
The NBAs worst nightmare is that their marquee team over the past decade - San Antonio - has come from a small market.
The Junior factor is no different; you want your most popular guys/teams to be competitive every week as it helps ratings. How many people, even non-junior fans, shut their TV off when their guy wrecks or blows an engine?
But don't argue with Monkeesfan about this, he believes even the obvious is bogus, it HAS to be BF and his leadership, otherwise the unthinkable will occur - that Monkeesfan may in fact have to admit he is WRONG.
BTW Monkeesfan - 'Quoting Eddie Gossage, as big a fool as Brian France, doesn't buttress your argument'. Yes, of course Gossage is a fool, his point backs up BF which backs up Marcs and mine. So therefore it MUST be wrong.
Incidently, blasting BF for being from LA? Amazingly ignorant. Using that logic, anyone not from the southeast must not know anything about racing, including those from Wakefield, Massachusetts.
nh_nascarfan, the reason I dismiss the arguments you and marc are making is because there is no credible basis for them. Blaming me instead of reexamining the accuracy of your arguments won't make the discussion go any better.
Where have you or Marc offered a credible response to points I've made? You haven't.
1 - Talladega is the best racing - that is a fact, not an opinion. There is no other racing that comes close to Talladega in leasd changes, leaders, passing, or door-to-door combat.
2 - Bristol - narrow, uncompetitive. That is fact, not opinion; see above, to steal your phrase.
3 - 43 car fields are not large enough anymore. That is fact. The tracks can handle larger starting fields because they've done it before. The whole go-or-go-home controversy stems from the fact the fields are too small and need to be expanded.
4 - Youy distort the Dale Jarrett wreck (it was 2003, not 1999). I was at that race and saw the whole thing; Jarrett crashed and the leaders backed off - EXCEPT MICHAEL WALTRIP. It was A DRIVER who screwed things up, NOT THE RULE. There is no safety issue with racing back to the yellow because there never has been a safety issue. That is fact.
5 - Once again you distort. It was the entire NFL that has gained popularity over the years; it is not losing any part of its audience. That Patriots game would not have caused the controversy it did if the NFL was not gaining in popularity. Marc didn't address this at all; he danced around it - NFL, MLB, they've all gained in attendence; his argument is therefore a fraud.
There are not reasons beyond Brian France's incompetence to explain NASCAR's loss of popularity. It's all about the competitive product and Brian France has done nothing but damage it. Don't give me the $3 a gallon argument becqause it's oversold; gas never strays up in price, it eventually comes down, You'll make the trip regardless of gas price if the race is worth going to. If the race isn't worth going to, you won't make the trip.
I went to Pocono twice this year for the first time ever. I'ds never done that before because of work commitments; this timne I managed to snare that Sunday off and went for the second race. It's the product that sells, guys.
On your second post, the NFL could care less if it's the Chargers versus the NY Giants in the Superbowl. It's the competitive product and the depth of that product that matters. They've never lost audience because "small market" teams wound up in the big games instead of the big market ones. If anything, if it's the Chargers versus the Giants they might actually gain audience because it's something a little different from what was expected.
As far as the Junior factor, it's oversold. The diecast companies may have lost money by declining Junior sales but I've seen them shrink for years before that; 2000 was the l;ast year whgere I noticed any real strength in the diecast market; since then it's been downhill.
Quoting Eddie Gossage doesn't help your argument either, nh. He's the one who is wrong, not me.
marc, you spoke of soemthing that was false and I called you on it. Not all sports are losing audience; the ones that are are doing so because of an inferior competitive product. Your link didn't prove anything because the preimise of your argument is ridiculous.
The NFL gained audience in 2007. If it hadn't the whole Patriots-Giants TV controversy would never have happened.
The fact remians that NASCAR's decline in popularity is entirely due to the inferiority of the competitive product and the incompetence of Brian France that has aggravated that inferiority. What part of this fact do you not want to accept?
m arc, your retorts to graceann nicely illustrate your stupidity. You repeat your quote about "many other factors" but can't accept that there aren't any other factors. Just accept that it is Brian France, not gas prices, that is chasing fans away.
NH_NASCAR - Thanks I'll get back to you in a second.
SimianFAN - "marc, you spoke of soemthing [sic] that was false and I called you on it. Not all sports are losing audience; the ones that are are doing so because of an inferior competitive product. Your link didn't prove anything because the preimise [sic] of your argument is ridiculous.
Called me on what? Mentioning anything related to any sports declining attendance?
I musta missed it, can you quote anything on attendence?
