The Verdict on Prime Time NASCAR is….Success!

NASCAR ran it’s Daytona 500 on prime time network television Monday night.  Danica crashed out, as did Jimmie Johnson and Tony Stewart.  Jeff Gordon’s engine blew.  The race was red flagged due to a massive fireball.  The race went until 1am and was won in underwhelming fashion by a personality-less android.  Despite these things stacked against it NASCAR on prime time was a massive success.  Fox ended the night P1 in total ratings, with NBC’s The Voice the only show to outdraw the 500 by a few hundred thousand viewers.  The Daytona 500 killed the rest of the competition, outdrawing everything else on TV that night.  I was suprised and impressed with the results.  I wasn’t sure how NASCAR would handle competing against prime time competitors but they managed to pull out a massive win.  Especially in the 18-35 demographic.  It worked out well for NASCAR and the potential for future prime time races.  In 2009 and 2010 the Daytona 500 was badly damaged in the ratings department by the rain out and pothole.  While ratings were slightly down from last year’s non delayed 500 pulling in over 14 million viewers, against 2 other networks with over 10 million viewers is a major victory for NASCAR. Ratings information can be found here, here, here and here.

Ironically Smash on NBC as well as ABC’s The Bachelor and Castle all rose in ratings (though ABC came in dead last in ratings) from last week.  The Voice may have led the night but it did see a ratings drop as did all four CBS comedy’s.  Fox has to be pleased with NASCAR for the major ratings bump as their House/Alcatraz lineup often was the lowest rated of the 4 major networks.  As far as I know a rainout has never been a positive for a racing series but this time it might be considered a good thing.  The theory of a prime time race has been out there for a long time.  It’s happened and was successful.  Imagine if a proper marketing campaign was built around it and there was no major red flag that prevent the race from ending before 1am.   While not every race should be in prime time it’s definitly worth considering for some of the major races especially a race like Bristol.  As someone who would like to see racing become more mainstream the prime time Daytona 500 was a big success!

Monday Night NASCAR? The Daytona 500 Heads for Primetime!

The idea of running a race on a weeknight has been tossed around for ages.  Most other sports in America do it and see massive ratings.  Both NASCAR and Indycar have thrown the idea out (remember the Thursday Night Phoenix race?) but never has it been attempted.  Until today.  Due to the rain delay on Sunday and more rain Monday morning, NASCAR and Fox have agreed to displace House and Alcatraz by starting the Daytona 500 around 7PM Eastern time.  This put’s NASCAR in uncharted territory.  Prime time network TV is a huge ratings draw, but that comes with a price.  Major competition.  Monday night features The Voice and Smash on NBC, The Bachelor on ABC, while CBS features it’s Monday Night sitcom block with How I Met Your Mother, 2 Broke Girls, Two and A Half Men, and Mike and Molly.  It’s hard to tell how NASCAR will do against this type of competition.  Will they smash the competition like they’ve smashed cars over the weekend or will the ratings end up flat, broke and busted?

The Competition

 Last week NBC (powered by it’s music competition show The Voice) led the networks, followed by CBS, ABC, and Fox.    One positive for NASCAR is that the 2011 Daytona 500 pulled in an 8.2, with 15.6 million viewers.  Referring to the two links earlier in this paragraph that’s more than any one show pulled last week on Monday.   However NASCAR normally races on a Sunday afternoon against relatively little competition except for other sports.  When NASCAR attempted near prime time racing on Sunday on ABC the ratings went down.   Today’s race will feature NASCAR going up against multiple shows that pull in ten million or more viewers at the same time.  Another important issue is that the 18-35 demographic is the more significant in network television than total ratings.  NASCAR struggles with that demographic.  Most NASCAR fans will tune into the Daytona 500.  The question is will casual fans and younger fans in the 18-35 demographic stick around.

The X-factor in the ratings question is Danica

The Daytona 500 is one of the better races to put into the prime time slot.  The race should feature a fair amount of passing and unpredictability.  It won’t be a Fontana style parade in a circle.  What could imperil the ratings is an extended red flag due to either a wreck (as we’ve seen many this Speedweeks) or rain.  Danica could be significant.  If Danica runs up front, or more importantly wins, I would expect a massive shift in ratings as younger fans and casual fans tune in.

A Blessing In Disguise?

