How long before Nascar becomes a negative?

[Stray Kat]

Really I mean Jimmie Johnson just outdueled a potential Ford superstar, Tony Stewert for the win today. Tony is another one of those drivers that got through Ford's fingers when he was coming up. I'm sure I remember him getting plenty of Ford backing during his Midget and Sprint Car years. Where is he now? Need I list the others?

 

So how many seasons of participation without a reasonable number of wins should Ford do before it actually casts Ford like an "also ran" negative. Fricken Minneaplolis- Moline can compete but if they lose every week how would that be a positive for them?

 

It galds me to see all those dollars flushed when I know the truth. Ford is the remaining manufacturer with a production based engine. The others have adopted a Ford type head to fit their custom made funny car blocks to keep up in the hp wars. All the hassle so we can see spec cars carrying Ford stickers. Who cares?

 

If it's worth it Ford you better stop playing nice and start stealing drivers back and muscleing Nascar for equal treatment under the hood. A liberal use of the chrome horn would be nice to see in return for all the times I've seen it done to Ford drivers when the chips are down.

 

Fugetabout Nascar, I have'nt seen them do you any favors!

Edited March 19, 2007 by Stray Kat

[Max]

It already is a negative. Given the fact that Director of Ford Racing, Dan Davis, gave reasoning of loyalty for Ford's involvement in NASCAR. Last time I checked loyalty does not yield a profit nor is it exciting, and the loyal teams aren't really competative. The Roush-Fenway team is the only real consistent contender with at least one driver in Matt Kenseth. Ford should exlcusively handle the grassroots/driver development style racing series...that's pretty much what they do best. Ford has never been a consistent champion in NASCAR, more like a consistent second place or a top five. Drivers like Alan Kulwicki, Davey Allison, Dale Jarrett, Mark Martin, Bill Elliott, Matt Kenseth, and Kurt Busch are bright spots for Ford...that is when these drivers drove Fords (with the exception of Kenseth). Greg Biffle displayed his racing prowess today when he took out himself and 2 toyotas in one incident...that's Ford talent.

 

It needs to be recognized that Ford is in the midst of a financial crisis along with an identity crisis with it's brands. I've long maintained that Ford has to be more assertive with its brands, but has yet to do so.

 

I find it funny how a company that emphasizes retro-themes and its illustrious 100+ year history(Ford Racing heritage commercial), skips the anti-semitic beliefs of its founder or the company's complicity and profiting with and from the Nazis during WWII. Is it a big deal? Maybe, maybe not, but the man's name is the logo itself. Japan's parliament-PR is having a helluva time with its comfort women used during WWII, it'll be interesting to see if anything else comes back from WWII to haunt someone or some company.

[RichardJensen]

It'd be a negative if Ford kept Tony, IMO. Hot-headed jerk. Real problem is there's no new 'class' in Nascar. There's 'celebrities', but nobody with Bill Elliott, Mark Martin, Richard Petty type class.

 

Combine the lack of people that transcend the sport with a culture of overpromotion (Harlequin romances & Nascar cologne), and you've got a bubble about to burst (I'm thinking NBA after Jordan retired).

[BlackHorse]

All valid and good points guys. Let me just add the "One has nothing to do with the other." factor in there.

When I watch a NASCAR race as do many of my friends, almost never do we say that so and so is driving a Ford while this other driver is driving a Chevy and that guy is driving the new Toyota. This is because we all know the race cars have absolutely zero in common with any production car on the road today much less the FWD production cars they pretend to represent. None of us watches a NASCAR race and thinks that Ford or Chevy is better or worse based on the outcome of a the race because honestly, the race cars are so far removed and different from anything rolling off a production line that trying to compare the two and say "See Ford is better because a Fusion won the Daytona 500." is just a moronically stupid point of view. You might as well compare a crop duster to the space shuttle. The majority of fans know this of course and I think that only adds to the "bubble is about to burst" effect that Richard spoke of. Like I said about this topic over in the "Competition" forum, I think people would rather see the manufacturers take honest to God production cars and make them race ready (or as race ready as you can make a FWD Fusion) and put them on the track because at least then you would have a much turer measure of one manufacturer vs. another in a race leagued branded "stock car."

[theVengineguy]

Well it will become negative when they start making 500 miles of right turns as opposed to 500 miles of left turns.

[ebritt]

It'd be a negative if Ford kept Tony, IMO. Hot-headed jerk. Real problem is there's no new 'class' in Nascar. There's 'celebrities', but nobody with Bill Elliott, Mark Martin, Richard Petty type class.

