Great idea NASCAR

FLORIDA STOCK CAR RACING KARNAC's FLORIDA STOCK CAR RACING
21

ARCA is old Cup cars. (Almost) nobody cares.

And I remember USAC, it was cool, but it was the ARCA of the day.

It would take the money to throw a better show than NASCAR out of the gate. It would probably lose money for the first 5 years (if not forever).

So, back at the reality farm, IMO, NASCAR has to get weaker before anyone else can knock them off the top of the heap, and in the meantime…we gots what we gots, the only choice is to watch, or not watch.

I slept through the entire Atlanta race from about lap 20 on. Found out Keselowski won from the wife.

22

I have to disagree with your assessment of USAC OS.With names like Foyt,Andreotti,Unser,Johncock,Sneva,Donohue etc in those fields they were much more than the ARCA of that day and even in that same time period ARCA was alive and well.USAC had every bit the following NASCAR had in those days.That was why Big Bill wanted so badly to get rid of USACs stock car division. USAC had much more of a national following in those days of than ARCA ever had or will.Lol it takes you to lap twenty? If I didn’t have a DVR I would never know who won a cup race.

23

ZeroFour,

Thanks, for sharing the names. Hurtubise, too.

Now that I think about it, you are correct. In their heyday.

Toward the end, not so much.

24

I guess that was a magical time in racing.If you lived down south you could see Petty,Baker,Farmer,Yarborough, Allison etc every week.If you lived up north you saw Hurtibese,Bettenhousen,Parsons,Glotzbach,Bowsher,Hartman and the likes.Sometimes at a place like Daytona and eventually Pocono the two intertwined. I don’t know if it will ever get back to that level but there is room for another series to make more of a splash than ARCA does.For if nothing else than the fact ARCA works in conjunction with NASCAR, they aren’t trying to compete with them.

25

change is part of life, correct
but in business change can bankrupt you or help you excel

like was said, NASCAR is no long run buy past racers, its the shirt and tie people…those aren’t the people that made the sport what is was.

I can prove that the changes are not working

Daytona cut 45,000 seats and still cannot sell out the 500
Atlanta cut 17,000 and had empty seats
Charlotte cut 41,000
Dover cut 17,500

all the tracks are cutting out seat and still cannot fill them

these are tracks people would wait for someone to die so they can get their ticket

the end started when Earnhardt and big bill France died and then came that silly car with the damn wing
:anim_pound:

26

Prove…?

Actually, the seat count loss is correlated with Brian and his changes but I would suggest cannot be proven to be causative.

“What the hell does that mean?”, you may ask.

It means that there are other factors, maybe many, that may have also contributed.

Like:

>Racing was a fad for a while. Every stick and ball schmo in the world wanted to be a race fan, as did their girlfriends. It was happening, it was “in”. Now racing is back to being a sport of neanderthals, as per the opinion of the masses.

>The tracks slowly got larger and smoother. And more boring.

>Ticket prices continued to rise.

>Old timers are dropping off the far end of the “fan” scale.

>Newbies have become less and less car oriented, period.

You perhaps are aware of the “scientific method” of research. Basically, it states that if you only change one variable, you can assume different results are due to that change. Change more than one, like stagger and a spring, who knows?

Finally, to further illustrate the point, how many women that are “expecting”(!), drank a coke in the last nine months?

Is the coke “responsible” for the pregnancy? If they switched from coke to sprite, is the sprite responsible? Clearly, the soda pop is correlated (that is, happened at the same time, but maybe coincidentally), but not causative (we all know what actually causes one to be expecting).

In conclusion, there is no way to tell if the numbers would not be far worse off if NASCAR had not made the changes.

Am not saying that is fact, am saying there is no way to tell.

27

Know what I find mind-boggling? The idea (and persistent internet meme) that “racing died with Earnhardt”. Really? Do you really mean that there have been no significant racers involved in the last 16 years? No worthwhile events? Sure, we were all DE fans, but the sport is much bigger than a single, iconic driver.

28

Dale Earnhardt Sr. had great car control. He also was a master of the art of “rough” driving.

That said, I cannot be included in the “fan” group, and his passing had no effect whatsoever in my perspective on Cup racing.

Which supports your overall point.