We’re in completely uncharted territory here so most of what I’ve wrote may be completely wrong.  I’m not even going to try and predict where the Daytona 500 falls in terms of ratings.  I would expect that the ratings will be better than what Fox achieved last week on Monday.  Past that I can’t say.  Will NASCAR show unexpected strenght in the 18-35 demographic or will The Bachelor manage to outdraw with younger fans?  Just how popular is NASCAR?  Will people chose their regular sitcoms, singing competitions, and reality TV over the Daytona 500?  Will this, like the 1979 Daytona 500, help expand the sport? Will prime time weekday races become more popular with both NASCAR and Indycar (Phoenix?).  I’m fascinated to see how this works out.  The theory of a prime time weeknight race has been thrown around for ages but no one’s tried it.  Now we’re going to see if Monday Night NASCAR can see similar success to Monday Night Football.  To quote Barney Stinson from How I Met Your Mother it could be legendary.  Or, it could look like Charlie Sheen driving off a cliff.  Since this race is televised on network TV we’ll see the real TV data and not just the spin that the network would like us to see (think Indycar on Versus).  Of course, all of this depends on it not raining again tonight and postponing the race until Tuesday.

And the Daytona Weather Issue

NASCAR’s season kicks off with the Daytona 500.  One slight problem is the threat of rain.  Rain threatens the race both today and, if it’s postponed, tomorrow.   Rain outs are an awful way to end major races like the Daytona 500 or Indy 500.  Talk about a win with quotation marks.  The 2009 Daytona 500 was rained out and it was the start of a rough year for NASCAR that saw a loss of ratings and interest in the series.  The 2010 500 was also plagued by problems (pothole in track) and also was followed by a year of decreased ratings.  2011 saw an exciting 500 won by Trevor Bayne and the 2011 season saw an increase in ratings.  If this 500 is a trainwreck ended by rain, or delayed, will that dampen NASCAR’s momentum from the end of last season?

Triple League Racing Podcast #3

James and I recorded another podcast this week.  Focus is Formula One and NASCAR.  There is some Indycar discussion about Fisher’s team (out of date) and the potential of a Texas track boycott (which I know is unlikely).  The track boycott discussion was sparked by talking about Bahrain.  Also includes making fun of Micheal Waltrip and suggestions for improving the NASCAR TV Broadcasts. This one is a bit shorter than the first two, coming in at under an hour and a half.  Should be a good pre-Daytona listen.

TLR Podcast#3

Sarah Fisher Get’s An Engine!

Great news!  Sarah Fisher Hartman Racing has secured an engine!  The Honda engine that otherwise would have powered another random GP2 driver with Rahal Letterman has been redirected towards the American Indy Lights Champion and the last team that won an Indycar race.  There is a god.  Hopefully this issue didn’t ruin Fisher’s chance at securing Walgreens as a sponsor.  Fisher says she has full funding in place and they’ve bought a new shop so it seems like someone’s stepped up besides Hartman.  It’s a good day for Indycar fans.  Now all Newgarden needs to do is secure a Rookie of the Year award.

In Defense Of Criticism

Criticism is an American thing.  Study the history of the United States for more examples, the American Revolution, for instance.  People like Roger Ebert have made a career out of it, and entire websites like IGN and the AV Club are built on it.  Yet in the racing world, especially Indycar and to an extent NASCAR, criticism is seen as a bad thing.  It’s the all or nothing approach; with Indycar or against it.  There’s no middle ground.  I don’t subscribe to that theory.  Can I be critical?  Yes.  Because things can and should be done better!  I don’t see how pointing that out is wrong.  I certainly don’t see the need for people to tell me that’s wrong to be critical.  If you want to be super happy and positive that’s nice and I’m happy for you if you but don’t tell me how to think, either.

There is a mentality among some fans that a person is either with the series or they’re against it.   Part of the cause seems to be how much criticism those series face from outside.  Indycar is regularly attacked by NASCAR fans, journalists, broadcasters and even some drivers (Carl Edwards, for instance).  Some from the F1 and Sports Car world also enjoy taking shots at Indycar.  NASCAR, in turn, is regularly snarked by open wheel and sports car fans.  NASCAR also is mocked by the stick and ball sports fans and journalists; even on their partner, ESPN.   It’s understandable why that attitude has developed, but the people who hold it are often the ones responsible for mocking the other side.  I’ve seen many open wheel fans who dislike criticism of Indycar regularly  make fun of NASCAR.  If you’re going to criticize people like me for being critical I have a suggestion: don’t then turn around and criticize another racing series.  That applies to NASCAR, too.  There are NASCAR fans and even journalists who act the same way; NASCAR is perfect and all other racing series suck.   If you’re like me, on the other hand, and capable of independent thought, then it’s all fair game.  I’ve managed to blast Indycar’s dreadful schedule and then turn around and mock the Bud Shootout.