I say again for possible cranial penetration (in the thickest skull around) My one and only ref was to declining TV ratings in the MLB and they have been in steady decline for 40 years. Both over-the-air and cable ratings have decreased Period.
Now... spin...spin...spin you little mental Sunbeam blender you.
NH_NASCAR - "It is interesting the fact that Marc hasnt let down with him, for each delusional statement that comes from his keyboard, Marc hasnt let it go, instead completely shooting him down, and Monkeesfan doesnt know how to handle the fact that there is someone completely knocking him down and discrediting him (not hard to do)."
The interest lays in his ability to continually restate was he's said numerous times in the same thread. You see it here.
How many times has he restated the same tripe as fact when it's opinion in everyone else's more logic/reality based world.
He has a firm belief that the more times he writes something, no matter how outrageous and factless it is, he can coerce and intimidate someone into thinking it true.
He's the racing commenter equivalent of a politician saying he would NEVER raise taxes. NEVER! I mean NEVER. Really!
The gullible believe that trash. (graceann, I'm lookin' at YOU!)
The sad thing is he can't point to ANY online forum of ANY type where he's given any credibility whatsoever. He's mocked, laughed at and generally treated like your weird uncle at thanksgiving. He's given his plate, shoved to the corner and forgotten about 'til it's time to rush everyone out the door.
That aside, the longer you bait him the more opportunity he has to make yet another stupid unsubstantiated claim and become a legend in his own mind.
It's fun. Honest, just like slowing down to see the 5 car crack-up in the opposing lane.
I understand what you are saying, I realize that people will turn off the race when their driver is out of the race, or leave the track. I have seen this happen for myself. I am not one of those people. I do have a favorite driver, but when he is knocked from the race there are others that I favor as well. You can be a fan of racing without being so blindly loyal to just one driver. I am not accusing you of untruth, I was objecting to the interrupting of the other posts. These were peoples feelings, not necessarily facts but how they felt. It was their opinion, from a fans viewpoint. It may not have been fact but to them it was gospel. You have posted the facts of the sales on Jr. this past season. Not to argue but to a fan that has been to races, when walking past trailers, you cannot get to any Jr. trailers. They are completely surround by fans purchasing goods. I know they are half price, to the average person that is a good deal, to the bottom line it depends on the cost of the item. Try to argue that one with a fan.
Graceann 'I know they are half price, to the average person that is a good deal, to the bottom line it depends on the cost of the item. Try to argue that one with a fan.'
Exactly the point - the Junior factor. Half price = half profits. But imagine if all the merchandise was full price during the last few races? The lines would have probably been minimal. Looking at Nascar.com over the same time period showed the same thing - LOTS of huge deals on soon to be obsolete merchandise.
The good news for M.A. is that Junior nation will now be buying all the nuew 88 merchandise, so they are anticipated to have a good tear. Its amazing the effect that one driver has on the whole ball of wax, and it supports what BF and Gossage said.
Of course Monkeesfan will disagree because to actually see truth in something BF says would be impossible for him to do.
Monkeesfan: 'The NFL gained audience in 2007. If it hadn't the whole Patriots-Giants TV controversy would never have happened.'
Are you actually delusional enough to believe that if the Patriots went into that game 14-1 as opposed to 15-0 that there would have been that level of controversy? Or that the game would have generated the numbers that it did regardless of what network showed it? Please... this should be good.
BTW Monkeesfan, you are correct on the year, it was 2003 and not 1999, but that doesnt change what happened on the track. Having cars race past disabled cars on the track at 150 + mph is JUST PLAIN STUPID AND EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. And I was at that race as well, it was more than just Michael Waltrip.
But I suppose a driver dying so you can be entertained is ok, isnt it?
Marc, you claimed that all sports are suffering from a loss of audience. That is not true. Not all sports are suffering from that; those that are are doing so because of problems with their competitive product. NASCAR unde Brian France is Case #1 of a sport losing popularity because of poor leadership and a weakened competitive product. Now you want to reach back 40 years with regard to MLB to buttress your argument. Nice try, but it doesn't help your argument. For your argument to be true, all sports would have to be losing audience INCLUDING the NFL, MLB, etc. and despite a compelling competitive product.
