Good day race fans, and welcome to RacersReunion, a site we know is read by folks that matter. Recently… like this morning… I was looking at the NASCAR schedule, for reasons that escape me now, and couldn’t help but notice something missing. Days off! “Off weekends!” Remember those? I’m serious as a heart attack here, and I think I found the answer to a lot of the problems that NASCAR doesn’t think it has. You and I might tend to think differently.
Suddenly, I find myself looking lovingly back to the days when we only ran 29 or 30 races each season. Those now seem like the “good ol’ days”, when there were strategic breaks in the schedule that allowed drivers, crews, entire teams and let’s face it… fans… to take a break once in a while, if for no other reason than to allow the human body to regenerate.
Raise your hand if you remember “Rain dates.” Hmm, that’s what I thought. We used to have them though, and they gave teams the luxury of not having to wait through Sunday, Monday and even Tuesday, trying to get at least half a race run by out-waiting or outsmarting Mother Nature. You know what they say about Her! Oh, that might be the reason that Mr. France is so high on finding faster ways to dry the tracks.
Note to Brian France: Try to find one that doesn’t involve large volumes of jet fuel and can withstand a flank attack from JPM.
So where did all those off-weeks disappear to? First, of course, we had the great Western movement, when for some reason it became extremely important to extend the racing “Market” ( I am quickly learning to detest that word) into areas that either couldn’t care less (Fontana) or just said no. (Washington State) Add trips to Las Vegas, Chicago and Kansas in there and race dates were getting short. Give a second race to Phoenix and Texas and pretty soon, even without North Wilkesboro or The Rock, there was only a tiny smattering of off-weeks to be seen.
With that in mind, why not move the Daytona 500 back a week to somehow accommodate (run from) the NFL, which for years on end had adjusted its schedule to accommodate that same Daytona 500? Shame on the genius that hatched that plot, which only served to leave an entire weekend early this year with nothing worth turning on your TV for that wasn’t occurring on the History Channel or its close associates.
It used to be set policy that NASCAR didn’t race on Mothers’ Day. They still don’t, if we’re using semantics, but they do race the night before. That occurred in one final effort to eliminate Darlington Raceway from the schedule. Something didn’t go according to plan though, because despite having its only race on that heretofore sacrosanct weekend, Darlington ran a race and the fans came… lots of them! Hey, Moms are race fans too.
All of that left this year’s Cup schedule with exactly two weekends open, the as yet unthreatened weekend that includes Easter Sunday, and the one we see this weekend. Well, there has always been at least one break in the summer, but why this one survived isn’t clear in my mind. Personally, if I were making the rules, I might have picked a week that would better serve a purpose. How about the weekend before the Chase begins? If we must have the thing, wouldn’t that be the most logical place to stick the one precious off-week still floating free?
I’m pretty sure that a lot of you are already beginning to show signs of racing burnout as the long hot summer drones on and a brand new NFL season looms on the horizon. The free market has rules about that… the lower the supply, the greater the demand. While the gang in Daytona are plotting with their marketing experts in New York City (Please insert elderly cowboy with over-sized hat and mustache to match, delivering that line as an incredulous question), I’m thinking they are overlooking the obvious. Remove some races and I believe the results would be surprising.
Never mind the teams. It’s an established fact that they would be happy about cutting out a half-dozen or more of the currently scheduled races. Drivers might have kids that recognize Daddy again, but the main effect, if my thinking is correct, would be on the fans. So, what about you, my friends out there on the World Wide Web? Do you think your interest might grow if racing were not available every week, week after week and day after day? Enduring a steady barrage of endless and often mindless words, thoughts and pictures of anything will eventually turn off the most avid supporter. As time passes, it becomes like that old Chinese water torture… drip… drip… drip…
Here’s the part where I hope this column differs from all the rest, even my own. Instead of using all my space to give you my opinion, I ask for yours. This old gal realized years ago that you really don’t give a hoot what I think, but I do care about your thoughts, and I love having the chance to give you an open line to Daytona Beach. Thank you Mr. France, for having folks monitor this site and this column. This is where you can learn what the fans are really thinking Sir; not from a “market study” but from their own lips, or in this case, fingertips.
