This may be slightly irrelevant but does nascar really need another event in their 36 race schedule? I know some of the drivers say there's enough/too many now.
Printable View
This may be slightly irrelevant but does nascar really need another event in their 36 race schedule? I know some of the drivers say there's enough/too many now.
Nascar has said the schedule is maxed out. Any new race in Wash, Colo or NY will come at the expense of 2nd dates at older smaller tracks.Quote:
Originally Posted by R. Mears
The fact NASCAR has 2 dates at half their tracks is killing them now, but I don't see ISC taking dates away from THEIR tracks to give to NASCAR, and you know Bruton Smith isn't going to give up dates.
The two races per track model is starting to bite NASCAR in the @ss really. I think the best way maybe handle this would be to make only your results for a 26 race sched up to the chase count for the points, making it possible for teams to take races off. THAT I think though is a whole other thread....
As for Washington not wanting to fund the building of a race track that is only really used once a year, I wouldn't vote for it either. As much as I love racing, I pay a whack of property taxes, and I hate having them used to line someone else's pockets to provide me with "entertainment".
By the way, I don't live in Washington, but the principle still applies. Property taxes to support the building of race track only works if the rest of the government is run with ethics and efficiency, and we all know THAT doesn't really happen...
That's why I've been pulling for Portland. Adding a road course and bringing rain tires back would be killing two birds with one stone.Quote:
Originally Posted by ms0362
I don't have a problem with using public funds for year-round sports facilities, but race tracks are different. A 20,000 seat hockey/basketball arena in a city with NHL and NBA teams, will host at least 82 games per year plus concerts and conventions. That can stimulate the local economy.
A 100,000 seat race track used once per year will bring less people to its event anually and consumes more space. That could help the local economy, but it would all come in one surge.
Isn't intended to be a one race a year track, I think they said three big events. So Cup, probably Busch w/ Truck and then GrandAm, IRL? Most warm weather area tracks are used much more than people realize with Driver schools, filming commercials, SCCA, PCA, Corvette club. When there's a track available small series pop up that didn't exist before.Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
On the other hand, what Nascar is offering I don't think is a good deal for Wash. If they cut the local funds they want in half, they may have a chance for a deal.
Looking back on the proposed deal Nascar gave to Santa Clara County FG in San Jose CA in the mid 90s. It must be 10x better than the Wash, Colo or NJ deals, and they were turned down!
How many IRL races bring in 100,000 fans at places where the track's name doesn't rhyme with "Mindy"? You're not going to have that many people show up at club and SCCA events.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesi
I don't expect them to, I would think that a Busch race will fill +50%, other pro events about 1/3. The smaller events may not even have any spectators, but they pay the bills on staff, etc and bring $ into the local community. Willows has grown quite a bit since Thunderhill opened, and Buttonwillow has grown from their nearby track.Quote:
Originally Posted by call_me_andrew
Latest on this has ISC pulling out, after getting a modified offer from WA. No word on what the changes were but it's a safe bet it was less $ from WA.
Oh well, there's always Portland.