Changes REALLY needed in Indycar.

[indy-fan-reborn]

-Move to a 50% mandate of North American drivers in Indycar and a 75% mandate of North American drivers in Indy lights. How can you revive an american racing league with only 25% N.A. drivers. Why would your target audience of Americans and Canadians really cheer for European, South American or Asians drivers. This sport needs to create and breed more domestic drivers in open wheel racing. No wonder F1 doesn't have 1 USA/Can driver in it. There is hardly any means of training to get to the international level of racing for N.A. drivers.

-Every team must have 1 North American driver. This is an American based racing series so should relfect that.

-Bring back the american engine builders. I know Chevy is back next year but there needs to be the Chevy vs. Ford engine rivalry back in Indycar. Needs to go back to the old adage, "Race on Sunday, sell on Monday."

-Any engine and chassis builder can participate. Just regulate the Tires to one manufacture. I would love to see Cosworth back building cars.

-Coverage, out with ABC, in with a broadcaster that actually cares. Speed does a fantastic job of F1 coverage. Bring back Paul Page and other anouncers that are likeable, interesting, and knowledgable about motor racing. Quit the cheesy production. 2010 intro for the Indy 500 almost made me puke with its cheeziness. More drivers profiles and cool music videos showing racing footage. Make the racing fans excited to be watching instead of wanting to reach for the remote control.

-Bring back the podium where 3 drivers stand at the top and shoot jumbo huge bottles of champagne at each other. What incentive is there even now to get a 2nd or 3rd place finish as they get no recognition. Leave the winners circle to the Indy 500 only please.

-Drivers need to be banned to speak about there sponsors. It drives me nuts when they are interviewed after the race and they constantly thank their sponsor before talking about anything else. It sounds too forced and phony and doesn't allow the driver to have a personallity.

-Bring back drivers like Paul Tracy. Whether you love or hate him, he brings personallity and excitement to the series.

-Go to 2/3 road and street courses and 1/3 ovals. Fans watch NASCAR for oval racing. This will also help train domestic drivers for International racing like F1.

-Bring back Austrailia, Laguna Seca, Cleaveland, and Vancouver!

-Quit showing that rediculous IZOD girl who stands behind the winning driver with that lame smile on her face. This reflects bad on any professional image of this sport.

-Last thing, have a minium 20 race tracks per year. Choose more attractive tracks. I hate to compare F1 with Indy but F1 has gorgous tracks to watch. Indy tracks look very 2nd rate.

[Mark]

A nationality ruling is quite probably illegal, if not it should be.

[Don Capps]

Sorry to inform you "indy-fan-reborn" but that the boat has already sailed. Howl at the moon all you wish, but not going to happen. These same tired, worn-out suggestiions have been made and made again and again. Most are simply impractical, a few downright silly, and unless you are willing to pony up a few hundred million dollars to support the teams and the series the others are beyond the pale. True, some would be nice, but...

Of course, it would be small-minded to point out that most of the remedies you wish to implement are from causes that were self-inflicted by the series upon itself.

[I am evil Homer]

Or you end up with a bunch of sub-standard drivers...as yesterday seemed to prove with the total brain fades. While I can appreciate it's furstrating to see people like Jakes or SeaBass in these cars its because they bring money...if a US driver could do that they'd get the drive instead.

Same with engine builders...not sure there's any ROI in doing it for them. Does someone see an Indycar with a Ford badge and then rush to buy a Focus? I doubt it.

The point about TV coverage is a fair one. But in order to get that you need a better product.

[indy-fan-reborn]

I am from Canada and the CFL (Canadian Football League) has a mandate that a certain number of Canadian players must participate. I believe there are more American players playing in the CFL then Canadian players. As long as you don't flat out ban other nationalalities, It shouldn't be a problem.

This should be done to bring more fans back. I am Canadian and always cheer for Canadian drivers. Same as with American fans, they want to cheer for American drivers. How can you bring all the fans back to a racing series that has so many international drivers? Its the truth. Makes sense. The only incentive American drivers have is to go to NASCAR at the highest level of racing.

Not to mention bringing in more domestic corporate sponsors to fund the sport to improve the look and feel of Indycar. More sponsors creates higher drivers earnings and prize payouts, which brings better drivers.

[anthonyvop]

I am from Canada and the CFL (Canadian Football League) has a mandate that a certain number of Canadian players must participate. I believe there are more American players playing in the CFL then Canadian players. As long as you don't flat out ban other nationalalities, It shouldn't be a problem.

This should be done to bring more fans back. I am Canadian and always cheer for Canadian drivers. Same as with American fans, they want to cheer for American drivers. How can you bring all the fans back to a racing series that has so many international drivers? Its the truth. Makes sense. The only incentive American drivers have is to go to NASCAR at the highest level of racing.