What about it race fans? Would you be up for some weekends off from racing over the course of a season? I am in no way singling out any track or tracks that I’d like to see cut back to one race, and I’m not even considering eliminating any track on the schedule today. I could, but it’s not my intention to start an argument or foster any ill will toward any particular track or area. Only to open an intelligent conversation on the currently overburdened schedule.
A couple of “fixes” are obvious, and would require no loss of races at all. First, put the Daytona 500 back where it belongs, in the natural flow of “Speed Weeks.” Next, move the All-Star Race to a weeknight. Keep it at Charlotte if that pleases everyone, but run it closer in conjunction to the World 600, maybe Wednesday or Thursday evening. Poof! We’d have two more off-weeks without lifting a finger except to write the new schedule.
Sure, I know that beyond that point there will arise some serious discussions, OK, maybe wars, based on the NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) theory in reverse. No one wants to lose HIS or HER race. That part would not be up to us, but I suspect any decisions would be based on someone’s bottom line. I would hope that any races taken off the schedule would come from tracks already having second dates, so that no one winds up totally without a race, as we saw with North Wilkesboro and The Rock.
Right now, all this is but some ideas escaping from the brain of a racing journalist, but I’m anxious for all of you to share your own thoughts on a shorter schedule with me and our NASCAR friends down in Daytona Beach.
Email: nas3car@etcmail.com
Twitter: @MamaPKL
If you’ve enjoyed your visit so far, we invite you to check out the Stock Car RacersReunion site by clicking here. By simply creating a log-in you will have access to over 100,000 vintage racing photos and thousands of articles, stories and conversations, some with legendary participants whose names you will recognize. As part of our racing family, you are free to enjoy the Chat Room and all Forums will be open for discussing your passion for racing with others of like mind. RacersReunion truly is where legends and fans unite.
In dragging a car from track to track on weekends it does get to be a hassle. I can remember my dad saying time out so to say,and no racing for a weekend or two,something about time for mom. But as in any sport I think you can have to much of a good thing. If you blanket the market it gets boring I think but if you give the customer or fan just enough he will live and crave the next piece,kinda like Dallas in its heyday.
Even if you live and breathe a certain sport NOT every one feels the same.
If the chase is to remain,as you said ,a break would indeed be nice before the boys have at it one more time. My take on it only but maybe others will chime in as to their feelings………..memories
Johnny, if anyone had told me 25 years ago that I would ever write those words, I’d have had a great laugh about it. But that was at a time when I was thrilled, living up north, to be able to actually WATCH the races instead of listen to them or read about them the next day.
I’m perfectly willing to take a share of the blame for what we have today, but I think that everyone needs to wake up and smell the smoke before the house of cards burns down. We’ve gone from nothing to overkill, and show no signs of even slowing down. I think I covered that in an earlier article this year… Ninety Miles An Hour Down a Dead End Street.
Your Dad had the right idea my friend. Take a day off. Time out! It’s the natural order of things. Reclaiming two of those weekends is a piece of cake, as I described. Beyond that would get tricky, but if NASCAR wants to get that bottom line back on the increase, I do think it’s something they have to consider. Of course, they didn’t listen in 2004, but maybe now that everything we tried to tell them back then is here, they might reconsider. Just trying! It’s all I can do.
Hi Patty Kaye! I heard an interesting conversation the other day regarding football and baseball and it does include our sport, NASCAR. The gentlemen were having a discussion regarding the size of the giant statiums (15-25,000 supposedly required by all the stick and ball sports. They found, through researh and study that many of these giant edifices won’t be needed in a few years. Much smaller stadiums, race tracks and arenas might be the way to go since TV and it’s ratings are growing leaps and bounds. I hate the word “Pay for View”, but these guys have figured out ways to either make it affordable of free. Take the sponsorship dollars. I wouldn’t mind going to a 10,000 seat event, It might be like some of the things I attended back in the day. Remember Richmond? I don’t know if the France family (and the Bruton Smith Group) would be interested in losing that much control and foorball and baseball is mmore fun watching on TV, These guys may something.
