NascarNow

[Jonesi]

NascarNow just had a very interesting discussion/debate on length of races, length of season, top 35, points with Marty Smith, David Poole, & Jeff Burton (they said Brian France couldn't make it). I think Jeff had the most practical view on most issues, although his comment that top 35 should be expanded to top 40 is probably not a popular one. The only thing they agreed on was non top 35 should qualify together. Program should repeat tonight (9pm here in PST.)

[call_me_andrew]

I saw that.

And I wish people would stop bitching about Pocono.

[Sparky1329]

Pocono is the most unique track on the circuit but 500 miles is a bit much. I don't think it should be eliminated from the schedule or lose a date because it draws from the metro NY/NJ fan base.

[harvick#1]

Pocono needs to go down to 300 miles, the race distance is a joke, then when a car is hooked up like Hamlin last year and Busch this year, its very hard to watch the race for a good lead battle,

[djparky]

I usually avoid Pocono- aside from the rain shortened event this year it's usually a drag, same applies to some of the mile and half tracks like Texas, Atlanta and Lowes Speedway- races could be a bit shorter

don't agree with this stupid top 35 rule- you're either fast enough to qualify on merit or you're not

as for The Chase- get rid of it completely

[Ted S]

Let's get rid of the top 35 rule. It won't affect the top teams and will give more small teams a chance to make more races.

[Lee Roy]

Let's get rid of the top 35 rule. It won't affect the top teams and will give more small teams a chance to make more races.


Actually, if you go back and look at recent history, after the advent of the 35/8 rule, the number of teams that started to show up to try to qualify increased. Before, you barely got more than 43 cars to show up for a race.

[Alexamateo]

Actually, if you go back and look at recent history, after the advent of the 35/8 rule, the number of teams that started to show up to try to qualify increased. Before, you barely got more than 43 cars to show up for a race.

While this may be true, I don't see it as cause and effect. In fact the rule was implemented after an Atlanta race had a ton of entries and all of the provisionals were used up by other drivers leaving regulars Scott Riggs and Scott Wimmer out of the field.

[Lee Roy]

While this may be true, I don't see it as cause and effect. In fact the rule was implemented after an Atlanta race had a ton of entries and all of the provisionals were used up by other drivers leaving regulars Scott Riggs and Scott Wimmer out of the field.

You use the example of one race. Try looking at the overall trends of the number of cars attempting to qualify before the 35/8 was instituted. And while the cause and effect is only known by the people who actually attempt to run the series, the evidence is overwhelming . . . . . and one thing is for sure, the number of cars showing up at the track drastically increased after they started the 35/8.

http://racing-reference.info/

[Sparky1329]

As mentioned on this NASCAR Now program the new teams entering the series in 2007 knew the Top 35 rule coming in yet they went forward with their plans. One of the loudest complainers about this rule is Michael Waltrip who also knew the rule coming in. He went ahead with his three team plans and got bit big time. That was his fault. It wasn't the fault of the rule.

[Jonesi]

As mentioned on this NASCAR Now program the new teams entering the series in 2007 knew the Top 35 rule coming in yet they went forward with their plans. One of the loudest complainers about this rule is Michael Waltrip who also knew the rule coming in. He went ahead with his three team plans and got bit big time. That was his fault. It wasn't the fault of the rule.

That's not completely accurate. There was one change made very late (after all plans & deals were made) and it only affected Waltrip's team, limiting Champion Provisionals to only 6.
The other thing he's asked for was non-'Top 35' qualify together, something that has a lot of support and may happen next year.

[Sparky1329]

True enough about the champ's provisionals but there were still not enough spots for all full-time teams to compete in each race. MWR had one guaranteed spot for at least six races which is more of a break than Robby Gordon got.

While Robby Gordon was building cars for his own effort during the 2004-2005 off-season NASCAR implemented the top 35 rule. He was blindsided by it and failed to make several races. Granted some of those misses were due to blown engines that had nothing to do with the Top 35 rule. Come to think of it the only thing I remember Robby complaining about in '05 and '06 were the blown motors that he purchased from Menard and DEI. He went into the '06 season outside of the Top 35 but he pulled up his big boy pants and got himself into the Top 35 for 2007.

[Alexamateo]

You use the example of one race. Try looking at the overall trends of the number of cars attempting to qualify before the 35/8 was instituted. And while the cause and effect is only known by the people who actually attempt to run the series, the evidence is overwhelming . . . . . and one thing is for sure, the number of cars showing up at the track drastically increased after they started the 35/8.

http://racing-reference.info/

OK, what you are saying is the top 35 rule causes more cars to show up. I don't think so. That race happened in 2004. Car counts were down because that was the year Kirk Shelmerdine made 18 races. Why were they down? Could it be that counts were down becuase of the mini-recession caused by the dot-com bust and the after affects of 9/11? I would think so. But as things picked back up, more cars showed up as evidenced by that late season Atlanta race where 58 cars showed. Now of course, the economy is humming along, and the open wheel mess has led to lack of viable alternatives for sponsors and of course Toyota has entered the fray.