29

It’s going to be difficult to prove that the death of Earnhardt did or didn’t have a big effect on race attendance and tv viewers. We’ve all seen interviews and read stories from fans who just simply never watched another NASCAR race because their hero Earnhardt was gone. So it certainly had an effect, a big effect in my view.
But that also took place just as Brian France was taking over the sport. And we all know how hard he’s tried to alienate the old school race fans. So i don’t know how you could really say how much of an effect each of those things had. I do know that NASCAR and the talking heads insist that the continued downturn in tv ratings and race attendance recently is only because Dale Jr. wasn’t racing and Jeff Gordon retired. Could the absence of those 2 drivers really affect the popularity of the sport? NASCAR sure seems to thinks so.

30

“And we all know how hard [Brian France has] tried to alienate the old school race fans.”–Renegade

How exactly do we know that?

I would assume that he thought the old school fans would either like the new changes or tolerate them.

Perhaps he was partially wrong, but I would doubt that would be his intent, since our money counts the same as new money.

31

[QUOTE=OldSchool+;173929]“And we all know how hard [Brian France has] tried to alienate the old school race fans.”–Renegade

How exactly do we know that?

I would assume that he thought the old school fans would either like the new changes or tolerate them.

Perhaps he was partially wrong, but I would doubt that would be his intent, since our money counts the same as new money.[/QUOTE]

I’m not sure Brian ever thought it out far enough to assume the long time fans would like his changes. And i think we can safely say he was absolutely partially wrong. Maybe even completely wrong.
I was having a conversation with a long time NASCAR fan at the track during the truck race, and he mentioned that he stated going to the speedway back in the 1970s. I asked him what he thought of all the changes and his response was that the ONLY thing he could think of that hadn’t changed were the old restrooms located the infield. I had to admit that he right. Was it necessary to change the sport so completely that the only thing remaining were the infield restrooms? No. But Brian’s vision for the direction of ISC, NASCAR, and their tracks seems to require out with the old traditional ( anything his Grandfather and Father touched ), and in with the new young and trendy.
I don’t believe he ever gave a thought to long time fans, he assumed he wouldn’t need them with all the youngsters buying tickets and watching on TV. But he’s got billions and i don’t. So who am i to say.

32

“I’m not sure Brian ever thought it out far enough to assume the long time fans would like his changes. And i think we can safely say he was absolutely partially wrong. Maybe even completely wrong.”–Renegade

Partially wrong–no doubt, as (presumably) you no longer watch Cup.

Completely wrong–can’t be, since I (and presumably a few others) still do.

“So who am i to say?”--RRF

Your opinion is certainly as valid as any!

33

So if you have billions you must be smarter? Brain didn’t earn them his grand father did. NASCAR has been going down hill since he took over.

34

Just to revisit,

Big 'ol Bill banned Curtis Turner and effectively Smokey Yunick, and let Richard Petty win 10 races in a row in '67. Do we think that was good racing?

Junior Bill largely presided over the good-short-tracks-to-lousy-long-tracks conversion of the sport, and was also there when they invented restrictor plates instead of a better solution. Did all that improve the racing?

So, as far as I am concerned, as Hank Jr. sez, “It’s a Fam-lee tradition”.

That said, they all have managed to successfully promote the biggest form of Stock Car Racing for decades, so kudos to them for that.

35

I will say this in Bill Jr’s defense.Buddy Baker had turned unofficial timed laps at Talladega in 1969 approaching 220 mph in a winged Daytona.They HAD to slow them down. The narrower wheel and tire combinations NASCAR ran in those days just weren’t made for that underneath those heavy bodies.Everything else Billy Jr pretty much got wrong.

36

[QUOTE=OldSchool+;173946]Just to revisit,

Big 'ol Bill banned Curtis Turner and effectively Smokey Yunick, and let Richard Petty win 10 races in a row in '67. Do we think that was good racing?

Junior Bill largely presided over the good-short-tracks-to-lousy-long-tracks conversion of the sport, and was also there when they invented restrictor plates instead of a better solution. Did all that improve the racing?

So, as far as I am concerned, as Hank Jr. sez, “It’s a Fam-lee tradition”.