There are people who take criticism to the extreme.  Mainly, I draw the line at the difference between being actively rooting for Indycar or NASCAR to fail and being critical because you care.  Sadly, that means the Crapwagon.com people are not being covered in this defense of critical thinking.  Sorry about that.

Things aren’t perfect in any racing series.  Far from it.  Maybe Indycar really does have momentum but to be honest when a series drops from 17 races to 16; and it’s mainly street courses and motorcycle road courses, I’m not sure that’s the definition of momentum.   In NASCAR it’s true ratings were up last year but there’s less and less teams (real, competitive teams) each year.  Besides the ratings were up last year based off 2010; they were still below NASCAR at it’s height.  Pointing those things out doesn’t make someone a hater or make them too negative.  It makes them honest.  If the flaws and problems aren’t pointed then how will they ever get fixed?  Some say that there’s no point in blogging about it; that it won’t cause anything to change.  That’s very likely the case but then again that logic could be used to say why blog or podcast at all?  Since it’s not going to make a difference one way or another why write?  But those of us who write blogs or even post on message boards and twitter are expressing our opinions and views, with the hope that others will read them and somehow be swayed by them.  While most of the time it may not change anything sometimes getting enough fans to agree on an issue can affect change.  It’s about the best we can do.

It’s become popular among Indycar fans and bloggers to bash critics.  It makes people feel more confident about Indycar’s direction, apparently.  While I understand that many in NASCAR and Indycar are upset with the relentless criticism and mocking those sports get from outside of their sport, attacking all criticism doesn’t really help.  Without criticism how will the the people on the inside of the racing world ever know something’s wrong?  Indycar is planning to race in China; apparently the police state mentality has migrated over too.

James Hinchcliffe, The Next Big Sitcom Star?

If the Indycar thing doesn’t work out, James Hinchcliffe could easily find a second career as a sitcom actor.  His first Go-Daddy video about how he got the Go Daddy ride is evidence of that.

As is this one with the engine-less Joseph Newgarden.

What Do You Value?

Values are a tricky and controversial subject.  The 2012 Presidential Election is a perfect example.  This is a racing blog not a political site which is probably a good thing; I don’t need to alienate any more readers than I already have.  There is a point to talking about values, however.  In racing terms values are what a fan looks for in racing.  Do they value parity and close racing or do they value purity and innovation?  Should the cars be the stars or should it be the drivers?  These types of questions and views are seen in every form of racing from NASCAR to MotoGP, but nowhere in the racing world are conflicting values seen more clearly than in the Izod Indycar series.   From the Sarah Fisher engine controversy to the future direction of the schedule conflicting values among fans are crystal clear.

Engines for Sarah. Just saying.

The reason for Indycar’s value conflict is obvious.  Indycar attracts interest from a diverse group of people that includes NASCAR, USAC, Indy 500, F1, and ALMS/24 Hours of Le Mans fans.  American and international race fans are brought together in a way that often pits them head to head.  Overall fans from Europe tend to want to see a Formula One style series, or maybe a 24 Hours of Le Mans style series.  American Champcar fans and ALMS fans also side with them. On the other hand American’s generally prefer a NASCAR/USAC style series.  Do you want American Indy Lights Champion Joseph Newgarden or Formula One Reject and GP2 winner Luca Filippe to get an engine and thus a ride instead?

Values in racing themselves can generally be broken down like this: Parity vs. Purity.  That’s the crux of the debate.  The other auxiliary issues all come down to the idea of parity and purity.  Multiple winning teams vs. watching the “best team win” is a classic example.  Innovation vs. close racing.  In Indycar it’s American drivers vs. having the “best of the best” (or, as some would argue, random F1 rejects).  The oval/road course debate comes down to parity/purity as many so called “purists” turn their nose up at Texas and Kentucky.  The engine debate is another perfect example of the conflicting viewpoints.  Parity supporters want to see Fisher get an engine while Purity supporter want the “market” to determine who get’s what engines.

