Subscribe to this blog's feed« Is it a deal now? | Main | Actions not detrimental to TV ratings »
September 14, 2005
Maybe Chase 'haters' is too strong
David Poole, not your most consistent defender of NASCAR and the way the company changes racing rules and policies the way some of us do our underwear, wrote positively and eloquently the other day about the Chase for the Championship.
Some readers hit Thatsracin.com's feedback button and wrote us - as eloquently, even if more to the point - of their disagreement with David.
In short, Poole wrote that other major league sports have playoff systems that are no more or less arbitrary than NASCAR's decision to narrow the Nextel Cup championship field to the top-10 drivers and teams after the first 26 races.
"The only significant major sport that doesn't use something that's at least akin to a Chase-style system is college football, and its championship format is perhaps the most bone-headed thing ever devised."
That, to me, seems to meet the criteria for hard to argue with, but many seem to disagree.
"Why do we have the stupid point system anyway?" Joann writes. "The way I look at it, the man on top at end of year should be the winner..."
Says Rodger: "Chase haters will get over it like I am. They will just turn off the NEXXXXTEL WWF !!!!!!!!!!!!!"
"Re your op-ed about the chase...and those who note that Emperor France is nekkid," writes Em Bee, who - as best we can tell - was a close relative of the late Aunt Bee. "You have the worst case of the Lewinsky Syndrome I've seen since the impeachment hearings way back in the 90s.
"You obviously have lost touch with the majority of race fans."
Martha, breaking the silence of her majority, adds these thoughts.
"I, for one, and I'm sure many others, am through watching racing for the season. Once your driver is out, if everyone would quit attending and watching, they would go back to real racing.
"This 'Chase' is just another bottom line deal for Nascar."
And from Philip: "I used to be die hard nascar fan . It sucks now. Without Gordon and earnhart who cares. It's boreing."
Who's to say who speaks for the majority?
Someone I know in public relations firmly believes the people who join in chat room and bulletin board discussions are overwhelmingly negative. I suppose he'd lump feeder-backers in with that group as too negative to consider.
And polls? Not scientific in their sampling. Certainly true enough in the case of our Poll Position.
But in early voting, ThatsRacin.com readers seem to offer a little vindication for Mr. France's non-NFL Folly, a.k.a. The Chase.
The most respondents so far say they "hate" the still relatively new Chase format. But the other two choices combined, "Love it" and Don't care - Let's race" are pretty close to the numbers put up by the nattering nabobs of negativism.
But it's still too close to call.
September 14, 2005 in Racing | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451bce769e200d8348c5d0e69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Maybe Chase 'haters' is too strong:
Comments
I don't mind one way or the other about whether or not we have a "chase" playoff format. I enjoy the sport either way. What I would like to see is this, after the top 10 teams have gotten their 2000 bonus points and have had their totals reset to 5 point increments, do the same from 11th on down to the bottom, reset their points too, to 5 point increments. Why? Because next year, if they end up in the top 35 they get the automatic provisional for the first four races. Plus, they are within a reasonable chance of the 11th place one million dollar bonus money. That will make the last 10 races a little more interesting for everyone, fans, sponsors, and drivers.
As far as racing retaliation goes, of course, it is not a safe practice to wreck another car intentionally on the track. Safety workers are getting on the track faster because they don't race back to the yellow anymore. That was the point. Right? Whether or not the drivers want to admit it, they do keep track in their heads who did what to them and when. They usually get their "evens" one way or another.
I remember when Dale Sr. was a rookie, coming into NASCAR and he put dents in a lot of left rear quarter panels getting to 7 championships. It was fun to watch, being tough on the race track and being a driver that people don't want to mess with has always been important to the image drivers want to project on the track. Can't blame them for that. Finger waving and helmet throwing are just kind of stupid in the long run, don't you think? I remember seeing a lot of fist fights years ago, right on the side of the track, after some wrecks. NASCAR would have a coronary if that would happen today in the more or less sanitary racing environment they are attempting to create. No more comments are being heard like "Boy, did you see Bobby Allison pop that guy in the nose?" Drivers are no more or less emotional now than they were when I first started being a fan 50 years ago. They are just paid more.
Posted by: J.R. | Sep 22, 2005 12:17:31 PM
Marc,
"How would the current standings change?" Given that they rescored the 2004 points finish with the old system and it showed a different champion plus the inclusion of Jamie McMurray and I think a couple of others who were shut out of the top ten by the playoff format, it is impossible to think the current standings would not change under the old system.
