^Might be more challenging than picking JJ, Carl, or KyBu every week to win

I love seeing the 90 and 91 crash. Makes me feel like there is still right in the world. Ya know? Karma. Karma righting itself.

indyrand - 31 December 2008 12:35 AM

I have no problem with the current system if that is what those teams need to do to be able to survive. Terry Cook who is pictured in the C&D;article is one of my very favorite drivers and I wish I could see him run in a good car, but it is what it is. Morgan Shepherd has given so much to our sport and is such a good person that I would never criticize his motives or methods.

so much for "integrity"

Marcia, Stacy, Randy, and Phil! MSRP! How cute! They even arranged it like manufacturer's suggested retail price!

This entire practice is completely sketch, and with impound rules now and the like, I'd be PISSED if I lost a spot in qualifying to one of these S.A.P. cars. This isn't really fair. I'm not a fan.

Morgan runs the race when he has the $$ for tires!

cope and the 90/91 losers do a few laps and quit

The-Carver - 02 January 2009 07:12 PM

Morgan runs the race when he has the $$ for tires!

cope and the 90/91 losers do a few laps and quit

Morgan runs for god. When god wants him to race, he does. It's pretty simple.

indyrand - 31 December 2008 12:35 AM

I have no problem with the current system if that is what those teams need to do to be able to survive. Terry Cook who is pictured in the C&D;article is one of my very favorite drivers and I wish I could see him run in a good car, but it is what it is. Morgan Shepherd has given so much to our sport and is such a good person that I would never criticize his motives or methods.

I wish Terry had a ride in the Nationwide Series that was capable of not just qualifying but running the race and winning. Economics simply don't allow it.

As long as there aren't enough quality cars to fill the available starting positions, people will find a way to get to the track and make a few bucks. Is it the right way to "race"? No. Is it a bad thing? Eh, who cares? Really, if your enjoyment of a race comes from who is at the back of a 43-car field, well, I can't help you!

Sure, sometimes a car that would actually race doesn't make it because a start-and-park car out-qualifies them. It all goes back to qualifying being what it should be for everyone - the fastest make it in and those too slow go home. None of this top-30/35 stuff. Go fast or go home.

And furthermore, since when is having 50 cars show up a bad thing?? According to Brian France and even Jeff Burton, having a lot of teams suddenly is bad. I guess the days of having 70 cars attempt the Daytona 500 and 60 cars at some of the Busch races in the 90s were just miserable, weren't they?

ChasKrall - 02 January 2009 10:38 PM

And furthermore, since when is having 50 cars show up a bad thing?? According to Brian France and even Jeff Burton, having a lot of teams suddenly is bad.

What's changed in the past few years is that it now costs $20 million to field a Cup car (granted this topic was not about that). It's very difficult to ask for that kind of money to put a logo on a car that may not even be in the actual race.

We're now seeing just how vital those individual major team sponsors are to this sport.

gary243 - 02 January 2009 11:34 PM

ChasKrall - 02 January 2009 10:38 PM

And furthermore, since when is having 50 cars show up a bad thing?? According to Brian France and even Jeff Burton, having a lot of teams suddenly is bad.

What's changed in the past few years is that it now costs $20 million to field a Cup car (granted this topic was not about that). It's very difficult to ask for that kind of money to put a logo on a car that may not even be in the actual race.

We're now seeing just how vital those individual major team sponsors are to this sport.

The owners are the ones who will drive themselves out of the sport. The correction we are seeing now is long overdue. Budgets need to come back into line. It shouldn't take $120 million to run a competitive four-car team. That is obscene.

The owners that have taken the "at all costs" mode over the past ten years will retire with dozens if not hundreds of wins, lots of championships and probably a lot of money to boot. But is it good for the sport? I would argue that it's not.

They are the ones putting Cup drivers into full-time Nationwide rides because "sponsors demand it." Bull puckey. They are now the ones feeling the pinch of not having developed talent ready to go when Cup rides open up. I would say that the sport was much healthier when someone could build a car in their own garage and tow it to Daytona and attempt to make the race. The barriers to entry will keep the sport a haven for only the very rich, and meanwhile the dreams of the thousands of weekly racers that at one time may have had the ability to make a few one-off races while trying to get noticed will instead be quashed.

But here is someone in Phil Parsons who has found a loophole and is exploiting it. Good for him. I don't begrudge him that at all. Like I said previously, who really cares who finishes 43rd in a Nationwide race? I would much rather Terry Cook have a chance to race up front, but in the absence of that he makes a few bucks to put towards his child's education and puts some food on the table too. Is that bad?

lucasgabriel - 02 January 2009 06:06 PM

Marcia, Stacy, Randy, and Phil! MSRP! How cute! They even arranged it like manufacturer's suggested retail price!

This entire practice is completely sketch, and with impound rules now and the like, I'd be PISSED if I lost a spot in qualifying to one of these S.A.P. cars. This isn't really fair. I'm not a fan.

So would I. But at myself. If you are being out qualified by a SAP car, It's not about fair, it's about the fact that you need to get better.