Not to mention bringing in more domestic corporate sponsors to fund the sport to improve the look and feel of Indycar. More sponsors creates higher drivers earnings and prize payouts, which brings better drivers.

The US isn't Canada. We have this thing called the Constitution which would prevent the citizenship requirement....Not to mention it is a silly idea.

Most of the rest of your ideas can be done. All you need is to right a check with a lot of zeros....I can give you the ICS office's address if you want so you can send it to them.

[ykiki]

indy-fan-reborn, who exactly is going to pay for your plan? It seems like you want more Americans/Canadians in the series, which is fine - except who is going to sponsor them if they're banned from even mentioning their sponsor???

So you want more American engines in IndyCar. Nice thought and I'm glad you want to invite any company to build an engine - but what if THEY don't want to play? (...and if Ford went out of their way to find a young American/Canadian, groom him/her from obscurity and finance their way up the ladder system, that driver would then be FORBIDDEN to utter the name "Ford" on tv???? Nice thank you that would be!)

Too bad the series has a sponsor like IZOD paying the bills. It's a shame they may want to have a presence at the track and sneak their glamor gal into the post-race photos.

Oh, and I must not exist. I'm just an AMERICAN who happens to root for European, South American or Asian drivers. Same with American or Canadian drivers. I don't care where they're from as long as they're fun to watch.

One last thing - I associate the word "league" with stick and ball sports and "series" with racing. Perhaps you could ban yourself from using the word "league" in conjunction with motor sports.

There, I feel better now. ...and it's only Monday!

[uncommonsense52]

At the height of Open Wheel's recent popularity in the states, CART of the 90's and very early 00's , we had championships given out to British, Americans, Italians, Colombians, Brazilians, Canadians... this whole National Pride thing, not only is it stupid, unethical and probably illegal, but it also holds absolutely no merit toward improving Indycar.

A battle between Zanardi and either Fittipaldi, or a battle between Scott Sharp and Buddy Rice. Guess which one more people would care about.

Indycar needs to focus on bringing in the best drivers in the world, so that they get recognition from the world - not the best drivers from a little corner of the world, in order to only get a small demographic watching the series.

The same goes for the engine builders.

Your bit about the sponsors is impossible too. If the sponsors don't get what they want, they leave - if they leave, no money, no IndyCar.

I agree about bringing back the tracks you listed, and the 2/3rds road/street courses. But that's about it.

[indy-fan-reborn]

Hey this is just food for thought. What would you guys suggest being done to improve the series.

How does Indycar go back to the glory days and gets its image back? The 2012 changes are a step in the right direction.

And there are many diehard Chevy and Ford guys who would love to cheer for Indycars with their brand of engine. I personally have trouble getting any excitement for Honda engines. I remember in the 90's when Chevy vs. Ford was a good storyline in Indycar.

[Mark]

I do agree with the podium thing but you could be accused of copying F1 then.

[uncommonsense52]

Hey this is just food for thought. What would you guys suggest being done to improve the series.

How does Indycar go back to the glory days and gets its image back? The 2012 changes are a step in the right direction.

And there are many diehard Chevy and Ford guys who would love to cheer for Indycars with their brand of engine. I personally have trouble getting any excitement for Honda engines. I remember in the 90's when Chevy vs. Ford was a good storyline in Indycar.

You can bring back Ford and Chevy, but other engine builders should also be there.

Indycar needs to make itself the best in the world, that was it's "glory day". To do that, it needs to invite the best in the WORLD, be it engine builders, chassis designers, drivers, etc...

[indy-fan-reborn]

If you mandate your drivers to 50% N.A. and 50% international, it will bring higher calibre international drivers to the series, hence leaving out drivers like, oh, say, Milka Duno,

Also, if you mandate your Indy lights drivers to 75%, you train N.A. drivers for Indy Car, greatly improving there talent in Indycar. The you get the best drivers from everywhere.

And you would still have international engine builders. I didn't say to ban that aspect.

[tfisch100]

1. If you want more american drivers, then you should find the money and pay for them. The sponsors are choosing the drivers. Start saving your pennies and become a sponsor. Then you may change your tune.

2. Become an engine manufacturer and see how much money you have left over to invest in motor racing.

3. Go to work for ABC and try to make it better. ABC provides more coverage than VERSUS.

4. I agree, put them all on the podium. Champagne is much better than a sticky 20 oz coke.

5. Let drivers talk about sponsors or all you will have is rich ride buyers.

6. Start saving your pennies and help PT buy a ride.

7. I agree, 2/3 road/street courses are good.

8. I'd learn to spell Australia then bring it back.

9. That IZOD girl is cute and much better looking than a backdrop of IZOD logos.

10. 20 or more good looking tracks would be nice. F1 also uses more creative and interesting camera angles.