 

Combine the lack of people that transcend the sport with a culture of overpromotion (Harlequin romances & Nascar cologne), and you've got a bubble about to burst (I'm thinking NBA after Jordan retired).

A friend of mine at work went to school with Tony Stewart and worked at McDonalds with him years ago, said he was a spoiled brat then and got his but kicked on a regular basis but never learned to shut up.

[Stray Kat]

It'd be a negative if Ford kept Tony, IMO. Hot-headed jerk. Real problem is there's no new 'class' in Nascar. There's 'celebrities', but nobody with Bill Elliott, Mark Martin, Richard Petty type class.

 

Combine the lack of people that transcend the sport with a culture of overpromotion (Harlequin romances & Nascar cologne), and you've got a bubble about to burst (I'm thinking NBA after Jordan retired).

 

 

 

 

A bright spot on the horizen Richard. Rickey Carmichael is beginning his Nascar carreer soon. I saw him race his last Supercross Sat night in Orlando. What a talent, and what a champion. He passed the torch so to speak to his successor James Stewart when they finished 1-2 way ahead of the next competitor. The man is a class act as well.

[sranger]

NASCAR went negative a long time ago when it quit racing stock cars.....

[LincolnFan]

NASCAR is taking a left turn.

Edited March 19, 2007 by LincolnFan

[Joe771476]

I don't watch it anymore, but if I did it would be just to see Michael and his other brother Daryll explaining why Michael didn't qualify! Not that must have been funny!

[MGallun]

I don't watch it anymore, but if I did it would be just to see Michael and his other brother Daryll explaining why Michael didn't qualify! Not that must have been funny!

 

 

ford has lost alot of great drivers, stewart went from ford in outlaws to gm in nascar... jeff gordon got his start with bill davis in busch fords, kahne got his lucky break running fords.. kyle busch got his break in asa with ford.. but when it comes down to the money they all jump ship, becasue really, the chevy teams are better, kahne went to dodge, too bad for him, bad choice..

 

ford took a big hit in 1993... alan and davey both lost, those 2 would have won more races and championships easy, earnhardt wouldnt have 7, and gordon wouldnt have 4 if they were still alive..

[Deanh]

think we should re-name the thread..How long before Nascar becomes a positive?.......Nothing stock about those cars at all, no trickle down technologies, run around in circles all day and the Stereotypical pictures that come to mind upon the mention of Nascar aren't exactly of a positive nature unless you own a brewery.... I think i should stay off nascar threads...WAYYYY too tempting

[Edstock]

IT'LL NEVER HAPPEN,

 

but, IMHO,

 

Ford should pull out of NASCAR.

 

Take all that money and Roush and Yates and field Mustangs like Shelby did in the 60's.

 

Figure out a way to get a 3.5 Fusion into SCCA. Especially if there's a 2-dr in the future.

 

Make all those wonderful parts available at your Ford dealer or by FEDEX.

 

I wish the Mull would stop spending money on a charade and spend that coin on bringing

 

TOTAL PERFORMANCE back to Ford. That's where he finds the money to list the AWD performance parts.

 

Imagine all that money spent to improve what sits in the showroom. That's value marketing. NASCAR does not add value of any kind.

 

TOTAL PERFORMANCE!

[Deanh]

IT'LL NEVER HAPPEN,

 

but, IMHO,

 

Ford should pull out of NASCAR.

 

Take all that money and Roush and Yates and field Mustangs like Shelby did in the 60's.

 

Figure out a way to get a 3.5 Fusion into SCCA. Especially if there's a 2-dr in the future.

 

Make all those wonderful parts available at your Ford dealer or by FEDEX.

 

I wish the Mull would stop spending money on a charade and spend that coin on bringing

 

TOTAL PERFORMANCE back to Ford. That's where he finds the money to list the AWD performance parts.

 

Imagine all that money spent to improve what sits in the showroom. That's value marketing. NASCAR does not add value of any kind.

 

TOTAL PERFORMANCE!

I agree...wonder how many sales are generated by the "sport??????".....total waste of time and effort...if some of the technology crossed over maybe I could justify it in my pea brain, but basically all I see is an alternative to WWF for the mid-west with ZERO fringe benefits...in no way does it improve the brand...NOTHING!