Denny, when you say that TV ratings are going up, I assume you are talking about ratings for ball games, but they certainly are not going up for NASCAR. Those ratings have been in almost steady decline since 2004… interesting coincidence there.
As to size of stadiums, those you mention 15-25K, sound like exceedingly small in size. Where we lived originally, the nearest football stadium was Rich Stadium, west of Buffalo, and the capacity back then I believe was 60K and it was the largest one. Even that though, would not begin to compare with most NASCAR venues today.
We started going to Martinsville back in the 80s and watched it grow from circa 20K to 90K by the mid 90s. Pocono, in all my memory, could always accommodate 120K or more. I fear though, that they finally hit peak and we are seeing the down-slide. They keep building them bigger, but they’re not making any more of us.
By cutting back some of the races, the seating and availability of it would slowly return to match the number of fans available to fill what would be left… if they don’t drive away any more fans. There’s a delicate balance there, but I don’t see it being improved upon at present.
Because I am a realist, I have considered that naughty word you uttered, Pay-Per-View. Funny, but I can remember being at Pocono back in the mid 80s, when they introduced some gentleman that was attempting to take over the two races there for PPV. You’d have thought the world was ending. Folks got on their feet and began to boo and hiss and scream so loud that the stands literally rocked.
It was the one solitary time I ever booed at a race track, but along with everyone else, we kept it up until the gentleman was shepherded from the stage with an armed escort… for his safety. In today’s market however, with TV losing so much of every race to advertisers, I can actually see the logic in paying a price just to NOT have the ads. That is a complete reversal in thinking, but it is something I might consider… depending on how much NASCAR would ask for its “product.”
As for live racing, count me in for a race run in front of 10K or less. I’m so dang old now that I couldn’t begin to make it up to the same seats we had at Pocono all those years ago. (Sky boxes… Terrace Club… start/finish line, right next to the press booth.) Life was good!
Patty, There’s just too damn much money involved to allow anyone other than those of us that don’t have it to see that we have saturated the market. It seems as if Bruton is the only one noticing that seats are empty and is smart enough to at least make some changes. If you’ve read the recent articles on Brian France’s latest interview it’s plain to see that he has no real clue as to the state of the sport. It’s almost like he’s totally disconnected. He talks about media changes, technology, more experts, what he ignores is the racing, the fans, the bad decisions coming out of Daytona. He keeps counting the corporate dollars coming into Daytona and doesn’t see the corporate dollars drying up for the teams. I don’t know what it would take to wake him up to reality. I think it’s heading to where at some point the family is going to have to step in and remove his seeming total control of something he just has no grasp of. It’s certainly frustrating as a fan to keep holding on to something we love while the powers that be don’t see there is a problem.
Mr. Clause, if someone doesn’t begin to “get it” pretty soon, there will be nothing left to get. I’m only one old lady from Georgia, but I have loved stock car racing for 60 of my years and that hasn’t changed as the CEOs did. I have every confidence that the sport itself will survive this regime, but we might not recognize it when the changes have all been made.
At some point, Mr. France either wakes up to reality, or reality will catch up with him. The best I can do is offer this column for the fans to speak, as you just did. I promise you, it will be read by someone in Daytona Beach. My guess is that the more civil our words, the better our chance of having it passed along to the proper desk.
You are correct in your observation that Bruton Smith seems to recognize the problem, but alone there is nothing he can do about cutting back on the 36 + 2-week schedule. That part is up to NASCAR. Will they even consider it? That’s a toss-up. I don’t see Mr. France agreeing to it, as it doesn’t fit his new-found love for technology, but as you indicated, perhaps his Uncle Jim or sister, Lesa, might offer some guidance.
My advice? Don’t totally give up being a fan. Eventually, the sport will win out, though it well could be our children that will see it. Now then… when are you going to tell me your real name Santa?
Walt Gruner Ms Maam!
I’ll probably anger some folks here, but there is only one reason we have this particular break. Indy. Is it a good reason? Not to my thinking. I don’t care for stock car racing at Indy. Never have. But to NASCAR’s marketing guru’s, it’s heaven. Problem is it’s not their heaven. It’s based solely on Indianappolis Motor Speedway history. But since the first NASCAR race was held there in 1994, the boys at the beach have commandeered that history and made it their own. And they have this nice little break so that they can remind everyone that the next NASCAR race is at Indy.
Carol Hon, I think you might be a bit hard on NASCAR about the summer break. There has always been one, but it used to be earlier, around the time of the Daytona race. The first year it fell right before the Indy race was 2005. Then, in 2007, they switched dates between Indy and Pocono, in order to make Indy the first race for the newly returned ESPN/ABC networks. At that point, the break did move back to before the Indy race, but NASCAR has always been prone to play games that way. Whatever the motive, that has been the time schedule.
I will however, second your opinion of stock cars racing at Indy. I love adore and completely honor and respect Indy when the Indy cars are racing there. Not so, the stockers. The track was not built for 3000+ pound cars and they should never race there. Stock cars need banking and Indy offers none!
Alas, none of that addresses the problem of where to find more breaks in the long schedule. We’re trying Mr. France. We really are trying.
There are a lot of races and a lot of ground to cover. Imagine if the drivers & crew still had to drive to races. There are too many races.
Mr. Hudock raises an interesting point about venue capacities. I have read several articles this past year about downsizing venue capacities and building cozier stick & ball stadiums that offer a more fan friendly experience. Now everyone is trying to emulate Fenway Park.
I came along in a generation when the Cleveland Indians played in Cleveland Municipal Stadium, whose capacity for baseball was 74,438. Imagine trying to fill that place today for a ball game.
We could immediately construct some cozier NASCAR tracks or bring back some abandoned ones. They were the Wilkesboros and Rockinghams. Many of them were the places that RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co. wanted off the schedule because they weren’t “major league.” Places like South Boston, Maryville, etc.
I’ll take a Cup race any day at South Boston over Fontana. As much as I tend to blame NASCAR for the ills facing us today, I’m all too aware of how the Winston brand also destroyed stock car racing as we once knew it. It was RJR that pushed and pushed to be in the L.A. & San Francisco markets regardless the venue or the cost to the racers. Schedule be damned was their philosophy. They wanted L.A. promotions. I’ve heard some of the conversations.
Can’t blame it all on NASCAR… we all know who invented the “modern era” and tried to leave out all stats and references to everything that ever happened in NASCAR pre-Winston.
Dave, having too many races is kinda what I said, isn’t it? Shortening the schedule would have to equal less races, with the exception of the two situations I pointed out that would merely compact what we have today. Yes, I know that at one time they ran schedules in excess of 60 per year; That was then, when most of the races were located in the Southeast and no one but a select couple of drivers even attempted to run a full schedule.
Today, the prize is too high not to run all the races, so even many of the start-and-park teams do it. I try hard not to make comparisons to stick and ball sports, because NASCAR does it all the time. We are a motor driven sport, not a ball game, and comparison is akin to monkeys and pincushions, absolutely not possible.
Some of the tracks you say that R.J. Reynolds drove off the schedule were dropped for much the same reason we’re discussing today. There were simply too many races. The “Modern Era” thing, believe can be credited to Bill France Jr., under whose watch it began. It set up a sort of dividing line between what Big Bill had accomplished and what would come later. The fact that the Latford point system came in about the same time, furthered the distinction.