Analogy

In fact parity vs. purity parallel politics perfectly.  The debate over a stronger or weaker government sounds an awful lot like the debate over a more pure or equal racing series.  Think about it; racing fans from the purity standpoint want less rules while parity fans generally support stronger sanctioning bodies with bigger rule-books and more regulations.  One interesting anecdote I’ve noticed is many fans who are more Conservative dislike the idea of TEAM Money or revenue sharing because it seems like “socialism.”

Of course it’s not an all or nothing issue.  There are level’s of parity or purity that each fan wants to see out of their racing.  It’s pretty obvious that I stand on the parity side, but I”m not as far down that side as Eddie Gossange of Texas Motor Speedway.  Most racing purists want to see at least some rules and regulations so that races are won by 10 laps.  I may be a racing parity supporter but that doesn’t mean I want to see competition cautions or things like the Chase for the Sprint Cup.

A Parity based series

Neither side is 100% right or wrong; however I do think the parity side is more appealing to more people.  Especially in the United States.  Looking at other sports series in the US, both racing (NASCAR) and stick and ball (NFL,NHL,NBA,NCAA Football, NCAA Basketball, MLB) generally stick towards the parity side.  Look at the salary caps and revenue sharing.  Overall fans in America have shown a lot more love and support for parity series than purity based series.  Not only is a parity based series what I would prefer; it’s also what, in my editorial opinion, is going to sell better to fans in America.  Something to think about when discussing Indycar.

All of that said I think some mid ground is possible.  Moderation and compromise and all of that.  The World Superbike Series shows that a racing series can have purity (no caution flags, multiple manufacturer with distinct equipment) yet also manages to have fairly large fields with a fair amount of competitive riders.  If only we could bottle it’s magic and give a little injection into every other racing series.   Indycar is somewhat tricky because of how distinct the viewpoints are.  Compromise should be possible as long as a 50-50 balance is maintained.  Considering the demise of Champcar that should be self-evident but it’s not.  Improving the quality of road courses would help immensely.  As my WSBK love indicates I’m not against all road racing, just boring road racing.  A lot more people would be open to the road and street courses if it didn’t result in horrifically boring races where the top five at the start of the race are the same top five at the end. Back on topic…

Parity and Purity Meet in the World Superbike Series

The debate over what direction racing series should take come up all the time.  It all comes down to what people want to see out of their racing.  Why someone watches racing in the first place?  Do you want to see unpredictability or see perfection?  I’ll be honest I desire and demand unpredictability.  I have zero interest in watching a race where I know with 99% certainty who’s going to win and I have no shame in admitting that.  Not everyone feels that way and that’s fine.  There is a mid ground and the goal of the sanctioning bodies should be to try and find that.  Both sides have their positive and negative aspects.  Too much purity can become boring while too much parity can turn a racing series into WWE on wheels.  Obviously fans aren’t going to watch a series that goes too far away from what they value in racing.  They’ll get nothing out of it.  Coming back to Indycar I really believe finding the moderate position is vital.   I don’t see how a series too focused on Purity is going to survive in the United States as anything more than a niche racing series with .3 ratings.  Taking a broader approach the middle ground makes sense for all racing series.  The “biggest tent” brings the most fans in and thus makes the series more attractive to sponsors and manufacturer.  Any series that can appeal to both purists and parity fans will draw a lot more fans than a series that draws only one or the other.

2012 WSBK Phillip Isle Pre Season Test

The 2012 WSBK season kicks off the same weekend that the 2012 NASCAR season kicks off.  After some private tests the pre season open test has begun at Phillip Isle.  While testing doesn’t always give a clear picture of how the season will unfold with this test taking place only a week before the race and at the track that will open up the season it’s likely that teams are pushing their hardest to get the bikes ready.  Hopefully this is indicative of how the 2012 season will work out because at the end of this test nine bikes where within a second of each other! For full results go to David Emmett’s MotoMatters.com.

Better yet Eugene Laverty, who was faster than Max Biaggi in an earlier test, wasn’t at this test.  Nor was John Hopkins.  Both riders where sidelined with injuries.  Leon Haslam, one of the nine riders who where within a second of the leaders, also has injured himself.  As long as these three riders recover, and assuming Hopkins is in good form (which is a stretch) there could be 11 riders capable of winning a race this year!  There might even be a 12th race winner.  While Aoyama (250cc Champion in 2009) was down on the time sheets he’s teamed up with Johnny Rea at the Honda team and as he adjusts to Superbikes could be a threat to win.

Check out SpeedTV this weekend to see if WSBK race 1 and 2 get televised, or if it get’s covered up by Daytona 500 hype and delayed until later in the week.