Edited March 19, 2007 by Deanh

[Deanh]

I REST MY CASE................. ( of bud )

[Deanh]

Yeah. At least with the WWE, some of the "divas" pose for Playboy. NASCAR wives? Nothin!

got one ...'Hot Dog Eating Contests"....Jimmy Johnson and El Gordo Montoya odds on favourites....

[SVT_MAN]

I didn't have time to read all the posts here because I need to study for an exam I have tomorrow (college, sucks) ...

 

But, anyway, I just wanted to remind everybody of how Ford drivers will inevitably defect to other brands due to NASCAR's favortism towards Chevy. NASCAR has favored Chevy for a LONG time. It dates back to AT LEAST Dale Earnhardt. But the Big E was definitely the start of Chevy's real advantage in the sport.

 

Here is a list that I can come up with just in the past two decades that have defected (whether willingly or by choice of the race team):

 

(these are drivers who moved to Dodge, Chevy, or Toyota (eww))

 

Kasey Kahne, Jeff Gordon, Tony Stewart (sprint car example), Elliot Sadler, Dale Jarrett, Ryan Newman, Kurt Busch, Dave Blaney, Scott Riggs, Jeremy Mayfield, Michael Waltrip (no big loss here)

 

I've missed a ton here ...

 

BTW: To the guy who lives the TOTAL PERFORMANCE mantra of the 60s, I hear ya bro. Too bad the government has CAFE standards ...

 

 

Anyway, yeah, I like seeing Matt Kenseth rock out the Ford Fusion on Sundays since he's an awesome driver. But, the problem is, his finishes are more a result of his driving ability than his car. Even in 2003, when Ford engines totally sucked, Matt won the championship because he had awesome handling cars. BTW: I have to be a Matt fan. He's from "just down the street." He grew up in Cambridge, WI which is pretty close to where I live. He's a humble guy, but really smart. Not the best at forming sentences, but his mind works perfectly for a racer ..

 

think we should re-name the thread..How long before Nascar becomes a positive?.......Nothing stock about those cars at all, no trickle down technologies, run around in circles all day and the Stereotypical pictures that come to mind upon the mention of Nascar aren't exactly of a positive nature unless you own a brewery.... I think i should stay off nascar threads...WAYYYY too tempting

NASCAR has successfully shed its redneck image to a lot of people. Unfortunately, in shedding that image, it has lost all credibility by not showing the public its rulebook. Until it does, it will not be a credible sport - even to me.

 

I find it funny how a company that emphasizes retro-themes and its illustrious 100+ year history(Ford Racing heritage commercial), skips the anti-semitic beliefs of its founder or the company's complicity and profiting with and from the Nazis during WWII. Is it a big deal? Maybe, maybe not, but the man's name is the logo itself. Japan's parliament-PR is having a helluva time with its comfort women used during WWII, it'll be interesting to see if anything else comes back from WWII to haunt someone or some company.

 

It's true that Henry Ford was an anti-semitic during his earlier years at Ford. I don't remember when, but towards the end of his life, he admitted that he was wrong in thinking that way. Nonethless, Henry Ford wasn't the only anti-semitist of the time. As far as I know, he never killed anyone either. That's a far cry from the genocidal actions of Hitler. I'm not justifying Ford's thoughts or actions, but that's kind of like saying that we shouldn't revere our founding fathers because they owned slaves. Thinking that way ignores the context of the culture. It angers me that a lot of our country's wealth was built on the shoulders of indentured servants and slaves, but we cannot change history. We can only learn from it.

Edited March 20, 2007 by SVT_MAN

[Edstock]

I find it funny how a company that emphasizes retro-themes and its illustrious 100+ year history(Ford Racing heritage commercial), skips the anti-semitic beliefs of its founder or the company's complicity and profiting with and from the Nazis during WWII. Is it a big deal? Maybe, maybe not, but the man's name is the logo itself. Japan's parliament-PR is having a helluva time with its comfort women used during WWII, it'll be interesting to see if anything else comes back from WWII to haunt someone or some company.

 

It is common, ho-hum knowledge that Henry Ford was an anti-semite. As it happens, he's dead. He hated Jews. That was wrong. He's dead, he can't hear you, and the rest of us find the subject dead. Get over it. That was then, this is now.

 

"or the company's complicity and profiting with and from the Nazis during WWII."

 

Please cite proof, if only out of respect for all the Ford employees that got behind the war effort.

 

For example: Thomas Watson, the creator of IBM was stronly implicated in the sales and service of Hollerith punch-card equipment to the Nazis, which allowed them to set-up the logistics for the Final Solution. For a starting point, visit http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/

 

thanks for playing

 

[probeGT]

I misread the title. . . I thought it said How long before Nassar becomes a negative. My bad.

