NASCAR: Should the Chase Feature a Road Course Race?

Year in and year out, drivers go into Watkins Glen knowing it can be a Chase game-changer.

In 2012, it lived up to that moniker again.

But with its potential to shake things up and make things exciting, a question emerges:

Is it time to have the Glen shake things up inside the Chase, instead of leading up to it?

Fans have debated the 10-race playoff's lack of a road race since its inception in 2004, and the tricky, seven-turn course in New York consistently provides one of the best shows of the year.

So why not slide the annual New York trip back on the schedule to fall inside the final 10 races?

When I'm asked whether I think there should be a road course event in the Chase, I usually answer with some variation of "I'm not saying there absolutely shouldn't be, but I'm okay with the fact that there isn't one."

And here's why.

First off, any argument for Watkins Glen based on this past Sunday is skewed and, therefore, unusable. The extraordinary finish caused by NASCAR's sudden onset of a swallow-the-whistle mindset livened up what had been, up to that point, a fairly lackluster show given the hard racing and paint-swapping the track had produced in years past.

But there are intriguing points to be made for both sides.

Pros:

NASCAR crowns its Sprint Cup champion based on their performance over the last 10 weeks of the year. In those 10 weeks, the Sprint Cup Series races on a myriad of tracks that include:

• Two (relatively) flat, one-mile racetracks; one a true oval (Loudon) and one a tri-oval (Phoenix)
• One 2.66-mile tri-oval (Talladega)
• One flat, 0.526-mile oval (Martinsville)
• One high-banked, one-mile oval (Dover)
• Five 1.5-mile high banked racetracks; Two quad-ovals (Charlotte and Texas), two tri-ovals (Kansas and Chicagoland) and one true oval (Homestead)

That pretty much runs the gamut of Sprint Cup tracks (unless you want to get technical and decry the absence of a high-banked short track like Bristol, but let's digress...)

The only substantial thing missing is a road course, which usually draws the ire of some who say they want the Sprint Cup champion to show he can perform in the Chase on every type of racetrack that the Cup Series races on.

Not to mention the fact that it would spice up a Chase that is filled to the halfway point with similar cookie-cutter racetracks that tend to produce less-than-stellar action.

Cons:

NASCAR turns right twice a year, at Watkins Glen and Sonoma. In a 36-race schedule, that equates out to just 5.5 percent. Even if you just equate it to the 26-race regular season, those races equal just 7.7 percent.

So those who want a road course race in the Chase want to stage 10 percent of the Chase on a type of course that only yields 5.5 percent of the entire season's performance?

It's such a miniscule percentage that the argument is nearly nullified.

Also, those in search of a wild Chase race need only look to one word: Talladega. The restrictor plate track is a Chase stalwart, and already poses enough headaches for crew chiefs who lament the fact that they are at the mercy of the pack at Talladega.

Going to a road course in the Chase would be just as unpredictable and could see something out of the ordinary play a part in the crowning of a champion, which no one would say is good for the sport.

So what say you, the readers? Answer the poll question above, and tell us in the comments below why you think that there should or should not be a road race in the Chase. If you think there should, which course should it be? Watkins Glen? Sonoma? A different track entirely? Let us know below!