5 Rules Changes That NASCAR Should Consider
When it comes to NASCAR, rules are made to level the playing field and—at least in theory—give both big and small teams an equal chance at competing and winning.
And yes, I’ll concede that some NASCAR teams believe rules are meant to be broken the moment they’re put into effect.
As we prepare for the 2015 season, here are five rules that we believe should at least be considered for change at some point in the future—some sooner than later.
We’d love to hear your thoughts, so feel free to leave comments and any rule changes that you would like to see occur.
A Different Points System During the Chase
1 of 5
OK, before you say you can’t take yet another change to the Chase, hear me out. This actually makes a lot of sense.
Granted, the points are reset to start the Chase, as well as at the end of each elimination round—meaning after the third, sixth and ninth races of the Chase.
But as we watch the Chase field be cut from 16 to 12 to eight and finally to four, one disparity sticks out to me. And in talking with many fans via email, Twitter and in person, I've found a good chunk of them feel the same way.
What I would like to see is for NASCAR to allocate points earned by where a driver is in the Chase after a given race. For example, let’s say Brad Keselowski finishes 25th in the fall Chase race at Texas.
Because that would fall under the Eliminator Round, and given that there are only eight drivers eligible to advance to the Championship Round, shouldn’t Keselowski be awarded points equal to where he finishes in a race compared to the other seven Chase semifinalists at that point?
In other words, if Keselowski is the lowest-finishing driver of the eight drivers at Texas, and because the Chase already has its own reset points format for each round, shouldn’t Bad Brad be awarded the equivalent of 36 points, which would be equal (without bonuses) to a driver who finishes eighth (the lowest a Chase driver could finish) in a race, rather than be awarded only 18 points (without bonuses) for finishing 25th?
This way, it tightens up the overall points total and we have a much closer battle for the next round.
I bet if you ask the guys who were eliminated in the first round of last year’s Chase, A.J. Allmendinger, Kurt Busch, Aric Almirola and Greg Biffle, they’d probably agree this proposed rule change makes sense.
Eliminate the 26-Race Mandate for Drivers to Make the Chase
2 of 5
NASCAR obviously has a lot of latitude when it comes to deciding who makes the Chase and who doesn’t. It came up with what at first seemed like a pretty fair way to determine who is eligible for the Chase and who is not: A driver must make all 26 regular-season starts to be Chase-eligible.
And in cases where exceptions might need to be made—like medical waivers for a guy like Brian Vickers, who will miss the first two races of this season due to a heart condition—NASCAR is pretty good and understanding.
It also granted a Chase exception last season when Tony Stewart returned after missing three races due to the Kevin Ward Jr. tragedy. As it turned out, Stewart didn’t need the exception, because he didn’t even come close to qualifying points-wise for the Chase.
NASCAR allowed Denny Hamlin to remain eligible for the Chase as well, even though he missed the 2014 race at California due to a piece of metal that lodged in his eye. And at the end of the regular season, Hamlin had more than enough points (plus a win) to qualify for the Chase.
Let’s do away with this 26-race rule entirely. If a driver has enough points or enough qualifying wins, he should be eligible for the Chase—period. If a driver needs a medical exemption, as long as he wins a race in the first 26, that should be enough to qualify him for the Chase.
Doing things on a case-by-case basis can become cumbersome and may seem unfair to some observers.
As long as a driver has enough wins or points to make the Chase, even if the driver has competed in fewer than 26 races, he still should be judged on the merits of what he’s accomplished in the races he did participate in, plain and simple.
Granted, if a driver earns enough early season wins or runs away with the points where he can coast in the latter stages of the 26-race regular season, that does present yet another problem. But at the same time, for every driver who coasts, that opens up perhaps a last-gasp chance for another driver to make the Chase.
It’s kind of a Catch-22 at that point.
What would you do in that instance?
Limit Sprint Cup Drivers' Participation in Other Series
3 of 5
I understand why NASCAR allows Sprint Cup drivers to make virtually an unlimited number of starts in either the Xfinity Series or Camping World Truck Series (or both, in the case of drivers like Kyle Busch). Fans love to see those drivers in non-Cup events, the ticket prices to those races are typically lower and track owners and race promoters like having big names to fill out the field.
But after a while, it gets kind of disconcerting when a guy like Busch wins so much. What is he really gaining from the experience other than another healthy paycheck and yet another victory trophy?
Additionally, what does the routine participation in the two lower series by drivers like Busch really do to and for the drivers who compete full time in those junior series?