[Mark B. Morrow]

I misread the title. . . I thought it said How long before Nassar becomes a negative. My bad.

 

We passed that milestone a few years ago.

[Rwall10279]

Really I mean Jimmie Johnson just outdueled a potential Ford superstar, Tony Stewert for the win today. Tony is another one of those drivers that got through Ford's fingers when he was coming up. I'm sure I remember him getting plenty of Ford backing during his Midget and Sprint Car years. Where is he now? Need I list the others?

 

So how many seasons of participation without a reasonable number of wins should Ford do before it actually casts Ford like an "also ran" negative. Fricken Minneaplolis- Moline can compete but if they lose every week how would that be a positive for them?

 

It galds me to see all those dollars flushed when I know the truth. Ford is the remaining manufacturer with a production based engine. The others have adopted a Ford type head to fit their custom made funny car blocks to keep up in the hp wars. All the hassle so we can see spec cars carrying Ford stickers. Who cares?

 

If it's worth it Ford you better stop playing nice and start stealing drivers back and muscleing Nascar for equal treatment under the hood. A liberal use of the chrome horn would be nice to see in return for all the times I've seen it done to Ford drivers when the chips are down.

 

Fugetabout Nascar, I have'nt seen them do you any favors!

 

Wait, what? Nascar is to blame for Ford not keeping their drivers under contract? Ford cold have kept Tony Stewert had they been first to have a team and contract ready for him. Same thing happened with Kyle Busch, and Kasey Kahne, there was no cup team with an opening for them to move up, so they jumped at the first opportunity that came up (if you recall, ford sued Kahne for breach of contract). And in the case of Penske Racing with Ryan Newman, and Rusty Wallace, thier contract with Ford ended and the switched to Dodge because at the time Penske was racing Mercedes cars in CART.

 

The other two things I see brought up here all the time are sticker headlights, and similar cars. Well, you can thank Pontiac for the sticker headlights, not Nascar. They started having thier teams put them on thier cars so the success of car on track (or lack thereof for the most part for Pontiac) would resonate in car buyers minds. It was a maketing tool, that Ford and Chevy followed. As for the cars being similar, thank the Ford Tuarus. That car was the first to take advantage of aerodynamics, with is jellybean shape, and "power dome" hood. Pantiac and Chevy teams bitched about thier aero advantage so Nascar started messing with the air dams and spilers to even the cars out. Fans bitched about the rules changes every week, so to make everyone happy they started using common body points. Remeber Ford, Chevy, Dodge, and Toyota design the front and rear of the cars sheetmetal.

 

Thats my rant, and I won't comment any more in this thread. So feel free to bait, I'm not biting, I have better things to do with my time the argue with people over the internet

[Stray Kat]

"Thats my rant, and I won't comment any more in this thread. So feel free to bait, I'm not biting, I have better things to do with my time the argue with people over the internet "

 

 

 

Oh so you can toss a flare and you're not going to pay attention to the answer? Well I'll just respond to your post for the record then.

 

You misunderstood the whole point of my post. Simply stated it meant; How long should Ford invest whatever they spend in Nascar with the current mediocre results before it becomes a liability to Ford's tradition of winning? Times are tough and money is scarce. Is this a wise investment?

 

I don't know what the real problem with the holding drivers issue is but it has had devastating effects. You conviently skipped the most famous driver ripoff with the Jeff Gordon debacle. Ford groomed him carefully for the big leagues and right at the 11th hour he is plucked away by a GM team that starts with H. It's "dog eat dog" in the business world I know but this example and the others you mentioned are instances of "dirty pool".

 

Finally you are wrong about the template issue. This issue stems from the shambles that Bill Elliot and team made of the competition starting in 1985 with the "aero" `Bird. You see Ford actually built a body the was more efficient aerodynamically than any of it's competition. Oh how I remember the howling that ensued during that time. Soon Nascar realized that a given manufacturer could dominate unless they took action real quick. In a nutshell they began taking from Fords and giving to GM. The result is the common template Nascar silohette you see today with only minor differences to give them some brand identity. The COT "car of tomorrow" will complete the total transformation to "spec" cars. Nascar is now and very succesfully promoting personalities not technical engineering displays. That's fine with me. My question is; Does this help Ford given the condition of today's markets? Can the money be better spent elsewhere? I say an emphatic yes!

