NASCAR thread

[gvervoren]

Whether people want to admit it or not, Jimmie Johnson and the 48 team have to be one of the best teams in NASCAR EVER!! Yeah you have people like Dale Sr. and Richard Petty that have more championships but that was how long ago. Back when they were dominating NASCAR, there was MAYBE 10teams that were even considered competitive every week. Back then, there wasn't so many rules so whoever had the most money, wins the most. The competition nowadays is MUCH MUCH MUCH higher then it was back then and to have 5 championships in a row is just unheard of. In other words, if Richard Petty and Dale Sr. were racing in todays NASCAR, they would not be as dominating as they were back then. You gotta give credit where credit is due and the 48 teams deserves a lot of credit for what they have accomplished.

[311-420]

Originally Posted by gvervoren

Whether people want to admit it or not, Jimmie Johnson and the 48 team have to be one of the best teams in NASCAR EVER!! Yeah you have people like Dale Sr. and Richard Petty that have more championships but that was how long ago. Back when they were dominating NASCAR, there was MAYBE 10teams that were even considered competitive every week. Back then, there wasn't so many rules so whoever had the most money, wins the most. The competition nowadays is MUCH MUCH MUCH higher then it was back then and to have 5 championships in a row is just unheard of. In other words, if Richard Petty and Dale Sr. were racing in todays NASCAR, they would not be as dominating as they were back then. You gotta give credit where credit is due and the 48 teams deserves a lot of credit for what they have accomplished.

I agree.

Whoever thinks these races/championships are "staged" needs to wake up. They're earned, not given. Congrats to JJ and the whole #48 team.

[birdman941]

Originally Posted by 03BumbleBee

M&M's melt in your car, not in your hands.

Sig material

[blown03Mach1]

Originally Posted by gvervoren

Whether people want to admit it or not, Jimmie Johnson and the 48 team have to be one of the best teams in NASCAR EVER!!

Sorry, but back in the day or just 10 years ago when there was no chase it took a complete driver to win. Now all you have to do is qualify for the chase and be good at 10 tracks.... Why not just make the season 10 races long?

Sorry to say it, but I used to LOVE NASCAR, but once they changed to the chase format that suits a driver who can do well at the last 10 tracks, they lost me and judging by the falling tickets sales, I am not the only one.... NASCAR needs to either flush the chase or rotate the final 10 races each season (yeah I know Northern tracks do not do well in November) to include a road race.

Sad, very sad..

[birdman941]

It started going a bit downhill after 212.809,
then when the toilets flushed in, phooey!

[G]

Originally Posted by gvervoren

Whether people want to admit it or not, Jimmie Johnson and the 48 team have to be one of the best teams in NASCAR EVER!! Yeah you have people like Dale Sr. and Richard Petty that have more championships but that was how long ago. Back when they were dominating NASCAR, there was MAYBE 10teams that were even considered competitive every week. Back then, there wasn't so many rules so whoever had the most money, wins the most. The competition nowadays is MUCH MUCH MUCH higher then it was back then and to have 5 championships in a row is just unheard of. In other words, if Richard Petty and Dale Sr. were racing in todays NASCAR, they would not be as dominating as they were back then. You gotta give credit where credit is due and the 48 teams deserves a lot of credit for what they have accomplished.

You are comparing apples and oranges. JJ drives in the "nothing close to stock" car era of super teams with multi car operations with a warehouse full of spares. Back in the day they ran stock cars on pavement, dirt, and even sand. Power steering wasn't something you could lose back then and fights actually caused bleeding. It was a different world and as much as you think Petty, Pearson, Weatherly, and Roberts might not make it today ... there's more of a chance that JJ would have been just a footnote if he raced back then.

I give JJ credit for what he has accomplished but there is NO way to compare the drivers from different periods.

[falcongtho3]

Originally Posted by blown03Mach1

Sorry, but back in the day or just 10 years ago when there was no chase it took a complete driver to win. Now all you have to do is qualify for the chase and be good at 10 tracks.... Why not just make the season 10 races long?

An excellent point. I'd like ot see a run down of who would have won the points championship since the chase started has it not been restuctured into the 10 race playoff. I suspect we would not be seeing the same results, by a long shot.