Posted by: Mike Daly | Sep 20, 2005 12:34:59 AM
Ok Mr. time for a new topic! ;-)
Posted by: Keith | Sep 18, 2005 10:24:55 AM
i hate the chase format,and who is anyone to say who is or is not a fan i would think we would no better than anyone else if we are a fan or not.i don't no if jeff gordon could have won the championship this year under new format but what i do no is he could have advanced up some but under new rules he can't and that just isn't fair.so i could care less what people call a fan,i am a jeff gordon fan but i will not watch these last 10 races because if you combine dale and jeff's fans and they just don't watch well nascar ratings go and they will take a second look at point system.
Posted by: kathy bailey | Sep 18, 2005 5:02:57 AM
I see where you're coming from Marc but to be honest, I don't buy into the longer season. Especially when it's come down to adding dates to venues that are some of the worst (Cali and TMS for example) while taking away from the historic tracks.
There would be enuogh purse money, ad money etc for the races that would happen. Taking away races would lose money for those races yes, but if they're not being run there's no need for the purse.
Track owners would lose money from Cup racing but would still take in gate receipts for other series. Sorry for them that we can't make a 52 week series so they could recoup their costs faster, that's the way racing is. Maybe they could push to hold more concerts and other activities there to make money.
As for lower attendances, yes there would be less people at the events because there would be no events. As for ticket prices, they're continually going up as are all sports, so they will continue to climb regardless. I don't go to races anyway (TMS is only local track to me and if it's not IRL there, the racing sucks IMO as the track's too narrow for side by side through the turns racing).
If they wanted to change anything, they should have revamped the points system. Started there rather than creating a playoff system in a sport that isn't built for playoffs. Move races to Saturday nights so as not to go against the NFL, which will always be THE American sport contrary to what the France's think. Tomorrow is a great example, Louden is another one of the weaker tracks (IMO) and I'll pop in to see who wins but I'll watch football instead.
As for the playoff system allowing a chance for other drivers to win, that's pure crap. How can anyone but the top three to this point even be looked at as a champ if they get a hot run and the top three get a bad break or two at this point? This should be about the WHOLE season, not about scraping your way into the playoff and lucking out the last 10 races. It makes a mockery of the first 26 races if all you need to do is make it in, get some luck on your side and you go from 500 points down to potential champion.
It's a cheap gimmick, a money making gimmick to try to spice up an increasingly dry sport. I hate seeing this happen to stock car racing.
Posted by: Moe | Sep 17, 2005 11:53:55 PM
Forget the chase for the moment. If you can.
Question #1: which is the better race team: the one that wins the most races or the one that finishes best over the course of a season? Choose one or the other. No waffling, no giving points to level the field.
If you answer that the team that wins the most races is the better team, go to question #2: team A wins two races and finishes 30th or worse 34 times. team B wins no races and finishes in the top ten 36 times. Which team is better? Team A, you say? Then they're the champ?
While I like some aspects of the chase, here's my way of determining the champ: run 36 races; each team throws out two finishes, one of the first 18 races, the other one of the last 18 races; of the remaining 34 finishes, the team with the highest average finish wins. Period. No gimmicks. No points for leading a lap or leading a race. If you want points, then a win gets 43, second gets 42, etc. Oh, you want a bonus for a win? Why not give a bonus for finishing on the lead lap? After all, isn't it more impressive to finish 7th, 20 seconds ahead of 8th, than to finish 1st, 0.02 seconds ahead of 2nd? Nope, 1st to 43rd. That's the way they finish, that's the way they should be scored.
If you must have a playoff, take the top 5 and put them in sprint cars on a quarter-mile dirt track for 25 laps.
Posted by: Doug | Sep 17, 2005 5:02:26 PM
Gary the only thing that I disagree with you about is that I don't think that the pre-chase NASCAR was the best racing. If the second place finisher can score the same number of points as the winner then that isn't good racing. It didn't reward winning which is why you saw so many guys playing conservative and taking a solid top 5 or top 10 instead of going for wins. That's why Jeff Gordon is the only driver since 1991 to win the championship while winning the most races in the same season. That's why 4 times since 1999 the driver that won the most races finished outside the top 5 in the final standings.
