I just read Joe Menzer’s article on the NASCAR.com main page about his suggetions for a shorter Cup schedule. Now, I read this article, trying to keep an open mind, which was very difficult having just gone thru an extremely painful week off!
So, when I clicked on the link to read his opinion, in my mind I was already saying “Are you joking? A SHORTER schedule? They already get far too much time off!” Now, that response was purely selfish and personal. I go thru TERRIBLE withdrawals from November until February! We start the countdown to the Daytona 500 the DAY AFTER HOMESTEAD!
Well, the first part of his article, comparing all the different sports and their seasons was interesting, but hardly convincing. I mean, I wouldn’t want to watch basketball, football, or even hockey any longer than I already do. But RACING??? I could watch if 52 weekends a year! I don’t need any weekends off!
But you know, the man has a point. I won’t repeat what he says, you’ll have to read that for yourself. But suffice to say, one visit to selected tracks instead of two, plus alternating visits to some other tracks is an interesting thought! If we only went to California every second year? Do ya think the seats might be a little fuller?
Now Mr. Menzer has already acknowledged that no one will give his suggestion a first thought, let alone a second thought, but it is an interesting idea.
So tell me? What do YOU think? Inquiring minds want to know!
20 Comments
Canadafan88
Apr 06 2008 01:20
Shorter Schedule? NO!
I Definitely agree with you JrCanuckfan, I could easily handle 52 races or more. Now I realize the drivers couldn’t do it and wouldn’t expect it. They already go through an incredible amount of work during the season and the off season no matter what non-fans think, although they are well compensated.
I can’t get enough either though and last year I pre recorded about 15 races on DVR to get thru the winter.
I think a partial solution would be to show old races on ESPN Classic and Speed and maybe a few from the previous season. They already show a lot of crap that I don’t know who watches but that’s just my opinion.
JrCanuckFan
Mar 25 2008 14:30
Okay
pugnut, point taken there, costs might end up being about the same with the accomodations, etc. I think we are already looking a little more cost effective by having the teams in the west (Cali, LVMS) then back east (Bristol, break for Easter, Martinsville).
As you said with “away races” even though the new car is supposed to eliminate teams’ need for as many cars, if they wreck the primary car, the backup gets put into use, and that requires the almost immediate need for another car to become backup.
Seems there are pros and cons to this suggestion, just like any other.
realist1961
Mar 25 2008 08:35
agree with joe
the season is too long for the teams and families. there is little time off. certain tracks don’t need a second race date, and rotating tracks makes a lot of sense, especially with new tracks on the horizon and existing tracks with no race dates. should a nearby track lose a race or be skipped that year, fans will more than likely travel to a different track. his idea makes a lot of sense.
Pugnut
Mar 25 2008 08:25
I also sent
Joe an e-mail about his article. I like the idea’s everyone has mentioned here. However, there are problems with going west and staying there for a several weeks. Unlike the NBA, NHL and MLB, where a series of away games, is 4 games in 7 days, 4 races would mean 4 weeks away for home and the shop. Costs would include hotel and food for the crew. Finding garages/places to work on the cars when not at the track. Getting parts and back-up cars from the east coast. It would be a costly and logistical nightmare.
KarinB
Mar 25 2008 01:42
29
your comment made me dizzy!! LMBO
KarinB
Mar 25 2008 01:41
Okay so we all
agree that the schedule should not be shortened. Good. Sigh of Relief. Next subject is the race scheduling geographically. I agree with Poor. Is the weather the only reason why they criss cross the country like they do?
29dntc9
Mar 25 2008 01:19
Spellor has.........
The right idea, although I would stay South while heading West…..weather might be better, than head back East via the North. But, it would have to circle the continent TWICE, Cause I do NOT believe in a shorter schedule!
LOL!!
JrCanuckFan
Mar 24 2008 23:56
Excellent
point spellor, that alone would cut down on a lot of the time, money and exhaustion the teams spend going to the races. The only downside might be weather, if they move north too fast
PoorSpellor
Mar 24 2008 23:50
I think the races should be closer to each other
What I mean is; don’t race in Daytona then have to get to Fontana the next day.Go from Daytona up the eastern seaboard ( Atl to Rockingham to North Wilksboro to Charlotte to Martinsville until they get to New Hampshire then head West.At least it would ease up some of the travel and maybe then they would race 52 weeks a year! I know I should have looked at a map first but give me a break!
LUKE4HMS
Mar 24 2008 23:05
NO OFF TIME!!!
RACE 52 weeks!!
Guys I am in and Out tonight, Hope to catch up later!!
Have a great night!!