Chase changes
You see that big float-y thing in the sky yesterday? That was a big ol' fat NASCAR trial balloon. If Brian France knew what he was going to do to the chase, he would have said it yesterday. So now it's up to fans and whoever else to give some feedback. Might as well get started.
We'll do it after the jump ...
Here's Dustin's story on the chase changes. Some ideas that are kicking around:
* A win gets you in. Win a race during the first 26 and you're in the chase no matter how badly the rest of your season is going. That would have gotten Earnhardt Jr. and J. Gordon in last year and would ensure that they'd stay in this year. It definitely puts emphasis on individual races. But what would NASCAR do if a middle-of-the-packer like Sterling Marlin or Scott Riggs raced their way in?
* Open the window wider. Let's call this the Jamie McMurray rule after the guy who missed the chase by 15 points in 2004 and 83 last year. If you make the window 500 or 600 or more points (it's now 400), more drivers will make the field - probably. If Jimmie Johnson keeps driving like he is, though, no one - not even the guy in second place - will be within 1,000 of JJ by Richmond. Keep in mind that this isn't a normal year.
More points for wins: You reward the rich, which I guess is kind of the point of the chase.
What all of this gets back to is NASCAR's point system: It's messed up. NASCAR should have changed it back in 2004 to something that, I don't know, makes sense. Here's a good historic overview of how it got to where it is now. Why the winner gets 180 points instead of 10 or 100 or some other round number is beyond me. But 34 points to the driver who finishes 43rd? I never got that.
Personally, I like Jeff Gordon's suggestion of giving drivers who finish 25th or so the same number of points (or no points, like they do in F1, which has probably the easiest-to-understand point system, even if it's the goofiest series.) The no-points-for-stinking idea might reward a late-season surge because a driver wouldn't be 1,245 points behind like Michael Waltrip is.
Of course, the whole discussion is premised on the idea that the chase needs more drivers. Does it? Use the comments to talk about it. Convince me what needs to be done.
Comments (1)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
just like France said:
nothing new, just emphasized more.
during Chase:
1. award winning by doubling points over second,
which is double over third, etc.
if 12 cars are in the Chase:
1st gets 2048
2nd.......1024
3rd........512, etc.
2. eliminate any other method of
receiving points (laps led, etc.).
Something Wild:
there's the Lucky Dog Rule, how about
a Hail Mary rule? here's what i mean:
if you are NOT the winner of the race,
but you are in the Chase, AND you are
the best finisher of all cars IN the Chase,
you get 500 extra points. 2nd gets zero.
Bottom Line: emphasize Wins not second-place.
Posted on July 8, 2006 10:04 PM