The IRL has a great points system. I think it's a great balance between winning and consistency. Their system is one of the reasons that they have so many great finishes. Every position really means something points wise, and you can't win the championship by finishing 8th every week.
Posted by: Ken | Sep 17, 2005 4:17:50 PM
Best post so far Gary!
I really feel the pain too.
I wish that you're right when you say that the chase and all the other crap (lucky dog, green white checker, etc.) will kill Nascar. It will be fun to see Brian France's little hypocryte face get smeered with sh*t. We can only dream to this day for now.
Posted by: everyone | Sep 17, 2005 3:50:51 PM
Best post so far Gary!
I really feel the pain too.
I wish that you're right when you say that the chase and all the other crap (lucky dog, green white checker, etc.) will kill Nascar. It will be fun to see Brian France's little hypocryte face get smeered with sh*t. We can only dream to this day for now.
Posted by: everyone | Sep 17, 2005 3:50:06 PM
Best post so far Gary!
I really feel the pain too.
I wish that you're right when you say that the chase and all the other crap (lucky dog, green white checker, etc.) will kill Nascar. It will be fun to see Brian France's little hypocryte face get smeered with sh*t. We can only dream to this day for now.
Posted by: everyone | Sep 17, 2005 3:49:30 PM
The chase for the chump points disgrace was, is and ALWAYS will be a cheap, sleezy, insulting roadside carny gimmick that has the WWF blushing in its absurdity. It has taken what WAS the best racing in the world and turned it into just another stupid and irrelevent network sitcom. It will NEVER produce a real champion. You race all year for that title... PERIOD. For 45+ years I always watched and attended NASCAR races because they were NOT like other sports. There were no player strikes, overpriced crybabies (except for Geoff Bodine) and the TV coverage was not written and produced for people with an IQ of less than 50. Add to the demise of the sport of stockcar racing the deliberate killing of Rockingham, Darlington and soon Martinsville for that useless piece of realestate in California and you have THE unforgivable sin. NA$CAR does not have fans any more... they have viewers and that is going to bite them in the a$$ before its all said and done because the viewers will drop them like a stone as soon as the next fad comes along. Thier attention spans are good for about 15 minutes and that's it. In the meantime, the true fans will be gone. The true fans have been sh*t on by NA$CAR for a long time now, and the chase for the chump is running us off in droves. I no longer watch the contrived and scripted series formally known as NA$CAR and I damn sure won't pay to attend another one. It's now just as stupid and insulting as any of the other "big-time" sports. I will spend my time and money on the IRL. At least they're actually allowed to race for thier championships.
Posted by: Gary Hammond | Sep 17, 2005 10:42:09 AM
Sal, well said...the fans speak! We dont care about your silly chase we watch racing because we love it. And Bill, if our guy isn't in it with 10 to go, guess what? He wouldn't have been in it anyway! As fans we'll still root for our guy regardless of the Chase!
Posted by: Keith | Sep 16, 2005 8:25:21 PM
So, the only thing that matters is how many drivers you can have "in contention"? It doesn't matter if they wouldn't have a chance without pretending they are all within 5 points of each other? I'd say the ratings for Richmond should make some commentary. If the fans were all so breathless after the new crapshoot last year, why were ratings down for Richmond?
Posted by: Sal | Sep 16, 2005 5:19:47 PM
I truly don't understand the resentment to the Chase. If the Chase were not instituted and the point sat where they were at the end of Richmond, how many drivers would there be contending for the Championship? Realistically, only three: Tony Stewart, Greg Biffle, and Jimmie Johnson. Drivers like Jeff Gordon and Dale Earnhardt Jr. would have been considered out of the hunt a long time ago. The Chase has revitalized those in fourth through tenth. It also makes those top three stay on their game or they may find themselves at the bottom of the Top 10.
I can assure you that if you are a NASCAR fan in any form, you will be watching these ten races with interest. If you are only a fan of a particular driver that is out of the Chase and you plan on staying away, then don't consider yourself a NASCAR fan.
Posted by: Bill | Sep 16, 2005 3:43:56 PM
Big guys and girls don't cry, they get even.
As soon as they came up with the stupid chase I tuned off. I now watch the truck series wich is still based on the desire to win races and be consistent and not on the desire to earn top money and sponsors.
Not to mention that I don't have 5 hours a week to give to Nascar. I remember back in the days when the broadcast of a race lasted only 3.5 hours and the pre-race show lasted 15 min. Those were the good old day before Fox and Tnt came in with more money than brains.