I guess now that we've had the 'drive for five', we'll see the 'slumming for six' next year?

[Con's Mach1]

Originally Posted by G

You are comparing apples and oranges. JJ drives in the "nothing close to stock" car era of super teams with multi car operations with a warehouse full of spares. Back in the day they ran stock cars on pavement, dirt, and even sand. Power steering wasn't something you could lose back then and fights actually caused bleeding. It was a different world and as much as you think Petty, Pearson, Weatherly, and Roberts might not make it today ... there's more of a chance that JJ would have been just a footnote if he raced back then.

I give JJ credit for what he has accomplished but there is NO way to compare the drivers from different periods.

Very good post. I do notice also during races, when JJ has issues like other drivers have, his seem to come when they have time to fix them and not lose many points. He's okay. He just reminds me of a BLAND box of cereal. The outside may be interesting, but whats inside is BORING. Congrats Mr. Vanilla...YAWNNN, you won another Chammmpi......SNORE. I'm sorry did I just doze off? GOOOO Carl, I love the way you flip, and go RIGHT into the stands. Let's see a lot more of that next season, PLEASE?

[bris09]

Originally Posted by falcongtho3

An excellent point. I'd like ot see a run down of who would have won the points championship since the chase started has it not been restuctured into the 10 race playoff. I suspect we would not be seeing the same results, by a long shot.

I guess now that we've had the 'drive for five', we'll see the 'slumming for six' next year?

I know KB would have won one in the old format. I say lose the Chase and reduce the number of points that can be earned in a single race.

[MAD_MACh1]

IIRC In his first three Jeff Gordon would have had the first one and Carl Edwards the third. JJ still would have won his 2nd one.

There is no doubt that JJ is the best at the last 10 races. Beyond that I'm not so sure. The crappy point system screws up any real play-off nature to the chase. While you can't have one on one eliminations like the NFL non chase drivers should not steal points from chase drivers. My suggestion would be something like the F1 points system for the chase drivers only. That way if some *** clown takes you out there is a chance to recover. the current system is way to easy to loose points and next to impossible to make them up.

[gvervoren]

Originally Posted by G

You are comparing apples and oranges. JJ drives in the "nothing close to stock" car era of super teams with multi car operations with a warehouse full of spares. Back in the day they ran stock cars on pavement, dirt, and even sand. Power steering wasn't something you could lose back then and fights actually caused bleeding. It was a different world and as much as you think Petty, Pearson, Weatherly, and Roberts might not make it today ... there's more of a chance that JJ would have been just a footnote if he raced back then.

I give JJ credit for what he has accomplished but there is NO way to compare the drivers from different periods.

In a way, yes I am comparing apples to oranges but the point I'm trying to make is back then, you only had a handful of cars that even had a chance to win at any given weekend as compared to now you have at least 20 cars that could win at any given weekend. If there were that many competitive cars back then, I would pretty much guarantee that Dale Sr. and Richard Petty would not have 7 championships.

[bris09]

Originally Posted by gvervoren

In a way, yes I am comparing apples to oranges but the point I'm trying to make is back then, you only had a handful of cars that even had a chance to win at any given weekend as compared to now you have at least 20 cars that could win at any given weekend. If there were that many competitive cars back then, I would pretty much guarantee that Dale Sr. and Richard Petty would not have 7 championships.

The reason they won so much is because they had the best cars/teams. That aspect of Nascar no longer exists. There's a reason the Daytona Chargers and Hemi engies were banned. Back then you could have never gotten away with running in the middle of the pack until the last 20 laps and then just march your way to the front and finish in the top five.

My dis-like for the 48 team stems from their adjustable rear window. The fact that they were willing to do that makes me think what else has been done to the car that the Nascar techs have either missed or ignored.

[gbranton]

Originally Posted by birdman941

It started going a bit downhill after 212.809!

All down hill

after Awesome Bill.

[kiler be]

Originally Posted by gbranton

All down hill

after Awesome Bill.

+1

212.809....after that all the cry babies have had control over NASCAR.

