NASCAR has Lost Its Soul

Intersting story in Sunday Times on NASCAR at the crossroad.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/15/sports/othersports/15nascar.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

 

Thank goodness someone admitted that things in the Bullsh_t Brigade aren't perfect.

I wonder if the France family will revoke NYT's NASCAR pass - if it had one - in the future for dare criticizing the organization.

 

I'll give two words to describe NASCAR's rise and fall: Jeff Gordon.

I'm still firmly convinced that had Gordon gone to open wheel, NASCAR would still be a backwater sport. But Gordon gave NASCAR the crossover opening it took full advantage of.

The problem is, with Gordon on the decline, NASCAR doesn't have anybody with his universal cachet. Having no discernible personality worked well for Gordon (as it did for Michael Jordan), but the lack of compelling personalities isn't working for anybody else in NASCAR. Heck, at least Gordon had Tony Stewart as a heel. In an attempt to make everyone a good corporate citizen, they've only made a bland sport (yes, open-wheel fan here) even more vanilla.

Even for open-wheel, the peak came with dynastic names like Andretti and Unser. Outside of them, it was mostly just gearheads who cared.

 

Wow, I'm impressed Boom ... a thread about NASCAR that you started and you had no mention of white sheets or flags or barefoot, pregnant women.

----
This story isn't really new news if you follow NASCAR and TV ratings.

I am VERY surprised this New York Times (of all the papers) writer couldn't get the Frances to discuss the "state of NASCAR" on the record. I'm also disappointed that the article didn't present a break-down comparison of NASCAR to the NFL or to MLB or to the NBA. The writer uses quotes to insist that "all leagues go through plateaus" YET where's the proof and the facts to support these statements?

"While hundreds of people work for them, the Frances — who declined interview requests for this article — are responsible for Nascar and its direction."

 

The problem is that NASCAR, no matter how much they want to televise it, is still thought of as a regional southern sport. It may take a generation to end that type of thinking.

 

I think Boom posted it to antagonize NASCAR fans because the NYT uses Nascar in its stories.

 

That's part of it, Boots. NASCAR wants fans and critics to believe it is now a national sport while still maintaining the appeal and accessibility of Southern hospitality and the Good Ol' Boys.

NASCAR can't make up its own mind, and that's a big part of the problem.

Bob Cook has a point, though. When Jeff Gordon came in, he was despised by many fans in the South - still the case today - because he was the first in many years not to back down to Dale Earnhardt. Tony Stewart has helped fan the flames of non-Southerners who have the ability and will to lead, but again the South vs. the rest of the country. What happens with Juan Pablo Montoya, and the fans' reaction to such could be NASCAR's next measuring stick.

 

Or when Toyota starts winning manufacturer's titles.

 

Eventually, the Frances are gonna have to poop or get off the pot. Either they become a true national sport and loosen the chains, or they stay niche and get to continue to run their own fiefdom.

 

Nothing like nailing what could be the biggest problems. The France family wants to be a national sport and demands to run the show. And based on the past, Brian France will try and get both.

And he'll fail. There will be no "debris on the track" to bring out the yellow flag with five laps to go this time.

 

To me, the fact there's no race in Nashville -- even as efforts are made to get races in New York City (NEW YORK CITY!) and Seattle –– is emblematic of the sport's problem. They've forgotten the folks who made them. And for that, they'll pay.

 

Why does the Times do that? Does is also use Ncaa? Fbi? Naacp? What's their issue with this particular acronym?

Sxy is right, this really isn't news now. 10 years ago? Sure. But that soul departed a long time ago.