RE: NASCAR (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Other Minnesota Sports] >> Other Sports



Message

Trekgeekscott -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 11:53:55 AM)

Clearly, I'm not a big fan of auto racing or of NASCAR.  I am not impressed when all they do is drive around in circles going to the left.  It's the same thing on every course.  I like road courses much better.  And once in a while couldn't they race the OTHER way around a track...you know...all right turns for a change?



TJSweens -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 11:57:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matt Dahl

Trekkie, thank you for contributing to the popularity of this topic.


Yeah, I think it just moved past the WNBA.

Edit: I take that back. The Lynx have 6 pages to NACAR's 4.



Matt Dahl -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 12:22:25 PM)

Is the decline in NASCAR's ratings due more to 1)Jimmie Johnson being the most bland champion in the history of sport (with apologies to Lennox Lewis) or 2)the Car of Tomorrow's failure to provide exciting and competitive racing?



Trekgeekscott -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 12:26:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matt Dahl

Is the decline in NASCAR's ratings due more to 1)Jimmie Johnson being the most bland champion in the history of sport (with apologies to Lennox Lewis) or 2)the Car of Tomorrow's failure to provide exciting and competitive racing?


Or 3) that it is boring watching cars drive in circles and in the same direction every single week. 






Matt Dahl -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 12:36:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matt Dahl

Is the decline in NASCAR's ratings due more to 1)Jimmie Johnson being the most bland champion in the history of sport (with apologies to Lennox Lewis) or 2)the Car of Tomorrow's failure to provide exciting and competitive racing?


Or 3) that it is boring watching cars drive in circles and in the same direction every single week. 





Nice try, but your theory does not hold water because from 1995 thru 2004 NASCAR experienced an unprecedented growth in popularity, never before seen in sport, and never to be seen again. And 95% of races were left turning circles then too. The two theories I listed, as Jim will undoubtedly agree with, are theories that do hold water because they make sense to people who actually watch the sport. The decline of NASCAR coincides with Jimmie Johnson winning championships. It also coincides with the introduction of the Car of Tomorrow.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 12:45:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matt Dahl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matt Dahl

Is the decline in NASCAR's ratings due more to 1)Jimmie Johnson being the most bland champion in the history of sport (with apologies to Lennox Lewis) or 2)the Car of Tomorrow's failure to provide exciting and competitive racing?


Or 3) that it is boring watching cars drive in circles and in the same direction every single week. 





Nice try, but your theory does not hold water because from 1995 thru 2004 NASCAR experienced an unprecedented growth in popularity, never before seen in sport, and never to be seen again. And 95% of races were left turning circles then too. The two theories I listed, as Jim will undoubtedly agree with, are theories that do hold water because they make sense to people who actually watch the sport. The decline of NASCAR coincides with Jimmie Johnson winning championships. It also coincides with the introduction of the Car of Tomorrow.


Funny.  Maybe the sport just couldn't hold onto all those fans because they realized how redundant it is. 

Maybe the growth coincided with the emergence of Jeff Gordon and now that he's just average...they don't care anymore.



Matt Dahl -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 12:55:02 PM)

I think this thread has gained enough attention that it should not be under Everything Else anymore. We should have a Motorsports section with NASCAR, NHRA Drag Racing, Indy Racing League, and maybe a local racing thread too as subtopics.



djskillz -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 1:31:19 PM)

Call it "turn left here" or something, Matt. 

I'm with Scott.

As for the sport, I think it's just been hit really hard by the economy.  Tickets are way too expensive to go to races and their fan base has probably been hit the hardest by the economy.  Tough to go to a race right now if you're in that group.

Plus, it sucks.  [:D]



Jim Frenette -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 1:32:29 PM)

We need to get Karl H over hear, he is a Kensith fan

I think it is the COT. It seems the Hendricks have caught on much faster then other owners. I find it boring sometimes when that team is up on top all of the time. For some reason they have left Little E behind though



TJSweens -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 1:38:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

Call it "turn left here" or something, Matt. 

I'm with Scott.

As for the sport, I think it's just been hit really hard by the economy.  Tickets are way too expensive to go to races and their fan base has probably been hit the hardest by the economy.  Tough to go to a race right now if you're in that group.

Plus, it sucks.  [:D]


Either that or the fan base is sobering up.



djskillz -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 1:44:23 PM)

Nah, couldn't be that one, Tim.  Those helmets keep providing cheap beer.



Jim Frenette -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 4:11:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

Call it "turn left here" or something, Matt. 

I'm with Scott.

As for the sport, I think it's just been hit really hard by the economy.  Tickets are way too expensive to go to races and their fan base has probably been hit the hardest by the economy.  Tough to go to a race right now if you're in that group.

Plus, it sucks.  [:D]


They are still selling out the races. The real money comes from sponsorship and that is where they are losing money. Companies are tightening their purse strings



Matt Dahl -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 4:36:26 PM)

I think TV ratings are way down.



djskillz -> RE: NASCAR (10/27/2009 4:40:49 PM)

Sponsorships hurt, Jim.  But those are down in all sports right now.



