About The New NASCAR "100%" Rule

Panther_99FS

Panther_99FS

Retired SOH Administrator
One of you guys was spot-on with this:
"Is NASCAR going to enforce this with the start-n'-park drivers" :ques:
 
If a start and park driver starts the race and drives as hard as he can then pits and parks I don't see how he is breaking the new rule. I don't like start and park but it's not going to stop. The reason they do this is they make a small amount of money while hoping for sponsorship so they can race. It's hard to blame them when you look at it through their eyes.
 
I agree and I fully understand that teams without a sponsor are at a severe financial disadvantage, especially these days. The start and park thing has been around for quite a while and I doubt it will go away. But, if NASCAR fines a start and park, then start and park will disappear and only teams with sufficient funding will try to qualify. That could mean that the field of 43 cars would shrink to thirty-some cars. I'm not sure what effect that would have on the sport. Gone are the days when 50 teams would show up to try to qualify for 42 or 43 slots, it seems to be getting to the point that in nearly every race if you show up, you will get a slot.
 
stansdds said:
I agree and I fully understand that teams without a sponsor are at a severe financial disadvantage, especially these days. The start and park thing has been around for quite a while and I doubt it will go away. But, if NASCAR fines a start and park, then start and park will disappear and only teams with sufficient funding will try to qualify. That could mean that the field of 43 cars would shrink to thirty-some cars. I'm not sure what effect that would have on the sport. Gone are the days when 50 teams would show up to try to qualify for 42 or 43 slots, it seems to be getting to the point that in nearly every race if you show up, you will get a slot.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Above all we need a full field.
 
I have to disagree.
43 cars isn't required for good racing & reciprocally can make dangerous racing. This is what happened in IndyCar.

Over the years, the number of cars has declined but that's no big deal in itself - the racing is good. But when people like Milka Duno are racing, then those extra cars to make the field larger create racing hazards to faster cars & more experienced drivers.

I'd rather see 40 NASCAR entries in good hard racing then the extra 3 who are weaving chicanes.
 
The first thing that happens win entries decline is attendance declines, then TV rights become cheaper and harder to sell. I just upgraded my Dish package to get FS-2, there is still no NBCSN so the only Indy races I see are on over the air TV. The same thing could happen to Nationwide and Campingworld. I still like the full field and the start and park must maintain minimum speed or NASCAR will park them so they are not in the way.
 
Well, it's not really a "rule", is it? It would be impossible to enforce if it was. Are they going to bust Jeff Gordon for letting the 48 lead a lap on lap 8 of the last race, when the 48 is leading the points and the 24 is in 9th place? No. Will they be able to tell if Biffle is not driving at "100%"? No. So it's really just an "admonition", a "finger wagging", as it were, to the drivers to "don't not be engaging in anymore shenanigans, and such." And the "start-n-parks" are driving to 100%, of what they have, which isn't as much as 100% of what the 2 car team has... :)
 
PRB said:
And the "start-n-parks" are driving to 100%, of what they have, which isn't as much as 100% of what the 2 car team has... :)
Click to expand...

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you here based upon why the start-n-parks exit a race - such as "handling". Might as well just give them the money after qualifying and call it a day then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top