Changes to the Chase - Chime In

I wrote my opinions about the new chase format HERE.

I am all for placing the emphasis back on winning. Will this format work? Time will tell. However, let's hope we'll see drivers settling for a "decent finish" become past history and that more drivers will compete for wins throughout the season. This is a start. I'm sure there will be more tweaks.

I agree brother Fulton!. Hope to never again hear a driver utter the words "he was racin me too hard".

I've read that under the new system, Junior would have won the championship and Kenseth would not have been eliminated before the final four race.

Bear in mind that Junior won 0 races last year and finished 5th in points while Kenseth was second in points and won the most races - 7. I don't think the fans will be pleased if the same scenario plays out in 2014. In fact, the lack of wins by the champion is said to be the reason that we have a chase in the first place.

I don't like it, but I've been wrong about some of NASCAR's previous decisions. It's official, there's no point in arguing. Although I'm surprised that there were no last minute changes. Since the story leaked, I have seen no positive reports in the media. They had at least a week to read those articles and fine tune things but nothing changed in the interim.

I have to say that I am on Facebook quite a bit. On every racing page I follow (Including museums, tracks, driver pages, teams, etc) there was a not a positive comment. I was shocked at how many said something like "Just go back to the pre-chase era". I have to agree. I do think that the last race could be exciting.....however, what if the top four going in are Johnson, Gordon, Stewart, and Kyle Busch. Let's say that at the start of the race, the four of them all get caught in a wreck and finished all in the 30's. Also meaning that if Tony Stewart is in 32nd place and in the garage, but ahead of every one (the other three)...he is the new champion.

I also don't think it should end something like what happened in the Nationwide Series this past season when the champion did NOT win a single race. When Dillion did win it, he stated "They said it couldn't be done, but we did it". That is true, but a champion is traditionally crowned based mostly on wins, with a part of consistency.

In theory, take Dale Jr.....He could have a very consistent season in 2014, just like last year. He could make it in the top few positions in points all year without a win (Just like '13). What if he won the race, or finished higher than the final three drivers in Homestead? He would win the championship.

Point being.....we don't need a championship based off one race, rather than the entire season. Anything can happen in one race, especially fuel mileage. Look at how many underdogs have won races in the last couple of years, and that's just one race, but didn't do as well over an entire season.

Like I said, it makes more sense that a championship caliper team being rewarded for a good season....not a good race.

-Cody

I like the new emphasis on winning. Teams are going to have to 'get up on the wheel' every race..... may be a pressure cooker, but some will rise to the occasion.

I'll step on a lot of toes here, but many folks have short memories and others have no memory at all.

For all the warm, fuzzy, feel good things written in recent years about Benny Parsons clinching the Cup points championship at Rockingham in 1973 with help from other teams, there was a tremendous amount of negative publicity about NASCAR having a Champion with just one win, that having come in race #18 at Bristol. The fans were not happy and the media panned NASCAR.

Ned Jarrett won only once in his 1961 Championship year. After that and up until Benny in 1973, the NASCAR Champion had multiple wins.

Year Champ Wins

1962 Joe Weatherly 9

1963 Joe Weatherly 3

1964 Richard Petty 9

1965 Ned Jarrett 13

1966 David Pearson 15

1967 Richard Petty 27

1968 David Pearson 16

1969 David Pearson 11

1970 Bobby Isaac 11

1971 Richard Petty 21

1972 Richard Petty 8

30 years after Benny Parson's 1-win 1973 Championship, we had another 1-win Champion in 2003 when Matt Kenseth earned the title with just 1 win. Fans screamed and NASCAR reacted with The Chase.

As my old friend, Paul Sawyer told RJR's Ralph Seagraves at the 1981 NMPA Convention in Myrtle Beach "Nobody ever came to a stock car race to see drivers earn points and nobody ever came to a track to talk about cigarettes. They come to watch drivers beat and bang for wins!"

Paul Sawyer's assertion still holds true 33 years after he said it to Seagraves in January 1981. We want to see drivers race for wins. We don't want to see a 1-win Champion today any more than we did in 1973 when Benny generated so much negative publicity as a 1-time winner.

Amen...... wins, not fuel management gifts or team mate assistance...

most likely it will still be the same results. I'm always hoping for some good racing so we will see.

In case you missed it, NASCARNOMICS proposes at least four points systems that I feel are better than what we had and what we will have. There's even one that keeps the chase but puts more emphasis on wins during the season. Then they list what the outcomes would have been going back to 1975. Each has positive points and I can't decide which one I prefer. I would eagerly accept any of them over what we've just been handed.

I also liked this paragraph that describes the experience of being a NASCAR fan.

In stick-and-ball sports, fans become fans via geography -- because you grew up in Boston or Detroit, you are a fan of the Red Sox or Tigers. Outside of the Southeast, NASCAR doesn't have a geographical component, and becoming a NASCAR fan is more like becoming a fan of an underground band.

You buy one CD, like it, buy another, like it, and so on. You show up in a dank concert hall to watch them play. You meet other fans. You evangelize new fans. When new material comes out, you measure it against the old material. When the band hits it big, you brag you've been a fan for years and watch for signs of selling out. If the band starts venturing into new musical territory, you wonder what was wrong with the old sound. At some point the band stops being the band you loved and becomes something else.

I think nascar should take a poll from the fans let them come up with ideas then take a vote.

I sort of agree with you Jeff, as well as with most of the responses here. I'll take the "wait and see" attitude. As we all know, I would prefer NO Chase but it appears that is what we will have under one plan or another. Having been a NASCAR fan for 60 plus years, I have seen the points system change numerous times and every time that happened, there are those who go back and say "if they hadn't changed it, so-and-so would have won". What they miss, I think, is that all (well most at least) have to play by the same rules. When Daytona kicks off the season in a couple of weeks, everyone is equal. From then on it will be, this year at least, a dog fight to win races. I think that is a good thing. Will help some, hurt others.

Having said that, there are many out there in the cyber world who hate the system just because Brian France announced it. As I've said, I am no Brian France fan but giving "the devil his due" you can't believe he came up with this all on his own. There were many parties with input to this decision I'm sure. Again, I think, it goes back to those young marketing "experts" who think they know what fans want. Part of their problem is that they don't even know who the fans are.

That's my "two cents worth". Ok, maybe a nickel worth.

NHRA copied the Chase deal for their eliminations. Now NASCAR has copied NHRA eliminations type deal for the Chase. I would like to see the Championship go back to the old points system with a few tweets.

If a racer is in the top 10 more than one or two guys winning only once, then he should be the Points Champion. The Chase SUCKS! And slow the cars down NASCAR.

That is my opinion and I am sticking to it!

I don't think any changes are realy going to matter, the list of characters will will probably wind up the same. their just trying to creat more excitement and I give them credit for that but over all I think the interest has faded somewhat

Another thing I would like to see and that is, if the point system starts at Daytona, why not finish the points system there. Change the date for Miami or add another race. What do you think?

I'm not sure they can fill Daytona during football season. I do think that Homestead is a lousy place to end the season. The track has no history or personality. I think Las Vegas or Fontana would be better but my vote would go to Phoenix because it seems like a difficult track to conquer and has produced good stories in the past.

Another loophole in NASCAR's rules that's big enough to drive a transporter through...

According to NASCAR's press conference:

Q. Is there a minimum points standing that a driver who records a win during the first 26 races must achieve to make the Chase Grid?
A. Yes. A driver must be in the Top 30 in the NASCAR Sprint Cup Series points following the first 26 races AND have attempted to qualify for all of the first 26 races.

Someone has told me that this means the only drivers who can qualify for the last ten races are those that are in the top thirty and have tried to run every race. Qualify for the race, not the chase. So there will be a maximum of thirty cars on the track. Can anyone confirm this interpretation of the rules?

Andy - that analogy made me laugh. I think when it comes to music, that may well fit me to a tee. When it comes to racing, I do often wonder if I've gotten exactly what I wanted. As a kid, I always wanted more TV coverage. As a college guy, I wanted all my buds to share my same enthusiasm for this sport. Ridicule it? Do so at your own peril as I may go Tasmanian Devil on you. As a young, salary-earning, pre-marriage/kids adult, I wanted to sit in better seats - with better view and fewer splinters. As a married man who was now more selective as to what races I would attend or watch, I wanted great sightlines and constant coverage. As technology evolved, I wanted more coverage of off track news - and I wanted it NOW. But as I approach a half century on this earth and 4 decades as a fan, ehh suddenly racing is too over-exposed, too tricked-up, too expensive, too predictable. Ha.

NO CHASE!? After all I've posted to this site Tim? Crushed man, simply crushed. Expected far more from you. LOL

That's one of the better ideas I've seen tossed around on Twitter. If this First To Finish model that wins the Cup in the final event will indeed be the most hyped race on the schedule 2nd only to Daytona, then NASCAR should likely consider a rotation of venues. But mid-November? Choices are limited right? Homestead, Daytona, Vegas, Phoenix and California. We know the weather history of Atlanta - dry but COLD. Talladega and Texas would likely be the same.

Now that ISC controls the final race - and with common management with NASCAR - I don't see a scenario where SMI gets the final race of the year again. That means Vegas is out.

I'm not opposed to the season ending at Daytona. Matter of fact, I've suggested that a few times in recent years as the traditional July 4th date and Firecracker name disappeared. But Andy, you make a good point about ticket sales. Starting and ending the year at the beach is one thing - selling 100,000 seats in November in the meat of the NFL season is another.

Not sure about the 30 car max you are referencing. But the 2nd part of that 'answer' is the one that confuses me. As I understand it, NASCAR will be implementing a new concussion policy this year - closer in structure to one adopted by the NFL and NHL.

I know Brad Keselowski is against it. And I think it was Denny Hamlin who suggested he could see some drivers missing some races this year because of the new policy. So how about this scenario. A driver wins 5 races before the summer Daytona race. Easily headed for the Chase right? But gets clobbered in the Big One at summer Daytona and misses 3 events. Loses a bit of mojo but doesn't fall out of top 30 in points.

So in this example, does this 5x winner still make the top 16 for the chase even though he didn't attempt to qualify for all the first 26 races?

Tim, I'm glad theres somebody besides me that goes back that far. I wish the cup guys had at least one half mile dirt race in the season. seperate the drivers from the hollywood guys. my three cents,change for the nickle.

This article says Homestead has the smallest seating capacity at 46000 of any of ISC's ovals. Only Watkins Glen is smaller. With all of cutbacks in grandstands lately, there's probably a reason why they chose Homestead to end the season. Daytona has three times as many seats and it hasn't been full lately. It looks real bad when nobody shows up for game 7 of your championship. Naturally they want to declare a sellout, and hope to brag that scalpers are getting Super Bowl prices for tickets. Ok, maybe Stanley Cup prices.

I think they should rotate at least half of the chase venues every year, with the result that the mix of speedways, road courses and small tracks would also change. But that probably would hurt the tracks.

Yeah, they said that they could make exceptions if needed. You can call it the Jeff Gordon rule.

What will really hurt them is if they lose a couple of star players. Let's say that Junior led the points all year and gets a concussion at Talledega during the chase. He has to sit out two races and gets eliminated when he could have won the championship under the old rules. What if Stewart is out too, and their final four is Truex, Logano, Newman and Harvick. Hard to generate excitement for that line-up.

They don't want the Wood Brothers winning Daytona and the championship and only running four or five races. If they had Pearson driving I could easily see that happening. They know it's not impossible for a start & park team to win Talladega or Daytona and not run more than twenty laps in any other race.

Frankly, I don't see how a part-time team has the money and organization to compete for the championship and they are worrying about a problem that doesn't exist. But if they open it up to more than 30 teams then you've essentially gotten rid of the chase. The only reason they expanded it to 16 is because it's an easy number to do several eliminations on.

great jab Chase, lol....got to keep the Legend on his toes....

I agree, BB...it's always been about money, and this new system will really separate the men form the boys. Only the mega teams, and there's maybetwo of them, can afford to win every week. So, after all is said and done, it'll be a lot more of the same.

well these days we have the newer generation of Nascar, Big Bill was more old school I would vote for Daytona being the finish too. Danica might even win a race but not the championship. also I would like to see them run two say25 lap heat races, a conslation race to determine the line up then a 200 mile main to determine the grand winner. jus a thought. willie

in the older days like even the 60s last place was equal to the number of miles the race ran, ie daytona last place was $500. the dirt tracks may be $100.00. now its way up in the $1,000 s no wonder there are start and parkers, some times if there were more than enough cars for a race, they would send you home for the smallest infraction, but if they were short of cars, they would send you home to drag anything you had sitting around the yard and bring it back. Norris Freil was the most hated man in Nascar.

That was one of the points scenarios listed in the link I posted yesterday.