Subscribe to this blog's feed« Hard times ahead? | Main | Why Penalize Toyota? »
July 21, 2008
Is The Brickyard The Real Deal Or Just Hype?
By Mark Young
The Brickyard. While growing up in the Midwest during the 80's and early 90's that was all that mattered. To be honest I hardly knew that NASCAR existed back then. We didn't have cable TV, Satellites were something only NASA had, and the Internet was just an idea. The only race I knew existed was the Indy 500 and it was the coolest thing in the world for me. But then in 1994 I found NASCAR and was hooked. I still watched the Indy 500 but it lost it's luster for me. Strangely enough that was the first year of the Brickyard 400 as well so there was balance in my world. But that makes me ask the question.......Is the Brickyard 400 the real deal or is it just hype?
I will be the first race fan to say that the Indianapolis Motor Speedway is not best suited for 3,400 lb. race cars. The racing action is not the best either but for me it is just as important as Daytona, Bristol, and Darlington. Indy is hallowed ground for racing and to have NASCAR there just seems right. I also believed that Formula-1 just seemed right as well.
But I want to hear what you fans think about Indy. Is it all hype with bad racing? Is it a place that NASCAR needs to be? Let me know what you think..........
July 21, 2008 | Permalink
Comments
Well stated Mark!NASCAR needs Indy,and Indy could survive without NASCAR,But it Truly is magic when the two come together.If my guess is right,after the last few races,this one should be nothing but electric!There are so many on the doorstop of the top twelve,That it should be a very good race!I have often dreamed of being on the front stretch,if not for great racing,just to hear the thunder of the motors.My home track is Vegas,even if it is a 250 miler just to get there.I have made the cup and Nationwide/Busch race the last 4 years,and the fall truck race the last 2 years.But Indy will always,for better or worse be a dream I have!!!
Posted by: The Bear | Jul 21, 2008 10:34:47 PM
Mark, (and I'm still computerly challenged)
It's hype. It always has been. Stock cars at Indy, well, they basically, suck. It's a long flat track made for Indy cars. "Days of Thunder," applies. The cars weigh half as much and the tires are twice as wide. It works for them, but I see the stock cars having another boring event.
Maybe I'll be wrong...sue me.
Posted by: Keith | Jul 22, 2008 12:13:22 AM
The Bear,
What are you smoking? NASCAR has, as you deny, survived w/o INDY. INDY needed NASCAR, and NASCAR provided the press. I'm sorry, there is nothing in this event that makes it a great race, except pomp and ceremony.
Posted by: Keith | Jul 22, 2008 12:44:11 AM
Yep all Hype. That being said if you were to have a career driving a race car that track is where it all started. Its no different than a runner performing a hundred yard sprint, you can do that anywhere but when you do it for the Olympics there is history associated with it. As far as a fan event its really no big deal for stock car racing that will always be Daytona's distinction. But from a drivers (of any series) point of view to cross the bricks has got to be something. To know you finished first has to count for something in the world of racing. How else can you justify the feeling a Nascar driver has winning the Coke/Pepsi 400 at Daytona. Its not the 500 but its still a Daytona win. Same thing with an Indy win. Its not so much a great Nascar achievment but a great racing one. I suppose some of that will play with the hype but as far as drivers putting on a great "race" its just so so especially if you watch it in person. That has to be the worst facility in all of racing to view a race.
Posted by: Bob | Jul 22, 2008 12:55:09 AM
It's just another cup race, and usually not a very good one. But it's also huge publicity, and that's OK. It seems to mean a lot to the drivers as well, and that, too, is OK.
Posted by: Doug in CA | Jul 22, 2008 12:55:32 AM
The Brickyard 400 is easily the second most prestigious event on the NASCAR calendar outside of the Daytona 500. Although the racing action is not typically all that dramatic, the Brickyard is perhaps the truest measuring stick of the strength of a team. It is notable how many Brickyard winners have also been champions, several winning both in the same season. This suggests that Indy tends to reward the team who is at the top of their game, moreso than the Daytona 500, due to the unpredictable nature of restrictor plates. It is a lot of hype but a place like Indy is deserving of hype. The Indy 500s are rarely exciting either. A race does not have to produce great action to be important to NASCAR. We as fans would certainly like it to, but missing that doesn't take away the importance of the Brickyard, in my opinion.
Posted by: Brady | Jul 22, 2008 1:56:53 AM
indy lost some luster when drivers named al sr, al jr, bobby, michael, gordon, rick, and danny retired and were replaced by foreign guys with sponsor dollars.
ask jeff or kevin or especially tony if it's big to win indy.