[Lousada]

There are podiums at every race except Texas and Indy.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/izodindycar/5565237011/

[Mark]

The difference is that F1 mandates drivers go straight to the podium. No interviews etc before that.

[indy-fan-reborn]

Wow, you guys are hard on anyone with an idea or opinion. This makes for good discussion though. My 1st time on this forum and I feel like I just had a bad prison shower expeariance.

Even my spelling mistake with fast typing was commented on.

[tfisch100]

Wow, you guys are hard on anyone with an idea or opinion. This makes for good discussion though. My 1st time on this forum and I feel like I just had a bad prison shower expeariance.

Even my spelling mistake with fast typing was commented on.

Don't take it personally. I agree on all your wants. It seems like a big country like the US would have enough capable drivers to fill a top level series. For some reason, this country does not appreciate motorsports as well as other countries. I am traveling to England next month. I will be in Buxton of all places. I searched for a motorcycle race to see while I was there. There is a race every night, weekdays included, that I am there within 1 1/2 hour drive. I am in New Jersey, the most densely (numbers not mental) populated state in the US. I have a hard time finding racing to go see here. Go figure.

[anthonyvop]

If you mandate your drivers to 50% N.A. and 50% international, it will bring higher calibre international drivers to the series, hence leaving out drivers like, oh, say, Milka Duno,

Exactly how would cutting the amount of International drivers bring a higher "calibre"? If anything it would just limit it to those who bring a bigger check.

Oh and how about the pesky notion that the ICS would be branded a xenophobic organization?

[anthonyvop]

It seems like a big country like the US would have enough capable drivers to fill a top level series.

The US does. Unfortunately that top level series is called NASCAR.

[indy-fan-reborn]

Thanks tfish100. Yes, you think between population of Can, US, and Mexico, we could come up with altleast 12-15 decent drivers. I come from a hockey country so I would love to see motorsport greatly increase and I think more Canadian drivers would help that. Might be the same with the US. American Indycar fans who left the sport with the split in the 90's either went to NASCAR or quit watching completely.

[uncommonsense52]

Wow, you guys are hard on anyone with an idea or opinion. This makes for good discussion though. My 1st time on this forum and I feel like I just had a bad prison shower expeariance.

Even my spelling mistake with fast typing was commented on.

I hope you don't take my post personally. I just strongly disagreed. I'm pretty new around here too. Nothing personal meant.

[SarahFan]

Changes?

Scuttlebutt on the boards is st Pete drew a 1.4 overnight ..... That might be the best tv rating for a season opener in a decade

[Chris R]

I cannot agree with the driver country of origin mandate - I do not think it is nearly as important where the driver comes from as to how much personality and talent the driver has..... We loved Zanardi, Teo Fabi, Montoya, Emmo etc. The casual fan who sees names on the computer screen has no clue that Dixon or Wilson are NOT American and that Yasukawa WAS.... I think most people like drivers who are genuine, talented and exhibit a larger than life type of personality they do not car where they come from....

Same goes for Ford vs. Chevy vs. Honda etc. They are all great racing names - Honda made AWESOME Formula one motors (and Champ car motors) so did Ford (and Toyota and Mercedes, and...) Chevy is actually a bit of an oddity in Indy car racing as far as I am concerned- I think of a pushrod 350 V-8 when I think Chevy (and I know they badged those great Ilmor motors...). Cosworth is a British company.... you want American iron, bring back the Offy.....

I hear what you are saying - you want the product to improve. I think the 2012 rules take a step in the right direction... I think to make it better you encourage the BEST to show up and play - the BEST from everywhere. You mix it up with different types of tracks so the drivers, designers, teams etc. have to adapt to different condition like no other form of motorsport... You promote the things that make Indycar unique (the mix of venues being one of the primary things, IMHO) Champcar failed being all road racing an the IRL failed being all oval - I think 50/50 or close to it is about right (maybe 60/40 to road/street).....

They need to let innovation take place with some sort of eye toward controlling costs and safety - which is a pretty difficult thing to pull off - but I think it is possible.....

Overall, the series needs to be seen as a desirable DESTINATION by all people involved. Drivers need to aspire to nothing more than Indycar. Teams need to think they are playing in the best "sandbox". Sponsors need to WANT to be in Indycar. We do not need the majority of drivers using Indycar as a stepping stone on the way up or down (a few of them is ok). We do not need sponsors who are sticking their toes in the water before moving up to "big time" NASCAR or F1....

