Moparman wrote:
I am not an elitist. One cannot have a garage full of old, nearly worthless 80s and 90s Mopars and be elitist. However, I do think that NASCAR is "gimmicky." Competition cautions, lucky dog points and everything else to keep not auto enthusiasts entertained rubs me the wrong way, but here lies the rub.
NASCAR is auto racing for non car enthusiasts. It is designed to intrigue and entertain coach potatoes, soccer moms and Wal-Mart customers. NASCAR sells the driver soap opera, brand rivalry and high drama.
Most NASCAR fans have no clue as to the technology used in building a race car. If a Chevy wins and they drive a Chevy then their car won. Maybe they will go out and buy Goodyear all-season radials because they "must" have the same technology as the race-winning NASCAR tires. NASCAR is a high-speed reality show.
It is not real racing in the traditional sense. Traditionally, racing was about winning and talent and technology and innovation, but that is boring for the average fan. Does anyone really think the average fan cares if the cars look like their street counterparts or share any components? Not at all. The don't even know what is even under the hood of their own cars, except what the salesperson or brochure told them. Road and Track's Sean Bailey told me that performance enthusiasts (those who actually place driving performance at the top of their list of importance) is under 5% of the market.
I often attend cruise events with my 89 Shelby Dakota. I have Yokohama Avid STs on the truck. Most of the cars there have generic "performance tires" with names like "Revenger" (actual observed tire). Most Americans believe the 1970 Chevelle was the epitome of automotive performance. That is who NASCAR markets to, the average American and they do it very well.
Do I think F1, ALMS, Rolex 24 and the SCCA offer superior racing? Yes, but unless you understand the cars and appreciate their particular designs those series can be boring.
Americans want bumping, rubbing, crashes, pit fights and loud noise (which is the main reason NASCAR uses V8s and Americans love Harleys). Sports cars and open wheel don't offer what Americans want. More people drink Bud than drink Magic Hat. Bud gives me nausea.
those grapes seem pretty sour. maybe you need to stop eating them.
everything you pointed out as being a negative thing about NASCAR can be turned right around and applied to every racing series you used as a counter example. F1 is slightly less boring to watch than Indy cars on ovals, mostly because of all the technology involved. the "superior racing" i've seen in ALMS on tv is a bunch of carbon fiber replicas of Hot Wheels cars trying not to run into each other for 12 hours at a time while being driven by people with names i can't pronounce.
i'll report back on SCCA racing after i check out the Trans Am race at Brainerd in September- which i'm very much looking forward to, by the way- since i can't think of any time i've been able to watch SCCA racing of any kind on tv in the last 20 years.
NASCAR is middle class racing for middle class people. middle class American people relate to the people in the cars, because most of the people in the cars came from middle class families that supported their early racing endeavors with middle class jobs. it's racing for people that just want to sit back and forget about the day to day stresses of their lives without investing too much brainpower in thinking too much. in that respect, it's a lot like professional football and, yes, professional wrestling.
look past all the big $$$ sponsorship deals, and each and every owner, driver, and crew member out there is doing it because that's where they want to be and they are doing exactly what they want to do- and they are the very best at it. most of them would be just as happy making no money at some unknown local dirt track.
ask any racer from any other series that has tried to make it in the upper levels of NASCAR if they think the cars are real race cars or if the racing is real. you might be surprised by the answers, but i wouldn't.
with very few exceptions, the people involved grew up going to 1/4 or 3/8 mile dirt or paved circle tracks on saturday night to watch their dad or uncle race. some of them got started in karts or even Legends cars. some of them came from an offroad racing and motocross background (Jimmy Johnson is an example of this).
go to a local dirt track and see just how many of the cars in each class have the same paint jobs as their Cup car heroes. and please don't try to tell me that road racers don't also emulate the paint schemes of their road racing heroes...
when they got old enough, they got themselves a real race car of their own and did what they could to work their way up thru the ranks. by the time they get up to the Cup level, they are among the best at what they do- even if they don't look like it on tv sometimes.
Cup cars are real race cars and the racing is real. yes, sometimes they do throw stupid cautions to pull the pack back together and maybe help out one of their golden boys, but there is only so much they could do to fix a race when there are 43 cars out there running at 200mph for 3 hours at a time.
you say that NASCAR is a race series for non auto enthusiasts- and that may be true. but that's only the marketing of it.
if someone could figure out a way to get millions of non enthusiasts to tune into ALMS (or whatever your favorite sanctioning body happens to be) races every week and buy ALMS merchandise and paint their cars like their favorite ALMS driver's car and get the car number and autograph tattooed into their shoulder, you'd probably say that racing sucks, too, and find something else to like.
does Rally racing suck because millions of people by officially licensed rally racing video games and drink Monster or Red Bull energy drink? maybe Subaru sells a few cars because of it, too.
does motocross suck because millions of kids want to dress like Brian Dungey, Travis Pastrana, or Bubba Stewart?
are monster trucks not impressive machines because they have gimmicky paint jobs and truly are marketed towards 5 year old kids that couldn't care less about the technology involved?