With the trucks, everything is said and done in about 2.5 hours and the finish is almost always exciting.
Go back to cutting the grass at the track Brian and let race people run the show!!
Posted by: everyone | Sep 16, 2005 12:43:26 PM
My very first reaction to the "chase" format was "What a crock...!!!" However, it didn't stop me or my husband from watching those last 10 races last year. Not even when our driver wasn't in the chase. Since it appears that we're stuck with it now, the only change I'd like to see would be for the number of eligible drivers to be 15. That way all the drivers involved face the risk of dropping out of the top 10 if they have a bad race. No one can end the year with an "oh, well - the worst we can end up is in 10th" attitude. They would all have to put their best effort into it for all 10 races.
Posted by: Robin | Sep 16, 2005 10:07:23 AM
"...eliminate some races to shorten the season," instead of the Chase?
In the famous words of Curly of the Three Stooges, "Hey Moe!"
And the result would be less purse money, less advertising money, lower total attendence, less everything in fact.
Well, not everything. The track owners that lose an event will raise ticket prices to regain lost revenue.
Wanna rethink your position Moe?
Posted by: Marc | Sep 15, 2005 8:32:10 PM
Ahh, 'The Chase'. How the mere mention of it brings about the ire of many, the support of some and the disinterest of others.
Personally, I've lost a great amount of interest in NASCAR the past couple of years since this new artificial playoff format (I know NASCAR hates the use of that term but too bad, it IS a playoff system). NASCAR is trying to do something about the lower viewership in the latter part of the season, that's not a bad thing but the way they went about it is.
Instead of the playoff format, why not revamp the points system and/or eliminate some races to shorten the season. NASCAR of course doesn't want to do this, they want to get into every market and have a long season. They must realize, when their season ends in the middle of the NFL season and they race on Sunday, they will always lose viewers to the NFL. Why not move the races to Saturday nights during this time instead?
There are other options, I just don't think NASCAR thought it through and instead went with the playoff gimmick to artificially create drama. In doing so, they are creating artificial champions.
Posted by: Moe | Sep 15, 2005 11:01:08 AM
Ok "The Chase" is a fact of life so we have to live with it. But, if these are the top 10 guys in the "Playoff" then why not start all with the same amount of points. I mean it's a clean slate. The past 26 count for zip, squat, nada. In the first segment they all started with 0 and the 2nd half should be the same. And why separate the points from the other Drivers? Just give them a special decal. Why because NASCAR doesn't want us to see the "Golden 10" lose positions to the "Just Fillin the Field 33"
Posted by: Keith | Sep 15, 2005 8:45:43 AM
Personally I feel the system is not as bad as peope make it out to be. I'm a Tony Stewart fan so I would think I would be in that group that would hate it becasue he lost his shot at the title last year due to Robby Gordon in the first race of the chase, but I'm not becasue that is just how things go. Heck I would still watch if he wasn't in the chase becasue I am a race fan. It has some flaws but I have yet to hear a good sugestion to change it. I feel winning should be rewarded more, but it shouldn't erase consistancy. My suggestion to that would be to give 5 more points per win for any driver that makes the chase. That means they are rewarded for winning those races but doesn't penalize the guys who were consistant enough to make the chase. Also I feel that they shouldn't make a seperate point system for the chase guys beacuse every position should be worth point so they will race completely and not just when someone in the chase is close to them.
Posted by: Clayon | Sep 14, 2005 11:53:23 PM
Saying that Mark Martin does not qualify as a Nascar champion is probably one of the most ludicrous statement's ever uttered. The man has 34 Cup series wins. And as stated above, if not for one of those "action detrimental..blah blah" penalties, he would have the championship he deserves. Also, I'm a Jeff Gordon fan, but you can't really say he would have won the championship last year. Several teams who were locked into the chase experimented with set ups and engines in races leading up to the chase because they knew they were safe. You can't compare apples and oranges. Bottom line...people want drama and excitement in sports. People crave the buzzer beaters shots, the game winning field goals and the bump and run out of turn 4 to win. It's human nature and Nascar found a way to deliver it on a consistent basis rather than the once in a blue moon tight championship races. Is it perfect, probably not. Is it exciting, yes. Is it healthy for the sport..absolutely.
Posted by: Michael | Sep 14, 2005 11:29:34 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
Advertisements