Blaming R.J. Reynolds for anything is not germane to any conversation of current events, as they have been gone for years… and I for one, miss them terribly. Civility will get us past first screening. Being argumentative will get us a trip to the shredder.
I also do not like Indy for Nascar races/shows. In fact, I very seldom refer to the cars as ‘stock’ these days as I don’t feel they are.
Less races, ahhh yes, I remember those days. I think we need that again. But more than anything we need real racing and more real racers. When one really thinks of it, they have hectic but good paying jobs (?) if they just show up and do their thing on a weekly basis. They live a ritzy, glitsy life and enjoy amenities the older racers never dreamed of. With most of the drivers today, they have all the riches they need, jets to get places quickly and their families now have coaches to live in during the weekend if they so desire. Very few have core values like the racers of old. They complain at the smallest inconvenience and whine when they can’t win them all. Way too much saturation, imo with all the pre race, post race, special interviews, events to be seen at, etc…. When one is seen too often and too much, it often turns into “Less would be better”. Less is also much more intriguing and keeps a person wanting more. Too sad that the powers that be just want more $$$ and I think that is why the sport is really suffering.
Vivian, I think you found the word I was groping for… intrigue. That is a perfect description… like why a woman is more desirable in a well fitting sweater than without it. That little something left to the imagination creates intrigue. Wanting more can be a good thing if you’re the one that has it. Too much of anything is never a good thing.
I think I’ll stay clear of knocking the younger generation today. If they had cars capable of racing, I think they’d have right at it, especially if they were on tracks that were raceable. Indy is a perfect example… how could we expect a good race from 3400-pound cars on a platter-flat track the size of Daytona? Big Bill knew what he was doing, and knew flat would not work… and it doesn’t.
The supply and demand thing is quite simple. It’s the old Vaudeville line, “Always leave ‘em wanting more!” We used to want more; in fact, as I said much earlier, we demanded more.
Be careful what you wish for, lest you get it. We got it and now we can’t get them to take it away. Maybe we deserve it for being greedy, but we were only human and couldn’t see how it would end.
I do think they’re beginning to listen though. Cutting back the schedule is perhaps the only avenue that they have not talked about, which tells me that in some convoluted way, that is the path they are considering. Women will understand that instantly; men, I suspect will side more with something my husband used to say about logic and where I pulled it from when needed. I always won those. For sure, making seats larger to give the appearance of more fannies in those seats is not going to change things.
I definitely feel Dover needs to be off the tour and so does Auto Club. I find seriously, not because a 2nd Chicago Date is the right thing to do, but, I would prefer to see more balance in the schedule.
Well Tony, I started out by saying that I didn’t want to see this thread of conversation disintegrate into a battle over which tracks could or might be eliminated, and it won’t. Eliminating either Dover or Fontana to put another race in Chicago does nothing at all to address the topic at hand, which is the length of the NASCAR schedule.
I invite you to come back and comment on that topic if you like. Your opinions are always appreciated, but please address the topic of the day.
Tony you are out of your mind Chicago is by far the worst track on the schedule. More balanced schedule? What all 1.5 milers.
Keith, thanks for stopping by. Next time, how about having something to say on the topic presented? Please see my answer to Tony.
Patty
You’re right but I could not help myself with that one.
Understood, but I like to keep it friendly here. We are read, you know.
Thanks PattyKay,
Right on the nail head. Season too long. Cars are phony. Leadership (sic) wrong. Cup drivers belong in cup races, not lesser series. Would like to see 4, 8 race segments. Four quaters, get it? That would provide three good breaks between quarters. If stupid Chase is maintained, make it the 4th quarter (last 8). And it MUST include a road race. If they are not worthy of the Chase, then get rid of them altogether. Eliminate exclusivity of selected products which bans other like products with bans. Only serves to limit some sponsorships which is apparently getting severly hard to find nowadays. Waaay too many rules and arbitrary enforcement. The overall condition of NASCAR is in trouble and more fragile than most folks will admit.