Karl H -> RE: NASCAR (10/28/2009 9:22:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matt Dahl

Is the decline in NASCAR's ratings due more to 1)Jimmie Johnson being the most bland champion in the history of sport (with apologies to Lennox Lewis) or 2)the Car of Tomorrow's failure to provide exciting and competitive racing?


I think there are many factors that have contributed to the decline in tv ratings....
- The COT.  It does make for a more boring race.
- The length of the race, including the pre-race show, make for a really long event.
- The later start times, plus more saturday night races, hurt viewership on the east coast.
- The mega teams.  People love the little guy or underdog.  Those days are gone.
- Little E.  The most popular driver in Nascar simply has not got it done.
- Nascar itself.  They went "hollywood" some years ago, went for the big dollars, and picked up lots of casual fans.  But I think they lost some of the hardcore fanbase.  Now it's starting to bite them. 

Just my $0.02...



Trekgeekscott -> RE: NASCAR (10/29/2009 10:10:28 AM)

I don't get the COT argument at all. 

How is this car taking away the excitement?  The sport is the same, Cars driving around in circles really fast going to the left for hours.  Whoopdeedoo.  Who cares if it's a 90s Dodge or a COT?  What's the big dif?



Jim Frenette -> RE: NASCAR (10/29/2009 10:10:49 AM)

All very good points Karl. I see you echoed a few of my thoughts with the COT and the absense of the underdog. The Hendricks have the money. It's getting like the Indy Car series with mainly just 2 teams competing (Penske and Gannasi) and I'm losing interest. If not for Danica Patrick, I wouldn't tune in



Matt Dahl -> RE: NASCAR (10/29/2009 11:03:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim Frenette

All very good points Karl. I see you echoed a few of my thoughts with the COT and the absense of the underdog. The Hendricks have the money. It's getting like the Indy Car series with mainly just 2 teams competing (Penske and Gannasi) and I'm losing interest. If not for Danica Patrick, I wouldn't tune in

What do you guys mean "there's no underdog?"

There are MORE underdogs than EVER! Anyone outside the Rousch and Hendrick umbrellas are UNDERDOGS. HUGE UNDERDOGS! Kasey Kahne is an underdog! And if you want to root for the true underdog, we have the ultimate underdog in owner-driver ROBBY GORDON!

As for the COT, it sucks because nobody has figured out how to make passes with it. It's more of a qualifying game and pit crew game now. That doesn't make for great racing.



Jim Frenette -> RE: NASCAR (10/29/2009 11:08:10 AM)

Matt how many races has Robbie won. Yes KK has a couple of wins, but we see to many of the races won by the big teams.



Matt Dahl -> RE: NASCAR (10/29/2009 11:21:19 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim Frenette

Matt how many races has Robbie won. Yes KK has a couple of wins, but we see to many of the races won by the big teams.

Robby has not won a race recently, but he did finish 3rd. You gotta admit that was pretty exciting!

I see what you guys might be saying. You're not saying there's no underdogs. You're saying the underdogs can't win.



Jim Frenette -> RE: NASCAR (10/29/2009 11:25:44 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matt Dahl

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim Frenette

Matt how many races has Robbie won. Yes KK has a couple of wins, but we see to many of the races won by the big teams.

Robby has not won a race recently, but he did finish 3rd. You gotta admit that was pretty exciting!

I see what you guys might be saying. You're not saying there's no underdogs. You're saying the underdogs can't win.


Let me put it this way, they are bigger underdogs now



Trekgeekscott -> RE: NASCAR (10/29/2009 11:35:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matt Dahl


As for the COT, it sucks because nobody has figured out how to make passes with it. It's more of a qualifying game and pit crew game now. That doesn't make for great racing.


So the drivers got into this car and suddenly couldn't figure out how to pass anymore?  That still doesn't make sense. 



Jim Frenette -> RE: NASCAR (10/29/2009 11:41:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matt Dahl


As for the COT, it sucks because nobody has figured out how to make passes with it. It's more of a qualifying game and pit crew game now. That doesn't make for great racing.


So the drivers got into this car and suddenly couldn't figure out how to pass anymore?  That still doesn't make sense. 


It's in the aero dynamics



Trekgeekscott -> RE: NASCAR (10/29/2009 12:08:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim Frenette

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matt Dahl


As for the COT, it sucks because nobody has figured out how to make passes with it. It's more of a qualifying game and pit crew game now. That doesn't make for great racing.


So the drivers got into this car and suddenly couldn't figure out how to pass anymore?  That still doesn't make sense. 


It's in the aero dynamics


Draft your opponent, Nudge the guy, put the pedal to the metal and pass him.  Or did all the drivers become pussies since Dale Earnheart died? 



Jim Frenette -> RE: NASCAR (10/29/2009 3:03:20 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim Frenette

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matt Dahl


As for the COT, it sucks because nobody has figured out how to make passes with it. It's more of a qualifying game and pit crew game now. That doesn't make for great racing.


So the drivers got into this car and suddenly couldn't figure out how to pass anymore?  That still doesn't make sense. 


It's in the aero dynamics


Draft your opponent, Nudge the guy, put the pedal to the metal and pass him.  Or did all the drivers become pussies since Dale Earnheart died? 


Not as easy to draft. All cars look the same, just different manufacturers names on them. Plus nudging doesn't work as well



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode