(Photo by Jonathan Ferrey/Getty Images)
When I first wrote the article, “Prelude to the Chase, Part 1,” the concept behind the story was not to belittle NASCAR by trying to say the points race was a bad idea.
Instead, it was more focused at shedding a brighter light on why and where the chase was created and, of course, to bring to the forefront one of the flaws that has most fans baffled.
Now, a change to a sport's format doesn’t always work, or in this instance, a change may not always make a sport more exciting as well as more appealing to the fans.
When a product that has been successful for 50+ years, and it’s served its purpose, why would anyone want to throw a monkey wrench into it without first taking the time to thoroughly research it?
It was more than obvious that the Chase format wasn’t researched because it only took two years before NASCAR had to tweak it before the start of the 2007 season.
NASCAR added another two drivers to the field, which some fans called the “Dale Earnhardt Jr and Jeff Gordon rule” because they failed to make the chase in 2005.
The fans then went on to say that NASCAR added the rule to make sure that none of their “superstars” would ever be shut out of the post-regular season festivities.
NASCAR even went a step a further and admitted that there was a flaw when CEO Brian France went public with this statement:
“The adjustments taken put a greater emphasis on winning races. Winning is what this sport is all about. Nobody likes to see drivers content to finish in the top 10. We want our sport, especially during the Chase, to be more about winning.”
This was after many of the drivers had a new-found love, or for a better way to put it, a new strategy to make sure once they were within the top 12 in points that they would stay there until the Chase started after the first 26 races.
It was then that NASCAR fans added a new phrase to the already extensive list of NASCAR lingo known as “points racing.” Now, in the first article, we saw that the chase was only effective in only two of the five years, since it was first instituted back in 2004.
Those years were 2005, when Tony Stewart won his second championship, and 2006, when Jimmie Johnson won his first of the three titles in this decade.
With all the emphasis put on the top 12 once the chase starts, is it fair to just “lock out” the other 27 drivers and basically not worry about them because they were not good enough or peaked at the wrong time?
The reason I say locked out is because now that we are nine races away from the Chase, the announcers are quick to use the term “locked in,” as if the focus of the rest the season only belongs to the elite 12.
Now, don’t get me wrong. After all, the whole idea behind racing in the Sprint Cup Series is to win it all and take home the hardware after a long grueling season. But what about the lower 27 who still have fans that follow them even though they are “locked out” of the chase?
0 Comments
Loading more comments...
This comment and all replies have been deleted This comment has been deleted Undo delete