[birdman941]

Met him a few times at Ford Development,
really a cool guy.
Met his Mom in Dawsonville.

[G]

Originally Posted by gvervoren

In a way, yes I am comparing apples to oranges but the point I'm trying to make is back then, you only had a handful of cars that even had a chance to win at any given weekend as compared to now you have at least 20 cars that could win at any given weekend. If there were that many competitive cars back then, I would pretty much guarantee that Dale Sr. and Richard Petty would not have 7 championships.

Nope, that's not right.

2010 season 36 points races - 13 different drivers won
1975 season 30 points races - 8 different drivers (Petty had a good year with 10 wins but still had 7 other drivers with wins)

If you go out of the modern era the number of races goes way up and so does the number of winners.

1964 had 64 races and 18 different winners. Some of the races had very few cars that year and it was marked with tragedy.

Long story short not much has changed since about 1958. There was some very wild stats prior to the 58 season. There were many races that had more than 43 cars NOT finish the race.

[Con's Mach1]

Originally Posted by kiler be

+1

212.809....after that all the cry babies have had control over NASCAR.

Yeah Awesome Bill will always have that record of the fastest speed, but I wonder if it was more the fact Bobby Allison almost ending up in the stands, that made NASCAR slow them down. I think either way Bobby would have wrecked the same, even if they had slowed them down. Look what happened to Carl Edwards; same thing. All of these happened at the same track too.

[Blackpony04]

Originally Posted by Con's Mach1

Very good post. I do notice also during races, when JJ has issues like other drivers have, his seem to come when they have time to fix them and not lose many points. He's okay. He just reminds me of a BLAND box of cereal. The outside may be interesting, but whats inside is BORING. Congrats Mr. Vanilla...YAWNNN, you won another Chammmpi......SNORE. I'm sorry did I just doze off? GOOOO Carl, I love the way you flip, and go RIGHT into the stands. Let's see a lot more of that next season, PLEASE?

My sentiments exactly. JJ + COT = the least interesting racing ever.

Some say the racing died with the restrictor plate but I say it really died with Earnhardt. I was not a #3 fan (I didn't "hate" him but as the lone Ford guy in my group of buddies I couldn't root for him either!) but I really think he'd be kicking Brian France's butt literally and figuratively for all the retarded changes they've made to the sport. I watched a total of 3 races this year--the two Daytonas and Homestead--which are the least # of races I've seen in probably 15 years. That COT has made the sport absolutely boring!

[Con's Mach1]

Originally Posted by Blackpony04

My sentiments exactly. JJ + COT = the least interesting racing ever.

Some say the racing died with the restrictor plate but I say it really died with Earnhardt. I was not a #3 fan (I didn't "hate" him but as the lone Ford guy in my group of buddies I couldn't root for him either!) but I really think he'd be kicking Brian France's butt literally and figuratively for all the retarded changes they've made to the sport. I watched a total of 3 races this year--the two Daytonas and Homestead--which are the least # of races I've seen in probably 15 years. That COT has made the sport absolutely boring!

COT really did NASCAR in, your right. Earnhardt, I sortta agree. He had more control for the drivers. Didn't like him either, but after a while I did respct him, in the late 90's.

[birdman941]

Originally Posted by Con's Mach1

Yeah Awesome Bill will always have that record of the fastest speed, but I wonder if it was more the fact Bobby Allison almost ending up in the stands, that made NASCAR slow them down. I think either way Bobby would have wrecked the same, even if they had slowed them down. Look what happened to Carl Edwards; same thing. All of these happened at the same track too.

Elliott and Bobby Allison were at Talladega,
I think Edwards was at Atlanta?
I kinda miss Davey and Kulwicki

[Con's Mach1]

Originally Posted by birdman941

Elliott and Bobby Allison were at Talladega,
I think Edwards was at Atlanta?
I kinda miss Davey and Kulwicki

I didn't even want to think about that part of it. It hurts too much. I miss seeing Mighty Mouse on Kulwickis driver suit.

[gvervoren]

Originally Posted by G

Nope, that's not right.

