Happy Hour: The Schottenheimer of NASCAR
By Jay Hart, Yahoo! Sports Mar 31, 2:19 am EDT
Imagine, for a moment, if Martinsville Speedway were no more.
Not that I think Martinsville is the end all, be all of racetracks, but if it were to go away, more than likely to be replaced by another race at Kansas Speedway or someplace like it, what would we have to look forward to? More importantly, what would we have to distinguish one week from the next?
Right now, I can tell you who won at California, Las Vegas and Atlanta, but only because it’s my job to know these things. But that’s about that only thing I could tell you about these events, other than they happened, which is a lot like dinner. I can’t always remember what I had last night; I just know I had something.
Bottom line: More short tracks, please.
Now let’s get to this week’s mailbag. We’ll kick things off with a suggestion on how to perfect the Chase …
Join Happy Hour
E-mail Jay
Twelve drivers, 10 races. After the first 2 races eliminate 2. Same after races 3 and 4. Then again after races 5 and 6. After races 7 and 8 eliminate 2 more drivers. Final 2 races 4 drivers racing for the gold. An actual playoff accomplished in a simple fashion.
D. Bischoff
Reading, Calif.
Simple, but brilliant. I like it. Get it done, Brian France, get it done.
Steve Letarte is NASCAR’s version of an NFL coach that does a good job preparing his team all week but has problems managing the game and making adjustments on Sundays. Gordon’s car seems to be better at the start of races and either fades off as the race progresses while other teams make the necessary adjustments to improve their cars. And frequently the 24’s last pit stop of the day is one of their worst costing track position at the point of the race where it is most valuable.
Case in point at Martinsville where Gordon wanted to know what other cars were doing while Letarte kept the blinders on and told him not to worry about it. And at the end of the race other teams had better set-ups and Gordon was no longer a factor in a race that he could have won.
Steve Letarte is NASCAR’s Marty Schottenheimer. Chad Knaus is NASCAR’s Bill Belichick. Gordon will be competitive but never win a championship in the chase format with Letarte calling the shots.
S. Bowers
Peabody, Mass.
Spot on analogy. It’s clear Gordon can still compete for a title. But you’re right, every week it’s the same thing – run up front when it doesn’t count, then fade (if only just a little) on the money laps.
On a side note, I do have some concerns about the “back issues” Gordon talked about prior to the season. I’ve had back issues. They’re tough to deal with, and I’m guessing Gordon’s hurting more than he’s letting on.
I really think that when qualifying is rained out they should start the race inverted, if these drivers that are in the points lead are that good then they can come from the rear. I’ll bet that will make the drivers want to get qualify in.
H. Hershman
Philippi, W.V.
Not sure you want to do that, H. Putting slower, ill-handling race cars at the front is more of a recipe for disaster. Sure, you’d think the best drivers could work their way through the field, but that’s assuming they aren’t caught up in a 10-car pileup along the way.
Jay, I wonder if the lack of testing is affecting Joey Logano’s early results. I don’t really care if he ever wins a race, but Gibbs has a pretty good track record for finding talent.
A. Cossick
Wadsworth, Ohio
I don’t think there’s any doubt that a lack of testing has hurt Logano. But here’s the thing on this: Should Gibbs have kept Logano in the Nationwide Series one more year? Sure. Did they have a choice? I’m not so sure they did. Home Depot needed their guy now, not in another year, and all parties involved probably figured Logano could weather the storm. What they didn’t know is that he’d have to do so without much practice, because when that decision was made testing was still an option.
Hi Jay I need to respond to Phyllis G in your last column. Her comments about the snoozefest at Bristol were mostly right on, but I have to disagree about the “lucky dog.” You see, I was sitting between turns 3 4 at New Hampshire a couple of years ago, when Dale Jarrett spun coming out of 4 and ended up stalled across the track at the beginning of the front straight. I remember watching the leaders charging down the back straight, “racing to the caution” and thinking that Dale might not survive that moment. Thanks to good spotters, nothing bad happened, but I’ll never forget that. I think the lucky dog IS necessary, even if you lose some excitement from the race. A little excitement sure isn’t worth somebody’s life.
D. Dewar
Boston
Great example, D. Hopefully that clears up why the Lucky Dog is a necessary evil.
Do you think it’s time NASCAR took a lesson from major league baseball. Baseball teams spent years building sterile, cookie cutter baseball “stadiums.” Finally someone recognized the charm and joy of the few remaining places like Fenway, and Camden Yards was born. How about the next NASCAR expansion (or is that excursion) taking a look at Martinsville and Bristol (and back at some of the dearly departed)? Sure, they’ll have to have bigger stands like Bristol to justify the expense, but that doesn’t mean the track can’t be short, irregular and downright interesting.
R. Keller
Grand Rapids, Mich.
It’s a great point. Unfortunately, the cookie cutters have already been built, so we’re stuck with them for a while – a long while.
I think they should change the races every year in the Chase. What are your thoughts on that?
Bronson
Helena, Mont.
I’ve gone back and forth on this one. I was all set to write, great idea in theory, not so much in practice, but the more I think about it, the more I like it. I’m sure NASCAR will say much more goes into scheduling than just slapping a date next to a race, and they’re right, but if the rotation were set a year in advance, I don’t see why they couldn’t pull it off.
The question you’d have to work out is how to determine the rotation. Does every track enter into the question? Do some remain Chase races every year? And does the finale rotate?
Whatever you come up with, there absolutely shouldn’t be five 1.5-mile tracks in the Chase, as there are now.
I’m not a huge Dale Jr. fan by far, and I’m less of a Kyle Busch fan at the same time. But one thing has seemed to have disappeared in the media and the NASCAR community. The burning question brought up at the beginning of last year was, “Who got the better deal? JGR for acquiring Kyle Busch, or Hendrick for getting Dale, Jr.?” Is it by now that the answer is more than clear to the entire NASCAR community, or that because the answer isn’t Dale Jr, that conversation has largely gone silent to the media? Just another ‘food for thought’ moment to feed the Dale Jr. conspiracy theorists. PS The obvious answer to me is JGR incase anyone really wasn’t sure.
E. Legenzoff
Erie, Pa.
If the obvious answer is JGR got the better end of the deal, then you’re assuming that Kyle Busch would have had the same results in a Hendrick car, and I don’t think you can make that assumption.
What can’t be determined is how Busch’s presence would have impacted Hendrick going forward. It’s more than just possible that Hendrick saw the future, realized that at some point Busch would put him in a position to choose between his own drivers, and Hendrick didn’t want to have to do that. So he cut loose the sport’s most talented driver in favor of its most popular. So far, it’s worked out well for Hendrick. Jimmie Johnson did win the title again last season.
Last call …
You really think NASCAR listens to what you say!!!!!!!
J. Ass
Parts unknown