Posted by: exile | Jul 22, 2008 2:59:14 AM
Been there once, in '98. Had some of the best seats in the place, and then went to Daytona later that October, for the first running of the night race. I decided then that I would never go back to the Brickyard (unless I get FREE tickets! haha).
One way to describe the racing at Indy: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...........
And that's the racing that you CAN see!
Posted by: Ironman | Jul 22, 2008 8:39:18 AM
Ironman,
I'm with you. I suppose racing is entertainment, and hype is good etc, but when you come down to the nuts and bolts, Indy sucks. It's only the pageantry of yesteryear that makes it even worth watching.
Posted by: Keith | Jul 22, 2008 9:18:38 AM
Keith,Ironman and others...The racing sucks there.What's worse than a flat track?A very long flat track!It's all hype,and I think with most fans,it has lost it luster just as the burnout!Hell,is it me or does all the summer races reek of bad racing?Even the OW races are boring.That being said,if someone offered me a free tix and whatnot,I'd be there to say I went or if I had the $$ to get tix and fly and all that crap I'd go.I'll watch it because I'm a fan and beer and more beer helps me get thru it as it does many of the snoozefest races!
Posted by: DJ | Jul 22, 2008 9:55:11 AM
I was at the Brickyard for the first NASCAR race there in 1994. I fell victim to the Indy hype. You couldn't see anything but between turns 3 and 4. I had 10 tickets I'd waited well over a year for and I never renewed them.
I really dread the races there as even on TV, they are boring! The place was never made for stock cars that need some banking and multiple grooves to be exciting. I don't care how prestigious the drivers think winning there is - it's boring for a fan. And I really get sick of TV and the media hyping such a truly sad excuse for a race.
Posted by: Another Cheryl | Jul 22, 2008 10:45:42 AM
Since I live just 45 miles from the Brickyard, I think it's the Real Deal. The racing may be bad sometimes, but it takes a great race team to win there.
To most drivers, owners, teams, etc. the Brickyard is not just another race. Some think it's the most prestigious race to win. I know most put the Daytona 500 on top but not all (insert Smoke). IMS was built in 1909 and will celebrate it's 100th birthday next year. IMO it deserves the respect most of us give it.
Now if you want to see some REALLY GOOD RACING go to ORP and watch the NCTS and NNS races. That would be well worth your trip.
Posted by: Diane | Jul 22, 2008 11:37:18 AM
Certain venues enhance the value of an event. This year's all star game was more special because it was at Yankee Stadium. Seeing an Opera at LaScala or a boxing match at Madison Square Garden adds to the aura. The same is true for Indy. The racing there sucks, but if you were to ask a driver if he could only have one career win, say New Hampshire of Indy, I think the answers would be unanimous.
Posted by: Peter | Jul 22, 2008 12:28:45 PM
Hype.
Keith knows how I feel about this.
Posted by: Joe | Jul 22, 2008 12:48:48 PM
Diane,
In the stock car world, the Daytona 500 is the career "must win" race. No-one will ever remember, or care, if a stock car driver ever did or didn't win a Brickyard race. It may be the standard bearer for other forms of racing, but it's just another NASCAR event if you live more than 45 miles from the track.
Joe,
Indeed I do...
Posted by: Keith | Jul 22, 2008 3:26:11 PM
Keith,
If what you say is true, why do so many drivers say that winning the Brickyard is 2nd or 3rd (behind Daytona & Bristol) on their list of must wins? I'm not talking about fans. I'm sure you guys in the south could care less if your favorite driver wins at Indy. But most of the drivers DO care. Watch their interviews or read their comments this weekend.
I agree that the Daytona 500 should be first and the Bristol night race probably is second. But please don't discount the Brickyard as an important win for the drivers.
Posted by: Diane | Jul 22, 2008 3:58:54 PM
The Brickyard 400 ranks with Bristol (the worst racetrack and perennially one of the worst races in NASCAR) as the most overhyped race on the tour. The history of IMS is undeniable, indeed, but the striking aspect of the 14 previous runnings of the Brickyard 400 is how forgettable all of them were. The Brickyard is a good measuring stick of a racer, but not as much as the other superspeedways - Pocono, the closest analogy to the Brickyard, is almost always a better race.
As for the Brickyard being a measuring stick of a team at the top of its game, consider the following -
- Jeff Gordon didn't win again in 1994.
- Ricky Rudd didn't win again and in fact all but collapsed the remainder of 1997 and well into 1998.
- Dale Jarrett didn't win again in 1999, coasting to a season title.
- Bill Elliott and Kevin Harvick went winless for nearly two seasons after their Brickyard wins.
