Why I don't watch NASCAR

This was originally published on Chris Moses' site: www.ovaloperations.com


I had planned this for just after "pothole-gate," but my own procrastination made that irrelevant. Now with "Edwards-gate" I got back to work.

For being the king of American auto racing (right now), I can't stand watching NASCAR. What impetus got me to write out my feelings? Well, yeah, it was the pothole, but more so it was the incessant Facebook NASCAR love-fest I saw on the day of the Daytona 500. I still can't understand why people watch this sh*t. Here's why I don't watch it. 1. Manufactured competition. This series is so regulated, and each "manufacturer's" car is so unlike anything rolling off the lines that it might as well be IROC. If NASCAR could get one maker to spend enough money to be the exclusive name, they would. The problem is the fans are still believing this is a Ford/Chevy/Dodge/Toyota war. Really? The fact is that NONE of those "stock" cars exist in reality. Their is no Ford Fusion rolling off a lot that bears resemblance to the Fusion on the track, save for the bogus headlight decals.

Carburetors? Really? The last time carbs were stock was when "Sylvania beat Sony again!" (look it up kids). Let's let modern muscle race. Ford Mustangs, Chevy Camaros, Dodge Chargers...hell, if you must throw in a Lexus IS, Hyundai Genesis, BMW 3's and Mercedes C's. Let's race REAL equipment. Spaceframes? No, instead of getting with the 20th century, NASCAR just made the tracks give instead of the cars. To top it all off, the aero tweaks are so precise as to keep these cars running around in a deadly pack and calling it "close racing." Want to see when racing is decided by luck and who will push the limit of being dirty? Look at the Edwards incident. For crying out loud, this series has gone almost WWE in how close it lets everyone run. In the WWE, a group of dwarves can compete with the biggest monster in the ring. But scripting will do that. Here...well, the script, in my opinion is a little more fluid. The only reason I don't think it's fixed is because despite all this effort with cars and resetting the point races, one guy has owned the series for the past four years, and is showing all signs #5 is on its way.

2. Fox bills these drivers as the "best drivers and the best racing." Really? Now, I think people who claim "all they do is turn left for 500 miles, I can do that" are naive - and I think they really believe it. To give the drivers credit, it's harder than it looks - just look at the end of the Daytona 500 this year. Not even the best drivers were able to finish 2 laps without two crashes!

How's that for a back-handed compliment? But seriously, if the sponsors and teams would let these guys drive, I think the nay-sayers would be surprised. Ask Michael Schmacher after he was humbled by Jimmie in the Race of Nations? Look at the fact that Tony Stewart is multi-disciplined, including sports cars. And, face it...not too many drivers have won the Indy 500 and Monaco GP like Juan Montoya. There are others. NASCAR has good drivers...let them race at something other than a cookie cutter oval. Which leads me to:

3. 500 miles? It's as much about luck and the crew chief. 500 mile races are their own type of event, but if you want to watch drivers race, let them go for 50, 100, 200 laps at half-mile and mile ovals. THEN you'll see driving. Oh, and mix in a few right turns now and then. Why do we live in a country whose road system is based on the right turn, yet our #1 series is all about turning left? Look, I like oval racing. I grew up around it. But I like a right turn now and then, too - especially from a series billing itself as the best American auto racing has to offer.

By the way...shorter races? Won't happen. Can't sell enough commercials in a 250-mile race! So I guess we'll watch crew chiefs and engineers go at it and NASCAR keeps telling us that "Junior" and "Danica" have the potential to be the next Richard Petty or Cale Yarborough, merely because distance will let the blind squirrel find the nut every so often. Kind of like other one-named wonders like "Cher" and "Sting," both people of moderate talent, elevated to elite status for no other reason than the delusion of fan's praise and marketability. 

4. The arrogance. NASCAR will never admit its own failings. They want to keep things deadly...errr...close, but encourage their little gladiators to go after each other now like a cockfight. Let that go...and get more Edwards/Keselowski.

I can't let the pothole die. While in the end, it was a nuisance, it also was a shining example of NASCAR's arrogance. The track hadn't been paved since Detroit was sending out carburetor equipped cars. No, not at NASCAR's flagship facility, not even during the last decade's free-spending days of subprime and roses, when they signed TV deals worth billions (with a b) could NASCAR find the money to repave the track. Really? Just like they refused to step up safety until its star was killed, and they threw a pioneer like Bill Simpson under the bus, NASCAR refused to pry open its wallet and be PRO-active for once.

But of course, the blind boogityboogityboogity-ites will just laugh that off, and in ten years it will be one of those "y'all remember when" moments.

5. In the end...it's boring. I didn't watch IROC, and that's what this has become. Fan counts are declining, to the point of using multi-colored seats at some tracks to give the illusion of people as the cameras pan by. I can't be the only one thinking this. I like partying, I like racing. I think the party is what keeps fans there but the racing is just awful. Don't tell me that because it's close, it's good. I could line up ten snails and it would be close, but it isn't good either.

Now, off to my local track to watch some racing.