I am not sure how to achieve these things and I am not sure if anyone really knows how CART came to be so popular - it was a much an accident of the times that they did so well as it was anyone's grand design.... CART prospered in the time before banned "sin" advertising, the times before the internet took over as the best advertising media, and the times when companies had lots of $$ to burn through for "advertising" and "entertainment". In short, the climate in which CART prospered is a thing of the past and I am not sure there is any bringing it back.....

[indy-fan-reborn]

I agree that talent and personality are greatly needed. I can't stand Dixon because he is so bland but he does have the talent.

Problem with Indycar is that it isn't really producing super star drivers. I can't stand NASCAR but Indy does need to look at what is working so well for that series. I am not saying Indy should mirror how NASCAR operates but should look at the aspects that have made it so successful.

As far as Indycar comparing to F1 and the calibre of drivers, it will never reach F1 status and respectability. F1 is international and Indycar is an American Series. Indycar really needs to establish itself as a equal or favoured racing series compared to NASCAR 1st. It should be getting the strengh of N.A. fans and drivers before trying to appeal to international fans. It's like a corporation or successful business. You work to capture a target market then start expanding to other markets. When business and companies try to win everyone over too fast, thats where they tend to fall.

There is a reason that no US/Can drivers are in F1. They have no proper means or vehicle to get to that level. It's like motorcycle racing. Why would Ben Spies stay in AMA when he can race at the highest international level of MotoGP. Indycar is to AMA what F1 is to MotoGP. I want to see a US or Canadian driver be world champion in F1 some day so N.A. can show the world that we have great drivers too.

The simple fact is US people are very patriotic and want to cheer for american superstars. If you deny that and are american, then man are you in the dark and naive.

Last thing, how can Indycar currently appeal to international fans. Most people around the world can't even watch Indycar broadcasts.

[ykiki]

The simple fact is US people are very patriotic and want to cheer for american superstars. If you deny that and are american, then man are you in the dark and naive.


Pretty broad brush stroke.

Sure, there are plenty of fans who wish there could be more Americans in the series, but there also are a lot of Americans who have a broader outlook and really do choose to root for someone they see as having an entertaining personality as well. You can't just shove an American down our throats and expect us to instantly like them simply because they're American. We tend to like choices. If you think all Americans are that blind, then perhaps someone else is in the dark and naive. NASCAR was able to build itself from a regional sport to national prominence thanks to the marketability of the drivers, not just because all of them were American - for the most part that has always been the case. It was that they began to really push the marketing side of things. My wife could care less about the racing, but she likes some of the NASCAR guys thanks to their "personalities" that are exhibited in various tv commercials. Give us someone marketable and we'll go with it.

This isn't the Olympics where we'll blindly cheer for an American because...well, it's the Olympics!

[indy-fan-reborn]

Yes, and that is why there still would be 50% international drivers in the Indycar series if they had this mandate. You are missing my point completely. I am saying increasing N.A. drivers in the series will help bring more fans to the sport which bring more sponsors, which builds the sport up. This is the entertainment industry, hence needs to be appealing and entertaining to more fans. And cash flow to the sport will help increase everything, including marketability. Why do I see way more Dale Earnhardt Jr. commercials on T.V. then Juan Pablo Montoya if you want to talk about NASCAR commercials and marketability? What about Danica Patrick commericals over any of the other top 5-6 Indy Car drivers who are far superior to her? Simona could freaken win the championship this year and guaranteed that all the focus will be on Danica Patrick. You wouldn't see one Simona commercial in the US.
What if there was not 1 N.A. driver in Indycar racing? Would it be the same series or would it die out really fast? Ponder that one.

[Leo Krupe]

The US isn't Canada. We have this thing called the Constitution which would prevent the citizenship requirement....Not to mention it is a silly idea.

Most of the rest of your ideas can be done. All you need is to right a check with a lot of zeros....I can give you the ICS office's address if you want so you can send it to them.
How do you figure the Constitution enters into it?

Personally, I think fans would bite you in the backside if you tried implementing a quota system.


Why would your target audience of Americans and Canadians really cheer for European, South American or Asians drivers.
I don't know....MLS fans seem to cheer for a lot of foreign born players (David Beckham for instance).


Bring back the american engine builders.
There are essentially two...GM and Ford. Sure, there's Chrysler, but they're tangled up with Fiat. How many other engine manufacturers based in the US can there be that can afford this level of racing?


Any engine and chassis builder can participate.
Any, as in worldwide, or any, as in American? Pick one and run with it.