I don't think the Brickyard really is that good a measuring stick.
Posted by: Mike Daly | Jul 22, 2008 4:28:49 PM
Mike Day - Contrary to your stats, the following is from nascar.com:
"In the last 10 years, the winner of the Brickyard has won the Cup championship six times. That includes twice in the four-year Chase for the Cup era, and four consecutive pre-Chase years, from 1998 to 2001.Them's mighty strong odds, considering in eight of those 10 years, the Brickyard winner ended up in the top five in the championship. In fact, in its 14-year history, Indianapolis' place in the Cup schedule has earned its marquee status by virtue of the fact that 12 of its 14 winners have finished in the top 10 of that year's standings; and nine of them have finished in the top three."
Keith - This is from Darrell Waltrip:
"For racers, going to Indy is like going to the Holy Land. When you walk inside the joint, the history just surrounds you. You don't get a feel like it from anyplace else. It's just incredible. Words don't do justice to how I felt when they said "Gentlemen Start Your Engines" in 1994 and us stock car boys finally were getting to race at Indianapolis. But the one thing that is pretty predictable is who is going to win. If you look at the record books since we started racing there, there have only been two drivers, Ricky Rudd and Kevin Harvick that have won the race and hadn't been an existing or past Cup champion."
From Larry McReynolds: "There's two races a year that people remember you for a long time if you win them: The Daytona 500 and the Brickyard 400."
From Dale Jr.: "The Brickyard is one of my top five must wins to complete my career."
The above quotes are ones I just happened to run across while reading the racing web sites today. I'm sure there are plenty more.
Posted by: Diane | Jul 22, 2008 5:11:36 PM
Diane,
It's only the hype of Indy that makes it a race drivers would "like" to win. Actually, I'm not southern, so demographics aren't a big issue here. Indy is all hype, and produces neither good racing, nor any indication of a team's prowess. If Dale Sr. had won neither Daytona, nor Indy, what would his racing resume have said, "Seven Championships, but he failed to win Indy?" I don't think so. The track at Indy is an American institution, but, in today's NASCAR, it's just another place they have to go.
Diane Part II
First off, you used quotes from Darryl Waltrip and McReynolds. Two of the biggest sponsor kiss-asses in TV history, and I could find quotes from any driver, at any track, that said a win at that track was historic and a must.
Posted by: Keith | Jul 22, 2008 5:30:01 PM
Keith,
Thanks for fixing my posting error.
Are you saying I can't believe what the drivers say? Should I ignore Jr's. quote. Sorry, we will just have to agree to disagree on whether or not the drivers think a Brickyard win means more to them than other tracks.
Posted by: Diane | Jul 22, 2008 5:45:56 PM
Diane,
What posting error ;)
Actually, since "big brother" NASCAR has control of the vocal chords, I do take any TV interview with a grain of salt.
It's the Indy name and hype that NASCAR's selling, but it's not a special event.
LOL, and you're right. Were we in the same neighborhood, we could discuss this at the local watering hole over a cold pitcher, and some hot wings. Wouldn't have it any other way.
Posted by: Keith | Jul 22, 2008 6:31:57 PM
I don't read loop data too much, and stats for past races are somewhat bland, but unless I am mistaken it is tough to pass at Indy unless you take two tires on pit road or something. With the CoT I think it will be even tougher. So you have single file racing for 400 miles, next to no green flag passes, even fewer lead changes, and the top 10 are separated by 13 seconds. No matter how you cut it....BORING. Now, the drivers may find it historic. Good for them. I'm a fan and the buck stops with me. Pardon the cynicism, but even the Indy 500 is all hype. Danica? All hype. In fact, the only thing not all hype is how hot it was today!
Posted by: Joe | Jul 22, 2008 6:38:46 PM
Diane, looking back at the Brickyard and series titles -
1998-2001 was the primary period when the Brickyard winner won the title. The other times were 2005-6. I don't put that much stock into the connection.
Posted by: Mike Daly | Jul 22, 2008 6:48:31 PM
Mike Daly,
Unfortunately the stats you posted are not as impressive as the ones on nascar.com.
The only years you listed were 1994, 1997, 1998 & 1999. And your reference was to losers, not winners.
I agree that the actual racing is usually not good or exciting but because of the track's history, the race is very special to the winner.
Posted by: Diane | Jul 22, 2008 7:35:45 PM
I agree that the actual racing is usually not good or exciting but because of the track's history, the race is very special to the winner.
What if he's lactose intolerant?
Posted by: Keith | Jul 22, 2008 7:47:55 PM
Post a comment
Advertisements