Bill
Bill, it sounds as though you’ve been doing a lot of thinking, and from the sound of your ideas, you and I would get along quite well. Four quarters of 8 races each brings it to 32 races and those pesky non-point things add another 2. I’d still like to see a couple more along with the creative juggling I mentioned in the article. Just don’t you go puttin’ your paws on my road races though. I’d go all roads and short tracks if I had my druthers, but I’m a realist and not looking for that to happen any time soon.
The exclusivity in brands is generally caused by NASCAR itself, not individual teams. I’ve never liked it, as I feel it puts the sanctioning body in direct competition with the teams for sponsorship. If you read me for even a short while, you’ll hear one of my favorite lines over the years is, “Some species eat their young.” When it comes to sponsorship, NASCAR is a fine example of that statement.
Then we have the other extreme, the ever so popular guaranteed top-35 starting places. A blind man could see with ease that we don’t have 35 teams that are in any way competitive at this juncture, so NASCAR is guaranteeing a race spot to cars that start and park on a regular basis. That only serves to let in a car that will park but making a few great part-time teams, such as the Wood Bros. and Trevor Bayne fight and claw for one of the eight spots left. One mistake or a rain storm and they go home while someone far less worthy races.
Come back to visit often. Sooner or later, we’ll hit all the topics here… and I take suggestions as well, from the fans, not NASCAR, though if asked, I might consider that too.
Here’s my proposal for a 32- race schedule. Tell me what you think….
1.Daytona
2.Homestead
3.Phoenix
4.Las Vegas
5.Atlanta
—off—
6.Texas*
7.Martinsville
8.Fontana
9.Kansas
10.Talladega
11.Richmond*
—off—
$$.All-Star@
12.Charlotte#
13.Dover
14.Watkins Glen
15.Pocono
16.Kentucky*
—off—
17.Daytona*
18.Iowa
19.Michigan
20.Montreal
21.Chicagoland
22.Indianapolis
—off—
23.Bristol*
24.Darlington#
25.Richmond*
26.Loudon
27.Kansas
28.Sonoma
29.Texas
30.Talladega
31.Martinsville
32.Charlotte*
@=Thurs.night *=Sat.night #=Sun.night
Matt, you really put some work into that didn’t you? It’s tough for me to muddle through my morning coffee and see at a glance what’s added or missing, but I see a few points that might need a bit more consideration.
You didn’t account for the Pole-winner race, whatever they’re calling it next year, but that one shouldn’t be a problem. They could always put it anywhere they like in that week between qualifying and racing at Daytona.
Weather tends to be the killer for some tracks. When looking at February/March, we have to keep snow in mind. At first glance, I’d trade your positions for Atlanta and Fontana. It doesn’t snow at Auto-Club, but we’ve had a blizzard at Atlanta… March 13, 1993. Very happy though, to see Darlington back on Labor Day weekend, and Sunday night is fine with me. A bit cooler than afternoon.
Love the addition of Iowa! That is one sweet little track… bigger even than Richmond, but still a short track. Montreal is OK, but would you consider Road America instead? Much nicer track than the street course. Every time the Nationwide cars go there, I am jealous.
I see you’ve moved to one race each for Michigan, Loudon and Phoenix, and I can’t find a reason to disagree with any of those, but you left two at Kansas. I realize the deal with the Casino, and we are probably stuck with that, but in a perfect world, what would you think of replacing one of the Kansas races with Rockingham? That way, the two flat milers (Loudon and Phoenix) would each have a race, and so would the two banked milers, Dover and The Rock. (And we’d be rid of another race on a mile-and-a-half track.
Wanna have some real fun? Why not move Martinsville and Charlotte back a week and make Talladega the closing race for the Chase? As long as we’re playing, might as well raise the stakes. You already have Bristol, Darlington and Sonoma in there; why not end it with a bang?
Thanks for the schedule. Much appreciated! Please stop back often. I love fans that so obviously care.
