« Mark drove so fast he missed the fountain of youth | Main | John Daly prepares to assume his role at the top of the golfing world »

Comments

JR

Two....count them, TWO NASCAR articles on the Panthers page...does the Observer know no shame? Please fire Tom and Scott immediately. It's quite obvious that they have run out of pithy, irrelevant topics to talk about.

catfandave

Give Scott and Tom a break. Remember - they're just opinion guys, not real sports writers. Expecting them to be topical or to report on real sports issues isn't very fair.

F TOM

Here is yet another glaring example of how the "yes men" at the Observer fail at their jobs. You could have posted a REAL story about the failure of NASCAR to heed the fans warnings, but nooooooooo. Let's keep kissing the hand that feeds us. Tom, you are a COWARD. Quit your job. Do us all a favor.

Mark Tolley

Maybe they should just give out points to the Top 5. 10 to the winner, 4 for second, 3 for third, 2 for 4th, and 1 for 5th. Then lets see who races for the win !

J

I've been saying this all over this website for days, and I'll keep saying it. NASCAR brass is far more concerned with making sure we all know who the boss is than getting things right. Otherwise, restrictor plates would have been banned after one of the 5 best drivers of all time was killed because of them, and they would have listened to the people who have been saying for forever that this point system has been obsolete for more than 20 years.

Back in the '60s and '70s, they were racing 40-50 times a year. The super-studs like Petty & Pearson were prohibitive favorites whenever they showed up. The point system was devised to prevent guys like that from showing up for 20 races, winning 10 of them and walking away with the trophy. By the '80s, they were down to 29 races and sponsor money was big enough that everyone always raced the full schedule. At that point, a new point system was needed.

If it were me, this is how it would go: 100 points for the winner, 75 for 2nd, then -1 point for each position 3-30. NO points for leading 1 lap or for finishing worse than 30th. No money for finishing worse than 30th either. Keep the 5 points for leading the most laps. That way, winning gets the reward it deserves, and you no longer have "start and park" cars, or cars that get in a bad wreck, and come back on the track with half a car, getting in everyone's way and causing debris cautions that alter the outcome of the race.

This "rewarding consistency" is about the same as baseball awarding playoff positions based on largest run differential instead of wins. After all, the team with the largest difference between runs scored and runs allowed is the most "consistent," isn't it? Yes, that's dumb. Just about as dumb as the NASCAR point system.

The comments to this entry are closed.