That said, they all have managed to successfully promote the biggest form of Stock Car Racing for decades, so kudos to them for that.[/QUOTE]

Apparently the fans in 1967 weren’t too worried about it, they packed every race and the crowd increased every year for the next 30 years.
And while restrictor plates may or may not have been the best answer to cars flying into the stands, the crowds still kept getting larger. So much so that Daytona saw the need to completely renovate the backstretch grandstands, adding 10s of thousands of new seats and even added suites.
Then, around 2000, Bill Jr. turned over what was one of the most popular sports in America to his son and daughter. Within 15 years, the backstretch stands were not only downsized ( including the late, much lamented beer garden ), they were eventually removed completely. Along with thousands of frontstretch seats.
The loss in fans and tv viewers could be attributed to a number of different things, or a number of things all combined. But the timeline sure looks like the new direction for NASCAR was the wrong direction. Much more emphasis on the corporate and fan experience ( gimmicks ) instead of good racing with a rules package that the racers and fans could understand. And i would think that the giant increase in ticket prices was probably a way to pay for the gimmicks that the fans really never asked for.

37

On a positive note, the view from the Daytona backstretch stands s-u-u-u-cked.

Now, they have escalators and prime rib sammiches and whatnot on a football-field wide slab of concrete on two elevated levels of the frontstretch stands, along with considerable additional seating.

A net improvement, I would say.

Regarding '67 fan levels:

Again, several factors in play. The cars were so much cooler and faster than '59. How much cooler are today’s cars than those of '09?

And the entire population of 1967, including the wives, were more hands on and independent types than the general demographic of today (imo).

Regardless, it still all makes my point.

In 1967 a single car was stinking up the show with a France at the helm.

In 2017, according to some, the show is stinking up the show with a France at the helm.

The fact that back then the peoples came and now, not so much, is not due to the (unfortunate) actions of the Frances as much as it is other factors.

Some, perhaps. But the percentages are impossible to calculate, as is the net plus or minus for any given decision.

38

Deeper and Higher

Formula 1:
“Formula 1’s television viewership in Britain fell to a 12-year low last season, with audience figures plummeting by 5.1 million viewers.”
“Formula 1 lost one-third of its global audience between 2008 and 2016…”–Motorsport.com

Indycar:
“The [Indycar] series trumpets television ratings that have improved 35 percent in the past two years [and very good for them], but they conveniently omit that even those numbers are about 70 percent lower than they were at their peak in the first half of the 1990s. Averaging just under 1 million viewers per race, IndyCar’s television audience is about one-fifth the size of the NASCAR Sprint Cup Series.”--ESPN

How about local track attendance (overall)? Does it look to be up from the '70s & 80s…?

Finally, also from Motorsport.com: “In the United States, since the turn of the millennium [ie, the year 2000], TV viewing figures [for F1] have dropped by 40 per cent among the under-25 demographic, an age group that traditionally made up a significant proportion of sports viewers.”

Am guessing Brian didn’t do all that by hisself.

39

F1 lost approx. 75% of it’s audience due to Bernie Ecclestone switching all televised races over to pay tv. Not a popular move with the fans in and out of the US. Similar to the move NASCAR made. Making it harder for fans to watch races hasn’t proven to be a very good marketing tool for F1 or NASCAR.

Indy Car never recovered from the split. No surprise their numbers are down. And to make it worse, televised races were moved to a channel that no one ever heard of. Now that you can sometimes catch the races on normal channels, the viewership is up. That accounts for the increased numbers over the last couple of years.

I can’t speak for all attendance at local tracks, i know some are far off of the tickets sold in the 70s. But then some like Citrus and Showtime are drawing good crowds. And 4-17 Speedway seems to growing all the time. Some are showing big growth.

Motorsport.com is absolutely right, tv viewing numbers are certainly off since 2000. The above pretty much tells the story of why. Along with a product ( in the case of NASCAR ) that fewer and fewer fans are interested in. And with the death/retirements of some of the sports biggest heros, big increases in ticket prices, constant meddling with the rules and the racing, Car of Tomorrow, NASCAR scheduling Saturday night races, and lot’s more choices for entertainment.
Citrus County and other tracks have shown that racers and fans are still out there. Maybe not as many as in the good old days, but they’re out there.
10s of thousands of fans still buy tickets for NASCAR, and millions watch on tv. Not anywhere close to the numbers of the good old days, but they still draw crowds.

40

Actually am fairly impressed with your theoretical reasons for the decline.

Each are popular in each discipline from similarly minded fans.

Blame the sanctioning body.

Curious though, they all are off from the “good old days”.

Or could it be simply that motorsports are simply passe (that is, out of date) among all but the most hardcore fans these days?

Am cool with all of it regardless. I love short tracks, tolerate and am amused by NASCAR, and can take or leave the other stuff.

Life is good.