There is so much chatter about the merits of making the Chase without a win, and many questions have come forth as the Chase gets near.
Should a driver with no wins, but with the points needed to be in the top 12 deserve to compete for a championship?
Should a driver with the most wins be in the Chase, even though he is out of the top 12 in points?
Should past champions, let's say five years back, get an automatic spot in the Chase?
Those are just a few of the questions being asked.
What do you think?
My personal opinion: Don’t reinvent the wheel!
The Chase has rules and teams follow them, it is just that simple.
There is a points system. The 12 teams with the most points make the Chase. The rest don’t.
If you win six races but live in the back for the rest of the pre-chase season, you don’t make it.
It sounds simple to me.
In racing, consistency is always the measure of a good team, not wins.
After all, making the Chase is what it's all about. There is no shame in points racing. It is what it is. So you take what the race gives you that particular day and get some points.
If they change the rules to give larger points reward for winning, NASCAR could save lots of money by just giving the trophy to one of the Hendrick or Gibbs teams after ten races.
They would probably have the most wins year in and out.
The point is, this format keeps things interesting all season long, and that sells tickets and gets ratings.
Sometimes fans forget stock car racing is a business.
Like the new article format? Send us feedback!