You keep harping that I restate points and state opinion, yet you never come up with any credible response to any of it. If there's restatement, it's because you refuse to acknowledge that your arguments do not refute any point I've made. You keep repeating "factless," yet offer no facts. So who's baiting whom?
nh_nascarfan, there is no evidence that Junior is having close to the effect on the whole ball of wax you keep pretending he has. If that were the case the TV ratings and attendence would have increased in 2004-6, yet they declined. There is no "Junior factor" and never was.
nh_nascarfan, on the controversy over airing the Patriots-Giants game - it long predated that game because of the spat between the NFL and cable companies over carrying the NFL Network. The 16-0 quest added to the controversy but in no way did it cause it. The controversy in the end came about precisely because the NFL is manifestly not losing audience but is gaining it.
For the umpteenth time, it's the competitive product. NASCAR is losing audience because Brian France is mismanaging the sport and his policies are hurting the competitive product. And for the umpteenth time, what is it about this fact don't you or Marc want to acknowledge?
SimianFAN - "Marc, you claimed that all sports are suffering from a loss of audience."
Ya know Daly, I understand you not wanting to make the time or have the intellectual interest to check other sites for verification of something but...,
To post this absolute trash with the intentions of making someone believe that is anything close to what I've said anywhere in this thread is beyond lunacy. It's dishonest. Period.
Now, once again, even though you have ignored other challenges, (what a shock!) look back up thread and repost a direct quote where I've said, or come clost to implying, NASCAR, or any sports, has "lost audience."
Lying NITWIT!
More from "fact is opinionFAN" - "For your argument to be true, all sports would have to be losing audience INCLUDING the NFL, MLB, etc. and despite a compelling competitive product.
Again, your attempting to divert attention from what was originally said, that is TV ratings are down not at game attendance.
Dsingenuous NITWIT, to use your terminology, "nice try."
SimianFAN - "For the umpteenth time, it's the competitive product. NASCAR is losing audience because Brian France is mismanaging the sport and his policies are hurting the competitive product. And for the umpteenth time, what is it about this fact don't you or Marc want to acknowledge?"
Here we go again. You have spent half your time in this thread pissing your panties because NH_NASCAR Fan and I have not acknowledged BF is the one and only reason for various problems with NASCAR.
Where have we said other wise?
Again ASSHAT quote it. Lotsa luck finding the quotes. They don't exist.
What you will find in both my comments and his other reasons we have offered that IN ADDITION to France or ISC that have had an effect.
To quote you "And for the umpteenth time, what is it about this fact don't you frickin' understand of acknowledge?
Despite the little nutzoid world you apparently reside in NASCAR has never, and will never operate in a total vacuum. What happens in American society WILL and DOES effect NASCAR.
That little little nutzoid world you live in allows to make loony statements like this: (paraphrasing now)
"Of, well gas prices don't matter I attended New Hampshire ( think if may have been another track) twice this year."
So... what it boils down to is, you are so full of yourself that because YOU can afford to drive to a race twice in one year that gas prices MUST... they SIMPLY MUST not be a problem.
The shear arrogance in that assumption is astounding. That you take it upon yourself to speak for 100's of thousands of other NASCAR fans is ludicrous in the extreme!
Here... puzzle me this brainchild. I know you have read the hundreds of complaints over at That's Racin' site, and Kathy's blog, of fans screaming to high heaven about the high prices of race tickets for the last two plus years.
How do you discount that? How will you spin that into it doesn't matter?
ISC doesn't own ALL the speedways, at least not yet, how do you Blame high prices on France, ISC or NASCAR?
NITWIT
Marc, if you'd re-read your own posts you'd see what I'm talking about as far as your claim about all sports losing a part of their audience. I don't make stuff up, your opinion of me be damned.
There are no other reasons for NASCAR's decline in popularity beyond the ineptitude of Brian France. Gas prices are not what is chasing fans away; it's the mediocrity of the competitive product that Brian France's policies have aggravated.
I've read the other blogs at Thatsracin and read the points made by others about high ticket prices etc. Again, they would suck it up and pay those prices if they were getting a compelling competitive product in return. This is what they did when those prices were high but the sport was more competitive.
It's Brian France's fault the sport is losing audience, Marc. Taht is the bottom line here.
Marc and nh_nascarfan, if NASCAR wants to regain audience, here is what they have to do -
1 - Abort the COT.
2 - Go back to the "old" car and add the roof spoiler, 7.5-inch rear spoiler with wicker, and the 2001-2 hard tire compound.
3 - Abort going to demographics that don't want the sport and concentrate on the demographics that want it - i.e. no more Hollywood or NYC or Seattle; bring back the "redneck" crowd; swallow your pride and give Kentucky Winston Cup dates; give Darlington back its second date; don't even contemplate abandoning or cutting dates from Pocono, Dover, the short tracks, or any other track with two dates.