Hey PattyKay:
Its refreshing to hear some new ideas about how to generate some new life in the sport I love. Here are some of my own …
1. Get the semi-pro leagues (Nationwide series, NCW Truck Series) back at some of the Fri./Sat. night hometown tracks. Nowadays EVERYBODY in these leagues are untouchable to the hometown tracks. What happened to the days of Myrtle Beach, Hickory, Motor Mile, South Boston, etc …
2. Get some track owners other than Bruton Smith and the France Family. Sorry, but if another 1.5 mile track (Charlotte, Texas, Atlanta, etc…) gets put on the schedule I will scream.
Good morning BT. Sorry I missed your comment last night, but you stay up a bit later than I, or live in another time zone.
I think every fan that ever sat in the stands or played in the infields would agree that the 1.5-mile tracks are far overdone and out of proportion… especially in light of the fact that they generally produce really boring parades rather than races.
Your other main point though, is on my to-do list of things the fans might like to be heard on down in Daytona… the status quo of the secondary and tertiary leagues, Nationwide and CW Trucks. Their outlook is not rosy. As always, I have some ideas… some call them opinions, and I will be sharing them quite soon, for both the fans and I to try once again to reach the proper desk.
Please stay tuned… same bat time; same bat channel.
Great piece PattyKay. I really like most of the responses but the one from B.T. Owens is really exciting. Would love to put him in charge of NASCAR. He has the right idea.
Patty Kay while I agree with you about today’s scheduling is a tough pill to swallow I also remember the days of a 54 race schedule mostly in the southeast but at short tracks that had a sold out and standing room only crowds.The teams mostly had one car and only the better financed teams had two cars.The driver,car owner and crewman had full time jobs at garages,service stations and mills. Yes there was no TV limited radio coverage. But it was a sport and not all about politics and power hungry sanctioning bodies and track owners. It was a grulling schedule for everyone but it was by far a lot better racing and a simpler time.If we would go back to some of the mentioned tracks mentioned above the racing would be better attended and put the short tracks back to work.I loved the old grand nationals running at Columbia, South Boston,Bowman Gray, Hickory and many other tracks.Just saying that they have out grown their usefullness in Daytona.
Mike, because we know each other well, you know that I remember the days of the exceedingly long schedules. Did we not have one year that exceeded 60 races? There were some marked differences though, between then and now. Back in the ’60s and maybe even into the 70s, no one not named Petty ran the full schedule and most came nowhere near.
The reasons behind that are simple. The prize at the end wasn’t big enough to entice racers to leave their work and families behind to chase that particular dream. Making the prize into the “Big Picture” might be the one thing for which I fault R.J. Reynolds.
Running all of the schedule back then was optional, not mandatory, and of course, races were held 3 or 4 nights each week, whereas today’s schedule is an endless game of turn-around, with teams returning to home base only to switch cars and leave again in another direction for next week’s race. NASCAR does little to help that, as the schedule generally has them running back and forth across this large country far more than necessary.
Back in the day (Most overused phrase of the decade) the races were, as you pointed out, predominantly in the Southeast, with the Northern Swing occurring over the summer months when the heat in the South in blistering. A man could run 3 races in one week and really never be far enough from home to necessitate a motel stay.
As to those little tracks, you’ll love my next column. If I ever get it written, it will be all about the short tracks and the NNW and CW Trucks. Oh, I have ideas my friend, and I want to present them, bit by bit, for discussion with as many race fans as can be rounded up and willing to comment. We know for a fact that someone from NASCAR reads our words here, and it is my intent to let the fans be heard through that open channel.
No fights, no name calling; just fans talking over what they see as right and wrong in racing today. Will NASCAR listen? I can’t promise that, but it’s worth a try. If we keep it civil and make intelligent statements, I believe they just might. Some of the radical changes seen circa 2004 have been changed or at least allowed to regress back to some semblance of what they used to be, but there is still much to be done and I hope to contribute toward that end.