Coverage, out with ABC, in with a broadcaster that actually cares.
Okay, find one. Who might that broadcaster be? Remember, it has to be a broadcaster with huge national coverage (like ABC/ESPN) that cares about auto racing (like Speed), and has on-air talent that makes viewers want to watch. It can't have cheesiness, but driver profiles and music videos are okay.


Drivers need to be banned to speak about there sponsors.Sponsors are expected to pay, but can't be heard. Gotcha. Listen, I hate commercials -- all of 'em...with the exception of maybe 2, and one was the Champ Car "Faster" promo from some years ago. The other was Target with Jimmy Vasser (he actually did several, including I think a few with Zanardi, and a few with Montoya). My point is I hate commercials on TV, on the radio, and on the internet. But the fact of the matter is, without ads, and without sponsors, you wouldn't be enjoying the entertainment you do. All media would be like paying for HBO and Showtime, or pay-per-view. No "free" TV like the broadcast networks. Athletes talking about sponsors is part of the price you pay for admission to watch.


Bring back drivers like Paul Tracy.I agree, PT's been my favorite for nearly 20 years. But the fact is, PT is getting a bit old (that's not to say he's too old), but rather than bring back PT, find other stars like him, and groom them. The series marketing department can help with that.


Go to 2/3 road and street courses and 1/3 ovals. I could deal with that.


Quit showing that rediculous IZOD girl who stands behind the winning driver with that lame smile on her face. This reflects bad on any professional image of this sport.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. When you have a presenting sponsor, you keep that sponsor happy. And you do that by keeping the sponsor's name in the public eye. A pretty girl always helps.

I'm sure you've gotten the idea now that most of what you say hinges on money. There's an old joke about a book called, "How to be a millionaire". Chapter 1: First, get a million dollars.

All your suggestions are easy if the money's there. The problem is, it ain't. Not in the amount you'd need to put your suggestions into play.

[Leo Krupe]

Yes, and that is why there still would be 50% international drivers in the Indycar series if they had this mandate. You are missing my point completely. I am saying increasing N.A. drivers in the series will help bring more fans to the sport which bring more sponsors, which builds the sport up. This is the entertainment industry, hence needs to be appealing and entertaining to more fans. And cash flow to the sport will help increase everything, including marketability. Why do I see way more Dale Earnhardt Jr. commercials on T.V. then Juan Pablo Montoya if you want to talk about NASCAR commercials and marketability? What about Danica Patrick commericals over any of the other top 5-6 Indy Car drivers who are far superior to her? Simona could freaken win the championship this year and guaranteed that all the focus will be on Danica Patrick. You wouldn't see one Simona commercial in the US.
What if there was not 1 N.A. driver in Indycar racing? Would it be the same series or would it die out really fast? Ponder that one.
One reason you see Dale Jr commercials over Montoya is...his name. Dale Earnhardt Jr. He's a legacy.

As for Danica, looks win. She's a pretty face.

Simply putting NA drivers in ads wouldn't do it if there isn't a story to tell. In 2006 PT donned a pro wrestling mask in Montreal. That's a story! But it doesn't have to be that over the top...Americans love an underdog. Americans love a winner. Americans accept other nationalities if there's a compelling reason to...if there's a tear-jerking story, or beating the odds. I don't think it matters so much where the driver's from. It's a combination of personality and storyline. And marketing, something both CC and the irl lacked. Hopefully, RB and the rest of IICS will learn, and budget or not, market the tar out of the drivers.

[MakinenLoeb]

No offence dude, but if you want more American drivers in Indycar. Then it has to be what the IRL was before 2005. ALL ovals. American drivers come from two places, short tracks and dirt short tracks. USAC drivers back in the day would have there eye on Indy. Now they go to Nascar because of the ovals and that's what they're used to running and it's what they LIKE and there is good money in Nascar. Guys like Ryan Newman and Jeff Gordon went to Nascar because they could run ovals and get paid a good salary. Not saying the Indycar series doesn't pay well. But you earn a ton in Nascar. I don't think anyone in Indycar has USAC experience except for Ed Carpenter. Most of the guys in the Indycar series are rejects from europe or american drivers that couldn't get a ride in europe or south american drivers that couldn't reach europe. But some of the guys from South America aim for the Indycar series because they can have a good life and earn good pay in America.

[Dr. Krogshöj]

The US isn't Canada.

FYI, Canada has a constitution too. Most countries do. But what does the U.S. Constitution say about citizenship rules in sports?