2010 season 36 points races - 13 different drivers won
1975 season 30 points races - 8 different drivers (Petty had a good year with 10 wins but still had 7 other drivers with wins)

If you go out of the modern era the number of races goes way up and so does the number of winners.

1964 had 64 races and 18 different winners. Some of the races had very few cars that year and it was marked with tragedy.

Long story short not much has changed since about 1958. There was some very wild stats prior to the 58 season. There were many races that had more than 43 cars NOT finish the race.

You are going by the amount of races and the amount of teams that DID win. OK there were 8 winners that year and probably those were the only 8 teams that even had a chance to win a race. The other cars were basically fill ins just to get a bigger field of cars. 2010 had 13 winners but there at least 20 - 25 teams (if not more)that were competitve enough to win a race compared to the 8 teams back then which makes it harder to win a race nowdays. So you take 20 -25 competitive teams compared to 8 competitive teams, how is that the same? Basically, back then, whoever had the most money couild win a race when nowdays a lower budget team can win just as much as an elite team like Hendricks and Rousch.

There was a big article about this somewhere on the web a few years back. I'll have to try to find it again. It showed comparisons from then and now and how much harder it is nowdays to be successful in NASCAR.

[blown03Mach1]

Curious what is the furthest back someone was at the beggining of the chase and ended up winning the chase?

If my mind has not completely left me, the winner of the chase has never started the chase out of the top 5.

[bris09]

Originally Posted by gvervoren

You are going by the amount of races and the amount of teams that DID win. OK there were 8 winners that year and probably those were the only 8 teams that even had a chance to win a race. The other cars were basically fill ins just to get a bigger field of cars. 2010 had 13 winners but there at least 20 - 25 teams (if not more)that were competitve enough to win a race compared to the 8 teams back then which makes it harder to win a race nowdays. So you take 20 -25 competitive teams compared to 8 competitive teams, how is that the same? Basically, back then, whoever had the most money couild win a race when nowdays a lower budget team can win just as much as an elite team like Hendricks and Rousch.

There was a big article about this somewhere on the web a few years back. I'll have to try to find it again. It showed comparisons from then and now and how much harder it is nowdays to be successful in NASCAR.

I'll agree with part of what you are saying. There were propably only 8 teams that had a chance to win every week back then. The difference is that only equalled 8 cars. Today you have 15-20 cars that could win every week but they belong to less than a handful of teams. While the names on the cars may differ they all belong to Roush, Hendrick, Childress, Penske, or Gibbs. Everyone else just fills the feild and occassionally gets a win and no I didn't forget about Stewart-Haus, Waltrip, or Petty. To me they are teams that just happen to get a win, not a team that you expect to win every week.

[G]

Originally Posted by bris09

I'll agree with part of what you are saying. There were propably only 8 teams that had a chance to win every week back then. The difference is that only equalled 8 cars. Today you have 15-20 cars that could win every week but they belong to less than a handful of teams. While the names on the cars may differ they all belong to Roush, Hendrick, Childress, Penske, or Gibbs. Everyone else just fills the feild and occassionally gets a win and no I didn't forget about Stewart-Haus, Waltrip, or Petty. To me they are teams that just happen to get a win, not a team that you expect to win every week.

It was not that way back in the 60s and 70s. There were really about the same percentage of so called "filler" cars. It was not possible to make a living as a filler car back then and the use of "ringer" drivers is not talked about that much but it was a very common practice. Bounties were also a promoter tool that worked well. You just plain can't compare that era with today. Back then guys were changing engines DURING the race and developing professional pit crews. It was a time that set a standard for today that has been screwed up by the Chase, COT, and growth that was too rapid. The core and founding fans and teams have been nearly forgotten.

To say that current era drivers like JJ are somehow better than lets say Joe Weatherly is total BS. Weatherly won a championship while driving part time for several different teams in the same year. He also came from motorcycle racing, he was AMA #1 and an extraordinary rider. Had he not died while champion I think he would have been much more prominent in the record books.

While I agree with many of the points about how tough it is to win a race today, the drivers are no longer "bigger than life". Little Joe, Jr Johnson, the Petty clan, and so many others had character; today when have only a few. We will never see guys like the Flock brothers (and sister) on the race track again and that's our lose.