I believe Nascar started the top 35 rule to protect the teams that show up weekend and week out from being bumped out of events like Daytona and others where many cars show up. The provisional system was there before, but that Atlanta weekend it didn't work like they hoped because so many of the irregular teams qualified very well that weekend and many teams in the top 20 had to use provisionals thus bumping teams in the lower 20's like Riggs (#10) and Wimmer (#22). It was a way of protecting regulars without going to a franchise type system.

What's attracting teams and sponsors to Nascar is the strength of Nascar, not a rule guaranteeing the top 35 qualify. There may be more cars showing up on average, but the rule is irrelevant.

[Lee Roy]

Why were they down? Could it be that counts were down becuase of the mini-recession caused by the dot-com bust and the after affects of 9/11?

You forgot global warming, sunspots, and El Nino.

I remember the prognosticators saying that the 35/8 would drive down the car counts, but they immediately went in the other direction.

[Alexamateo]

You forgot global warming, sunspots, and El Nino.

I remember the prognosticators saying that the 35/8 would drive down the car counts, but they immediately went in the other direction.

OK How does the top 35 rule attract more cars?

PS Lee Roy, I have a lot of respect for you and your opinions. I offered three possible and very real possiblities for a drop in car count and you have only offered snide remarks about global warming etc. Yes some prognisticators said car counts would drop, but I was not one of them. I think the top 35 rule has no effect on car counts whatsoever except to provide some guarantee to sponsors that their car would be in the race. I believe it was Nascar's answer to some people calling for franchising. Nascar said "Here's your guarantee."

What is attracting cars is the strength of Nascar and the fact that the economy has been doing very well. Will it continue? I don't know, Bobby Ginn was a casulty of business drop off, but Penske is adding a car. Things go up and down and maybe there will be a time in the future when only 43 show up to a race. Regardless, the 35/8 rule has no effect on car counts for good or for ill in my opinion, if you have reasons for believing the top 35 rule adds to car counts, I would be happy to hear them.

[Lee Roy]

What is attracting cars is the strength of Nascar . . . . .

Actually, NASCAR's TV ratings and attendance have been dropping for the last two years.



Regardless, the 35/8 rule has no effect on car counts for good or for ill in my opinion, if you have reasons for believing the top 35 rule adds to car counts, I would be happy to hear them.

I'm not trying to come up with any theories whether it has or it hasn't had any effect . . . . . I'm just looking at the results. The results say "yes".

[Alexamateo]

If this were logic class, this would be the logical fallacy of confusing correlation and causation.

"Nascar has instituted the top 35 rule, car counts are up, therefore the top 35 rule increases car counts."

That makes as much sense as:

"When sales of hot chocolate go up, street crime goes down, therefore more hot chocolate sales decrease crime." Well perhaps cold weather increases hot chocolate sales and keeps people off the street therefore reducing crime.

Sales of hot chocolate don't reduce crime, nor does the top 35 rule affect car counts (except perhaps to stabilize them) The way I see it it just corrects a flaw in the old provisional rule (which was done to protect the regular teams and drivers.) That flaw was exposed that day in Atlanta when a bunch of one-offs and irregulars were fast and ended up bumping two regulars.

Now of course there are more than 43 fully funded teams, something that is unprecedented in Nascar, if it weren't for that I doubt the top 35 rule would get much press.

As far as ratings and attendance drop, that may be true, but my original point was that car counts are up because of the general strong economy, the general weakness of Indy/Champ car racing as a viable alternative to sponsors, and of course the entry of Toyota into Cup.

Nascar may not be as strong as it was, but I am sure you'll agree it's the strongest American Series, if not, oh well.

Now, if the economy is dragging somewhat now, and Dodge leaves or cuts back, car counts could drop again in 2009 or so, but it will take that long to feel its effects, and guess what, the top 35 rule won't have anything to do with car counts then either except to keep at least that many teams running the full schedule. :)

[muggle not]

I believe that anyone can see that the top 35 rule has absolutely no effect on the increase in car counts. I am somewhat puzzled though on why it has increased since the TV ratings are down and attendance is down. TV Ratings are down big time, about 20% over the past 2 years. Usually sponsors bail out when they lose TV exposure. Perhaps it is that the other racing in the U.S. has declined and the sponsors are coming to Nascar, somewhat like the O.W. drivers coming.

[Lee Roy]

If this were logic class, this would be the logical fallacy of confusing correlation and causation.

Or wild assed guesses . . . . or throwing 9/11, dot.com, the economy, or Indy Cars against the wall to see if any will stick. And I may add, that you have as much proof of those . . . . . errrr "theories" relating to car counts as I do of the 35/8 rule.

But, sticking to hard cold facts, the average car count for the past few years has been:

2003 - 45.9
2004 - 47.6
2005 - 48.6
2006 - 49.2
2007 - 49.7

(If you go back before 2003, you will see the car count is even less than in 2003. But I'm too tired tonight to pursue this any farther.)

At least for those who proclaimed the ruination of NASCAR with the 35/8 rule, the opposite, as far as people who want to participate in NASCAR even with the decline in TV ratings and attendance, has continued to increase.