[Chris R]

I am not so sure they went to "run ovals" so much as to go where the opportunities were/are and where they could earn a good living.... If Indycar can demonstrate that all the drivers can earn a decent living they would be much more attractive... Also, you have to go with the numbers - there are roughly 20 more driving spots in Cup racing than in the Izod series... I would not want to see a 43 car Indycar field - but perhaps they need to address that situation - maybe cooperate closely with ALMS (or someone else) so that drivers have ample opportunities to race other great cars in top series' to both augment their income and provide a clear opportunity for 40-50 driver to flourish in top tier motorsports with a strong Indycar component....

[Mightyreds]

If there are 50 million hispanics in the USA, does that mean that one eigth of the drivers should be hispanic. How many should have blonde hair and blue eyes?

Nationality, is an important factor, but until Indy Car drivers make more money than NASCAR drivers, they could drive nothing but ovals and the best American drivers growing up will want to be NASCAR drivers.

Fortunately, some American drivers get hooked on road racing and see Indy Car as a stepping stone to F1.

Seeing your favorite driver/team win is great. You need more American winners, not drivers.

[anthonyvop]

FYI, Canada has a constitution too. Most countries do. But what does the U.S. Constitution say about citizenship rules in sports?

The US supreme court has consistently ruled that the Constitution applies to everyone in the US and it has been legislated that you cannot discriminate against anyone regarding employment because of race(Nationality), creed or color.

[SarahFan]

Isn't Helio an American citizen now?

So does penske meet the quota?

[FIAT1]

For my money I would like to see likes of Mansell, Zanardi,Montoya,Tracy,Villeneuve ,Power etc. then Hornish, D Patrick, Marco, Kimball etc. Fact is that American drivers are not as good and I don't know why.( perfect exsample is Andretti kid, with one of best teams and machinery ,he can't cut a muster after 5 years). This is not hate post just abservation and I would love to see Rahal win every time because I'm a fan. Look the numbers and records. No room for misplaced patriotism I'm just racing fan. Bring on the best period!

[MAX_THRUST]

American fans cheered for zanardi didn't they. You just need drivers who are entertaining and loveable rogues. Drivers with personalities, its more about PR and marketing than nationalities. I don't care where a driver comes from, I do like it when Dario wins but I aint scottish or italian. He's British to me, Wilson wins that great, PT wins awsome, I don't care as long as they deserve the win. When Moreno won in champ car, and cried how can you not love that.....?You need US drivers, but you need characters

[Anubis]

-Bring back Austrailia

So you want 50% American drivers and a ban on mentioning sponsors yet also want the whole circus to up sticks and race in Australia once a year? Two problems you appear to have overlooked :-

1) Who pays?
2) Aussie V8s

Your solution?

[bennybigb]

I'm American, and my favorite driver was Raul Boesel.

Who said Teo Fabi had a great personality? News to me, I just thought he had a cool name.....

Please no more Racine Gardners, Jack Millers, Tyce Carlsons, George Macks, Danica Patricks......

I like the rest of your post though. More Road Courses, less cheesyness, less TG, better cars, maybe a 2.65L turbo charged V8.

Perhaps a better management team would help some of these areas.

[nigelred5]

The US isn't Canada. We have this thing called the Constitution which would prevent the citizenship requirement....Not to mention it is a silly idea.

Most of the rest of your ideas can be done. All you need is to right a check with a lot of zeros....I can give you the ICS office's address if you want so you can send it to them.

Nothing constitutional but....
The Immigration and Nationality Act prohibits citizenship status and national origin discrimination with respect to hiring, termination, and recruiting or referring for a fee.8 U.S.C. § 1324b(a)(1)(B).

Employers may not treat individuals differently because they are, or are not, U.S. citizens or work authorized individuals. U.S. citizens, asylees, refugees, recent permanent residents and temporary residents are protected from citizenship status discrimination. Employers may not reject valid employment eligibility documents or require more or different documents on the basis of a person’s national origin or citizenship status.

[anthonyvop]

Fortunately, some American drivers get hooked on road racing and see Indy Car as a stepping stone to F1.



They do? Why? I mean what would give them a reason to think that? Maybe 20+ years ago but today?

[bblocker68]

Jonathan Summerton almost made it, kinda. He was in Indy Lights for a spell and was to get the USF1 seat. Things didn't turn out, unfortunately.

Seems the "More Americans" angle is huge in the Mid-West, where the world revolves around Indy and dirt tracks. It's not the same on the West Side, for the most part.

[Mark in Oshawa]

More Americans in Indy car and the new Canadian kid brings it up!!

Ah yes, haven't we ploughed this field before?

I like a lot of his ideas on some level, and I don't deny that more American names in the lineup wouldn't hurt but you cant force this stuff in the free market.