You’re likely not going to hear a driver comment publicly against having someone like Busch “come down” to race in NASCAR's junior series. That’s the last thing NASCAR wants to hear.
But if you have been or are a regular competitive athlete, wouldn’t you get tired if somebody who isn’t even a regular peer of yours continually matches up—make that overmatches up—against you when you realize you’re totally outclassed by him and have little chance of beating him?
What NASCAR should do is limit Cup drivers to a combined 10 extracurricular races in the two junior series. That way, it still gives promoters and fans a chance of having a “big name” in a race while also giving the actual full-time drivers in those series more incentive, rather than them conceding first place more often than not.
.jpg?w=256 "Colts Jaguars Football")
Set Minimum and Maximum Age Limits in Sprint Cup Series
4 of 5
Admittedly, there are young drivers who have an incredible amount of talent. Chase Elliott is a perfect example. He won the Nationwide Series championship last season at the age of 18, the youngest driver to have ever won a major championship in NASCAR history.
Now 19, Elliott will be just 20 in the 2016 season when he replaces Jeff Gordon in the Sprint Cup Series.
But for every phenom like Elliott, there are probably 100 or more other young drivers who have no business being in the marquee series of NASCAR—Sprint Cup—before they turn 21.
I don’t have a problem with young drivers being in the Truck or Xfinity Series before they are 21, but Sprint Cup is hallowed ground, where the best of the best deserve to be.
It should not be a training ground. That’s what the other two series are for.
As such, one rule I’d like to see changed is for NASCAR to limit drivers from reaching the Sprint Cup Series until they are officially 21. Even if their birthdays are in the second half of a year, they should not be allowed to race full time in the Cup ranks until they are of age.
And then there’s the opposite end of the spectrum: How old is too old for a driver to be racing in the Sprint Cup Series (or in the lower series, for that matter)?
Morgan Shepherd is still competing part time in both the Sprint Cup and Xfinity Series at the age of 73. Is that too old? While he didn't completely come out and say so, Joey Logano, who had a run-in with Shepherd at New Hampshire last season, questioned whether his rival still had the refined skills to compete with drivers more than half his age.
I don’t want to deprive anyone of a livelihood. But driving a race car at speeds reaching 200 mph does call for optimal skills, reflexes and reaction time.
It’s no secret that our skills do diminish with age. Look at how terrible Richard Petty and Darrell Waltrip were in the last six to 10 years of their racing careers? Sure, they both became NASCAR Hall of Famers, but they’re two prime examples of drivers who remained in the sport when their skills were noticeably deteriorated.
Should NASCAR set an age limit for drivers? I’m kind of torn on this. While I don’t want to see a driver hang on for too long like Petty and Waltrip did, at the same time, there’s also drivers like Mark Martin, who was productive and competitive and seemed to have not lost much of a step well into his 50s before he retired.
Age doesn’t seem to matter that much in the Trucks or Xfinity Series, where guys like Ron Hornaday Jr. are still very competitive and productive into their 50s.
Hornaday should be an interesting study in 2015, as he’ll be back competing in the Sprint Cup Series for Curtis Key-owned The Motorsports Group. How he does could go a long way toward determining whether there should be a maximum age limit for Sprint Cup competitors or not.
Enforce and Tighten Team Ownership Limits
5 of 5
If it looks like a bird and flies like a bird, it probably is a bird.
That’s one analogy that can be used in NASCAR.
While the sanctioning body limits team owners to having a maximum of four cars in their organization, what has transpired since that rule went into effect in 2010 is probably not exactly what NASCAR envisioned.
To get around the team limit rule, we now have “farm teams” and “partner teams” and “affiliate teams.” No matter what you call it, if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it’s still a duck.
Is it any surprise that Stewart-Haas Racing, which buys its chassis and motors from Hendrick Motorsports—leading to SHR earning two Sprint Cup championships in the last four seasons—is sometimes called “Hendrick Lite” because of its extremely close affiliation?
Or how about all of the engine development programs that exist, including Roush-Yates Engines, ECR Engines (formerly Earnhardt Childress Engines) and the aforementioned HMS that sells motors to other teams?
While NASCAR doesn’t want to limit free enterprise or restrain business practices (which could result in a potential restraint of trade lawsuit), should it draw the line on how much primary teams can help secondary or partner organizations?
To me, the jury is still out on that. But if we see “partner” or “satellite” teams continue to win championships in the same fashion SHR has in the last four years, NASCAR will likely have to do something.
The question is what.
Follow me on Twitter @JerryBonkowski
.jpg?w=480 "Colts Jaguars Football")