 

Oh and BTW I enjoy forums like this where I feel like I can express my opinion about the things I am passionate about. Free speech, it don't get no better than that!

[Rwall10279]

"Thats my rant, and I won't comment any more in this thread. So feel free to bait, I'm not biting, I have better things to do with my time the argue with people over the internet "

Oh so you can toss a flare and you're not going to pay attention to the answer? Well I'll just respond to your post for the record then.

 

You misunderstood the whole point of my post. Simply stated it meant; How long should Ford invest whatever they spend in Nascar with the current mediocre results before it becomes a liability to Ford's tradition of winning? Times are tough and money is scarce. Is this a wise investment?

 

I don't know what the real problem with the holding drivers issue is but it has had devastating effects. You conviently skipped the most famous driver ripoff with the Jeff Gordon debacle. Ford groomed him carefully for the big leagues and right at the 11th hour he is plucked away by a GM team that starts with H. It's "dog eat dog" in the business world I know but this example and the others you mentioned are instances of "dirty pool".

 

Finally you are wrong about the template issue. This issue stems from the shambles that Bill Elliot and team made of the competition starting in 1985 with the "aero" `Bird. You see Ford actually built a body the was more efficient aerodynamically than any of it's competition. Oh how I remember the howling that ensued during that time. Soon Nascar realized that a given manufacturer could dominate unless they took action real quick. In a nutshell they began taking from Fords and giving to GM. The result is the common template Nascar silohette you see today with only minor differences to give them some brand identity. The COT "car of tomorrow" will complete the total transformation to "spec" cars. Nascar is now and very succesfully promoting personalities not technical engineering displays. That's fine with me. My question is; Does this help Ford given the condition of today's markets? Can the money be better spent elsewhere? I say an emphatic yes!

 

Oh and BTW I enjoy forums like this where I feel like I can express my opinion about the things I am passionate about. Free speech, it don't get no better than that!

 

Well, I intended to not respond because usually there is a barrage of "nascar sucks" and no acctuall discusion. It wasn't aimed at you, sorry if it seemed that way.

 

I avoided talking about Jeff Gordon because I don't know the details about how that all went down. I happened before I started watching. There is defenitly something not right though when Ford grooms these drivers and they jump ship so quickly.

 

Sure, the aero wars started a long time ago, but the Bill Elliot car didn't cause the common body template that happened only a couple of years ago. The Chassis and frames on the other hand, I don't know when those where made common, it was before I started watching again.

 

As far as should Ford leave Nascar? I honestly don't know if it would benifit them. But can you imagine the backlash if Ford left nascar? It wouldn't do much for Fords image imo.

 

I have no problem debateing with someone who acctually want's to debate. I just saw this as another one of those threads that degrades into bashing.

Edited March 21, 2007 by Rwall10279

[Whipsnard]

The problem with this post has been the spelling. The correct way to spell the name is "NA$CAR".

 

I have been involved in Stock Car racing since the early 60's and some of us from that era have taken off of racing hats and hung them up a number of years back. Now I don't even turn on the one-eyed monster to fall asleep to the sound of the roundy-rounders. Since Bill Jr. turned over the daily reins to Brian, the boy has run it into the ground. Oh the "Modern Era", as some like to call it, has changed NA$CAR. Some for the good, some for the bad. But I believe that the negative started waaaaaaaaaay back when The King and a bunch of followers said no to trying to kill themselves with bad tires at Talladega on a given Sunday. Hence the Crash 'Em at All Cost Earnhardt Era. Someone else needed to have 7 Cups, not just the tall lanky kid from NC! Now we have almost all the "Stars" (Pretty Boys) on one freaking team. The un-convicted convict owns it all, wins it all, and thumbs his nose at you all. Well, take note my friends of the "Old Days", a number of millionaires are showing up and not every track is owned by the France family and a sh1t load of people wanted to see a 30 lap feature on dirt. Soon we will see a change and hopefully it will be for the better. And every other manufacturer will have a small block V-8 just like the Ford. Or has that happened already?

 

So is NA$CAR a negative? Ask the guy trying to run a Stock Car show on a Saturday night that NA$CAR is on TV running their show!

 

By the way, here is my current racer. A Hooters Cup car lying in state since the 2002 season. That's my old Aerostar in the background. Maybe you may have seen the car on TV a few years ago. So yea, I know NA$CAR...

Edited June 15, 2007 by Whipsnard

[Roadrunner]

(dumb comment retracted)

Edited November 25, 2007 by Roadrunner