It has been said over and over, the reason American drivers coming up through karting end up in NASCAR is because of the Dough. It isn't rocket science. Rather than finding sponsors to buy a ride for 16 races and hopefully eking out a living, you can go to NASCAR where your talent actually will help you go to an established team who in turn will find sponsors or put you in the picture. Not many drivers in NASCAR land have to work as hard to get a sponsor before signing with a reputable, competitive team. In Indycar, if you are not driving for Ganassi or Penske, your job is only as good as the sponsor you may get on your own.....

The IRL has I think bottomed out. Randy Bernard is steering this ship into calmer waters. Patience people...I think if left alone, in 4 or 5 years we will look at this series and think "wow, look how far they have come!"

[Mark in Oshawa]

Not quite accurate. Gordon at least tried to get into CART first but couldn't get a sniff of interest from the team owners. He didn't, at the time, have enough money to buy his way in. He then went to NASCAR and the rest is history.

If you read his Autobiographical account, he didn't spend a lot of time on it either. He went to the Buck Baker stock car school while killing time waiting for maybe a try out to get into Atlantics or Indy Lights and knew immediately that the stock car suited him much better. He didn't spend any real time AT all trying to go beyond Sprint Cars in OW. Realistically, no one could look at his USAC results and dream he would be a CART star. By the early 90's, most of the guys in CART were not coming from the sprint car world....and for anyone to say this was intentional is silly. It was an evolution of the sport where the rear engined modern CART/IRL style car had more in common with OW formulae running on road courses, not the solid axle offset sprint car with an engine in the front.....

[Mightyreds]

What is the goal for Indy Car? What should it be CART 2, an open wheel oval series, 50/50 road vs oval, 33/33/34 street/road/oval, no street races?

For me, in my opinion, I could do without the street races and would prefer a balance of ovals and road courses. Diversirty should be the hallmark of indycar and everything should be diverse.

[uncommonsense52]

What is the goal for Indy Car? What should it be CART 2, an open wheel oval series, 50/50 road vs oval, 33/33/34 street/road/oval, no street races?

For me, in my opinion, I could do without the street races and would prefer a balance of ovals and road courses. Diversirty should be the hallmark of indycar and everything should be diverse.

Absolutely entirely disagree 100% so much. Let the NASCAR guys go in boring circles all year. I want to see better racing than that. And my favorites are the street courses. The fact that I could take my own personal car and drive that course if I went there is exciting to me. It brings a connection to the fans.

Not to mention oval racing is just stupid dangerous in these cars. Stupid dangerous, less interesting to watch and less skill needed to win. Why would I want that?

If I had my way, it'd be 1 oval - Indy. Maybe Milwaukee. Then You've got long oval and short oval.

Everything else would be street/road courses.

[garyshell]

If I had my way, it'd be 1 oval - Indy. Maybe Milwaukee. Then You've got long oval and short oval.

Everything else would be street/road courses.

Oh gawd, here we go again... A lot of us road racing fans still like the idea of diversity. Diverse beyond a single oval each year. The idea of less skill is very debatable. One only needs to look at some of the road racers who can't do squat on an oval course to make that point. Different skills, yes. Less skills, not so much.
I am a dyed in the wool road race guy, been going to Mid Ohio since 1967. But I still love going to Ky. speedway too. The diversity is what sets Indycar and CART/ChampCar before it apart from other series.

Gary

[Mark in Oshawa]

Cant be Indycars with out ovals. It isn't a coincidence that as CART lost its ovals, it lost its relevance....

We can beat this to horse to death, but the series needs all types of tracks. When OW was going to ovals and road/street courses in a nice balance, it was at its Zenith. No other series really forces drivers to adapt to such radically different tracks...

[bblocker68]

Haven't we learned our lessons already? I love to watch INDYCAR race on all types of tracks. Roads, streets, shorty's, Superspeedway's, you name it. Different disciplines separate OUR series from all of the others.

It's a great idea. We need to stick with it!

[Mightyreds]

If I wanted no ovals I'd watch F1 or sportscars.

If I wanted all ovals I'd watch Nascar.

Make each race something different, get away from the Nascar cookie cutter ovals and replace them with the lower banked ovals so the drivers have to lift once in awhile. Get away from the concrete canyons and get some variety. What made Cleveland so interesting was the wide open space of turn 1.

Lets get to 2012 and the diversity of cars and engines and then lets see them race with different set ups every race because of the different tracks. Long Beach should be the only street course, Edmonton is in because of the airport, move Toronto to Mosport (I know it needs to be upgraded), add Michigan and Fontana, Road America and make every event different. Standing starts at some road races, rolling starts at others.

Then you can say the indy car winner is the most skilled driver because he can drive on any kind of track.

[anthonyvop]

Then you can say the indy car winner is the most skilled driver because he can drive on any kind of track.