4 - Abort the Chase format; go back to the Latford System but with an increase in race-winner points to 300 (to 170 for second etc.) and increase most-laps-led points to 100, to make it mathematically impossible to win the title without the most wins and most laps led - i.e. make performance instead of best-average-finish win you the title.
5 - Mandate a hard spending cap and revenue sharing for race teams - take away Hendrick et al's ability to outspend the field.
6 - Spend real money on the sanctioning body's other touring series - Sportsman, Trucks, etc.
There are other areas that can be addressed, but it boils down to - to improve the sport, address the fundamentals of the sport.
It's not the way it used to be, as the title of this thread notes - therein lies the biggest percentage of the sport's problem.
SimianFAN - "Marc, if you'd re-read your own posts you'd see what I'm talking about as far as your claim about all sports losing a part of their audience. I don't make stuff up, your opinion of me be damned."
I HAVE to re-read my own posts? I know what I wrote, no need.
Funny, you make an unsubstantiated charge and I'm tasked by you to re-read my posts.
Very typical of you. Quote it asswipe!
Prove it!
Marc, you don't know what you wrote, otherwise you wouldn't be making the issue you are making. Re-read your posts - for real this time.
Monkeesfan - 'Marc, you don't know what you wrote, otherwise you wouldn't be making the issue you are making. Re-read your posts - for real this time.'
I saw what he wrote, and know you are way off base (gee, theres a surprise!). Go ahead and quote him IF YOU CAN. Or will this just be another MonkeyHoax - all fluff and no substance?
I'm not holding my breath...
nh_nascarfan, the onus is exclusively on Marc to prove his point, not me to prove mine. The hoax is his and you fell for it.
Marc - post #9, the one where you claim all sports are losing part of their fanbase, the post you spent a long time demanding I cite. How about facing facts and admitting your wrong for a change?
Monkeesfan said...
nh_nascarfan, the onus is exclusively on Marc to prove his point, not me to prove mine. The hoax is his and you fell for it.
Actually, he has done a good job of backing himself up using links and other verifiable data. You spend a lot of time spewing hot air, but never provide even one speck of data to back yourself up.
He, and I, weren’t asking you to prove your point in the discussion, you were being asked to quote him with items that he specifically wrote that you claim he said. So far, nothing. Nada. Zippo. And it certainly isn’t for lack of time, as far as I can tell you spend quite a bit of time blogging... so go ahead, quote him if he said all the stuff that you claim.
Monkeesfan said...
Marc - post #9, the one where you claim all sports are losing part of their fanbase, the post you spent a long time demanding I cite. How about facing facts and admitting your wrong for a change?
So why wont you cite it? That would go a long way in allowing me to 'face facts'
nh_nascarfan - "So why won't you cite it?" Because I don't have to. He has to prove his argument, not the other way around. Nowhere has he backed up any argument he's made with truthful data - he's thrown some numbers out there but never cited any actual races or incidents that prove his argument. I cite actual instances and common sense. You don't want to believe me, then you have a credibility problem, not me.
Monkeesfan said...
nh_nascarfan - "So why won't you cite it?" Because I don't have to.
Oh, I get it now... you cant.
"Oh, I get it - you can't." Wrong again nh - I just did, and the onus of proof is excluswively on Marc, not me.
Monkeesfan... '"Oh, I get it - you can't." Wrong again nh - I just did, and the onus of proof is excluswively on Marc, not me.'
Really? Where did you offer actual, verbatim quotes of his posts the way I just did you above? That’s all I ever asked. If you have all this time to spew your lies, take less than 2 minutes to quote - and I mean DIRECT quote - Marc? Or at least point me to the spot where you are referencing if you don’t know how to use the copy feature of your mouse. Really, if you could just do that one thing it would go a long way to substantiate your statements. But I suppose if they don’t exist except in that bundle of dying cells in your head that you refer to as a brain, they you won’t be able to. Somehow I am not surprised at all.
The onus is on you to back up your statements with substantiating facts; if you claim someone has said/written something, then back up your claim. Give a quote. Point us in the direction so we can read it again ourselves. Something. Or at least something other than how you interpret it. Or are you fearful that by doing so it will reveal you as the fake and liar that you are? That the few remaining people out here (if any) who agree with your ramblings might see you for who you really are?
nh_nascarfan, I quoted his post #9. This semi-charade you and he put on with quotes is meant to dodge the issues. Marc was caught in a lie but he won't admit to being wrong. The onus is on you and he to provide credible reason for their points; I point to history and the real world - that's all you need as far as proof goes.
Post a Comment