Depth of NASCAR field gone down?

[NickFalzone]

I'm starting to notice that the "top-35" this season no longer means a whole lot. Basically anyone who is not a start and park is in the top 35. I realized this when I looked up Hornish in the standings after today's race. The guy has, I think, crashed in almost every race this season. Horrible finishes for most of the season, but about as poor as he ran last year, and the year before. Difference is, he was struggling to stay in the top-35 the last couple seasons with similar results, now he's well within the top 35, I think 200+ points up and solidly in 30th. So imo, the depth of the field in 2010 is not nearly as strong as it was even 2 seasons ago.

[e2mtt]

This is true. Right now, we have about 15 good teams + drivers, another 20 drivers who may run well occasionally but have no chance at a win, and everyone not it those ~35 is severely underfunded or just doing the start-and-park thing.

On the bright side, it is still the deepest field of any major racing series, probably won't shrink much further, and has lots of opportunity for new drivers & teams to break in.

[Mark in Oshawa]

yup...any time you are talking about the competitive depth of a series being 35 cars debt, to call what we have now as a bad period is crazy. Truth be told, the true quality cars in every year going into the 80's could be counted on both hands....

[NickFalzone]

I'm certainly not suggesting that, comparatively to other racing series, NASCAR's field is in bad shape. But compared to itself, it's definitely not nearly as strong as it was in the last 4-6 years. Right now the top 35 doesn't mean a whole lot. As long as you have entered each event and had a couple top-25ish runs, and a lot of worse results, you're locked in. The start and park guys and the ones that havent' run every race obviously are outside of that bracket. But just a couple years ago, "good" teams were struggling to stay in, no more.

[Lee Roy]

Maybe NASCAR can consider reducing the locked in 35 to a lower number, maybe something like 25.

[NickFalzone]

Maybe NASCAR can consider reducing the locked in 35 to a lower number, maybe something like 25.

I think that dropping it to 30 would make sense, although I would be stunned if they decided to do that in the current economy (good for competition imo, possibly bad for business).

Just out of curiousity I ran the numbers on the first 12 starts for Hornish the last 3 years.

2008 - avg. finish 28.5
2009 - avg. finish 23.75
2010 - avg. finish 26.3

I'm pretty confident that in both 2008 and 2009 at 12 races in, he was struggling to stay in the top 35. Now with finishes fairly close to his rookie season, he's solidly in at 30th and 200 points up. One also has to wonder what is up with the Penske 77 car running that far back and the 2 regularly running top-5. Obviously driver difference, maybe some moderate equipment difference, but that's another discussion. I just think someone at Penske & sponsors has to wonder what's up when u have such a huge disparity between teammates.

[call_me_andrew]

Top 30 or 25 would be a good start, but I think the best solution for competition would be to start the 35 fastest cars with the highest ranked cars not fast enough to race (which effectively locks in the top 8).

[NickFalzone]

I personally believe that they should simply let as many cars on track as have entered, with reasonable rules on a minimum qual/practice speed and must make best efforts to prepare a car that can complete every lap of the race. I would not mind 40 cars, or 46 cars with 6 slower ones, what pisses me off is slow "big team" qualifiers that get locked in, and the "small team" qualifiers that create a qualifying car than cannot or will not race more than a few token laps.

[slorydn1]

I think that dropping it to 30 would make sense, although I would be stunned if they decided to do that in the current economy (good for competition imo, possibly bad for business).

Just out of curiousity I ran the numbers on the first 12 starts for Hornish the last 3 years.

2008 - avg. finish 28.5
2009 - avg. finish 23.75
2010 - avg. finish 26.3

I'm pretty confident that in both 2008 and 2009 at 12 races in, he was struggling to stay in the top 35. Now with finishes fairly close to his rookie season, he's solidly in at 30th and 200 points up. One also has to wonder what is up with the Penske 77 car running that far back and the 2 regularly running top-5. Obviously driver difference, maybe some moderate equipment difference, but that's another discussion. I just think someone at Penske & sponsors has to wonder what's up when u have such a huge disparity between teammates.

for starters...I agree with your premise entirely.

Secondly, although I can't prove it for sure after 12 races (I can only prove he wasn't in the top 20 after 12 races either year; racing-reference.info only shows the top 20 in points after every race) I can prove that at the end of the season he was :

2008 P35 with 2534 points, 74.53 ppr (missed 2 races so must have been a GOGH'r at some point)

2009 p28 with 3203 points, 88.97 ppr and he ran all 36 races

2010 p30 with 1013 points, 84.42 ppr, after only 12 races, definitely a step backwards so far

[NickFalzone]

for starters...I agree with your premise entirely.

Secondly, although I can't prove it for sure after 12 races (I can only prove he wasn't in the top 20 after 12 races either year; racing-reference.info only shows the top 20 in points after every race) I can prove that at the end of the season he was :

2008 P35 with 2534 points, 74.53 ppr (missed 2 races so must have been a GOGH'r at some point)

2009 p28 with 3203 points, 88.97 ppr and he ran all 36 races

2010 p30 with 1013 points, 84.42 ppr, after only 12 races, definitely a step backwards so far

well.. based on your inconclusive stats here, his current P30 position actually IS roughly in line with previous years points, so maybe I was incorrect - (ie slightly worse position than last year with slightly less ppr, and better position than 2009, makes sense bec ppr this year so far is better). I think the underlying message of this discussion is that Hornish is not making the improvements expected/needed by this point in his nascar career.

[slorydn1]

well.. based on your inconclusive stats here, his current P30 position actually IS roughly in line with previous years points, so maybe I was incorrect - (ie slightly worse position than last year with slightly less ppr, and better position than 2009, makes sense bec ppr this year so far is better). I think the underlying message of this discussion is that Hornish is not making the improvements expected/needed by this point in his nascar career.

No actually you were spot in your initial assessment. See, its not just about Hornish (and your memory came pretty damn close to jiving with the facts) but have we yet experience the "heart is breaking" story as the media would have put it because a major league, well funded team has been sent to the house.

Hornish, at P30, is at the very, very bottom of the super-team ladder, everyone behind him on the points are struggling to make it to the track every week.

Give your self a little more credit, you hit the nail on the head, even if the numbers were just a little off.....

[damg75]

Maybe NASCAR can consider reducing the locked in 35 to a lower number, maybe something like 25.
That's somewhat how it USED to be 2004 and prior years...the top 25 were given an unlimited amount of provisionals while 26th on down were given a set number, so in effect, the top 25 were "locked in"...I would go along with the top 25 being locked in, 35 has always been too many for me.

[Mark in Oshawa]

I think they wont mess with a thing. The top 35 suits their purposes, because although they wont guarntee the top teams a "Franchise" seat, this is their behind the back way of doing it. You knock this down to 25 or 30 teams, maybe some really good teams will be sent home at some point....and you know they just don't want that.

It wont change because there is no real reason to change. In a bad economy you have more than 43 teams trying to make the field. If the sponsors start coming to the back marker teams like they would in a healthy economy, the start and park phenomena will go away with it. In short, a healthy economy solves all problems...