It’s time to put the Budweiser Shootout Out of its Misery

In years past the Budweiser shootout represented a reward for drivers who earned a pole in the previous season.  Denny Hamlin took control of the #11 for Joe Gibbs at the end of the 2005 season and even managed to earn a pole at Phoenix.  Hamlin’s pole got him into the 06 Shootout which he proceeded to win.  That win launched an impressive rookie year that saw Hamlin contend for the title.  Sadly that was in 2006 when Budweiser sponsored both the shootout and the Pole award.  In 2009 NASCAR split the beer sponsors.  Coors took the Pole award but Budweiser got to keep it’s iconic shootout.  With that decision the Budweiser shootout didn’t just jump the shark, it flew over it Evel Knievel style.

This used to mean something...

Since 2009 the Shootout has used a variety of ever changing rules to award starting spots in the race.  Initially a somewhat interesting idea of making it a “manufacturer” race with each auto maker getting their top six drivers into the race along side four “wildcards”.  Unfortunetly this created a situation where top Chevrolet drivers couldn’t get into the race and with the fall of Dodge this system was scraped.  A new, new format was thought up that awarded starting spots to, among things, Rookie of the Year winners, Chase qualifiers, and past winners at Daytona.  For 2012 a new, new, new format was dreamed up.  This format allows the entire top 25 in points from the previous year as well as any driver who has won at Daytona.

What’s the point of even having the Bud Shootout?  In the past it meant something.  It was a way to reward pole winners with a big race and potentially big payout.  This could be especially helpful to struggling teams who had managed to get a pole and now got a stage to show themselves and their sponsors off without another 42 cars on track.  Now it’s just an excuse to put over half the NASCAR field on track.  Because a racing series with 36 points races, 2 “qualifying” races of questionable importance (at the same track), another questionable non points race, not to mention over 20 Truck races (that Cup drivers can race in) and over 30 Nationwide race (that Cup drivers race in).  In total that’s over 86 races per year between the three NASCAR series.  During Speedweeks alone there’s the Shootout, 2 qualifying races, Nationwide, ARCA, Truck, and then finally the Daytona 500.

There's over 80 NASCAR races a year between the top 3 series

There’s already a belief among many people (me included) that the NASCAR season is too long.  Non points races are in theory a good idea but it’s hard to get the point (bad pun) of having pointless races when there’s 86 regular, televised, NASCAR stock car races.  That doesn’t even include ARCA and the East/West series that occasionally are aired on SpeedTV!  The only defense for the pointless races is that without points there’s no points racing.  I would agree points racing is a major problem in NASCAR.  But I don’t think the pointless races are really that much more exciting or that the drivers try that much harder.  In fact being pointless there’s not much motivation to race hard if a driver is not running up front.  Although thankfully these races haven’t seen the type of pathetic playing that has been seen during other Stick and Ball “All Star” games.   Plus the Shootout is a plate race.  It’s a crapshoot whether there’s points or not.  And a few days after the Shootout is the qualifying race!  At this point there’s not much difference between the two.

If in any way the pointless races do feature better or harder racing than regular NASCAR races it’s due to the shorter format more than lack of points.  Shorter races are a good idea; there’s 36 races that could be considered opportunities to experiment with that.  If the 500 where to be moved up and both the All Star Race and Shootout died then NASCAR could end it’s season two weeks earlier.  That’s two less weeks competing with NFL.  Cut just two more races from the schedule and that’s a whole month!  A whole month without competing with the NFL!

Replacement

If NASCAR really does want to keep Speedweeks then the solution is really simple.  Daytona is host to another race in January.  The 24 Hours of Daytona would fit perfectly into the start of Speedweeks.  Moving the 24 Hours into Speedweeks would raise it, and the entire Grand Am series profile.  The 24 can have a similar effect to an All Star Race only it has the NASCAR drivers doing something completely different and going up against Indycar drivers and former F1 drivers.   It would make more sense than the Shootout…

The Bud Shootout jumped the shark in 2009.  I don’t even know what to call it this year.  Maybe “pulling a Bud Shootout” will be the new phrase that can replace jumping the shark?  The Shootout has become more pathetic than Two and a Half Men without Charlie Sheen.  It’s time to put it out of it’s misery.  There’s nothing unique or special about it.  Especially with the qualifying races coming up a few days later.  NASCAR already has too many races.  Cutting this pointless race is as good of place as any to start.