I never did buy into that argument, Using that Logic a Danica or Milka is better than a Senna, Schumacher or Loeb.

[jeffconn]

Sorry, i'm late to this party, but i just needed to point out that having a nationality requirement isn't unconstitutional. Major League Soccer has had nationality requirements since MLS started in 1996.
From MLS's website:

The remaining roster slots must belong to domestic players. For clubs based in the United States, a domestic player is either a U.S. citizen, a permanent resident (green card holder) or the holder of other special status (e.g., refugee or asylum status).
http://www.mlssoccer.com/2011-mls-roster-rules

I don't think it's a good idea, but it is legal.

[Chris R]

I never did buy into that argument, Using that Logic a Danica or Milka is better than a Senna, Schumacher or Loeb.

Not really, Senna and Schumacher and Loeb WON many races - I think a a driver with a win record to match those drivers in the "mixed" series would probably be better (but there really are not any - so there is no comparison...)......

[anthonyvop]

Not really, Senna and Schumacher and Loeb WON many races - I think a a driver with a win record to match those drivers in the "mixed" series would probably be better (but there really are not any - so there is no comparison...)......

But their is a comparison.

Ayrton Senna scored 41 wins in an all road course series.

Michael Andretti scored 42 in a series that had both road and oval tracks.

Sooooooo......By your logic Michael Andretti was a better racer than Ayrton Senna.

[bblocker68]

There is no logic in that logic, haha.

[anthonyvop]

There is no logic in that logic, haha.

Exactly my point.

[Chris R]

But their is a comparison.

Ayrton Senna scored 41 wins in an all road course series.

Michael Andretti scored 42 in a series that had both road and oval tracks.

Sooooooo......By your logic Michael Andretti was a better racer than Ayrton Senna.

That is no comparison - Michael's career was 10+ years longer... Senna's winning % was much greater... IF Andretti had accomplished those wins in the SAME time frame as Senna we'd have something to talk about - but he didn't - and to the best of my knowledge, nobody ever has.... I do not think a series with a more diverse and balanced offering of tracks lends itself to the kind of sustained domination that allowed Senna and Schumacher to build up such impressive stats in a relatively short time...

[anthonyvop]

IF Andretti had accomplished those wins in the SAME time frame as Senna we'd have something to talk about -

No we wouldn't. Any comparison would be ridiculous.

[Chris R]

No we wouldn't. Any comparison would be ridiculous.

Now you are being ridiculous - c'mon IF anybody put up Senna's numbers (including winning percentage) while racing CART that would be one impressive driver - the fact is nobody did, so it is a moot point..... The problem is it is all hypothetical (which is, in and of itself, somewhat ridiculous).

[uncommonsense52]

CART and F1 were both rivals and equals in the 90's.

We saw champions go back and forth. Mansell came to CART, Villeneuve went to F1. Both won championships in both. Mansell was here two years, and struggled his second year.

They were very different series, but just as competitive as the other. Neither was "better" than the other.

About the Senna thing, yeah, it's totally about a ratio there. Wins per race. I'm a big hockey fan, so that argument makes sense to me. It's much more impressive to put up 80 points in 1 full season, as opposed to 3, because of the points per game implications.

If someone had the ratio of wins to starts in CART that Senna had in F1, they'd be regarded just as highly.

Actually, that COULD be an argument that CART was MORE competitive. That no one was ever able to dominate the field of CART like Senna did in F1, around almost (give or take 5ish years) the same, despite the fact drivers went back and forth to both series. But I don't really buy that argument, jsut saying the numbers could make a case for it.

When Penske and Ganassi left CART, F1 immediately became the top open-wheel series. Before then, it was a toss-up.

[anthonyvop]

CART and F1 were both rivals and equals in the 90's.


Nope.

Some people liked to say it but is was not true. An F1 car Back then accelerated faster, braked harder and turned quicker than a Champ car.
While there were some excellent drivers in CART it had no where near the depth of talent. CART was a Stepping stone to F1 not the other way around. Mansell came to CART over a money dispute. N/H & Lola paid him the money Williams wouldn't and no other team had a seat for him(At least a competitive seat)n so he split to the US. Had one good season and then wore out his welcome as his career quickly declined.

[call_me_andrew]

Some people liked to say it but is was not true. An F1 car Back then accelerated faster, braked harder and turned quicker than a Champ car.

You can make that exact same comparison between an Indycar and a Sprint Cup Car today. Now how many Sprint Cup races has Sam Hornish won?

[uncommonsense52]

Nope.

Some people liked to say it but is was not true. An F1 car Back then accelerated faster, braked harder and turned quicker than a Champ car.
While there were some excellent drivers in CART it had no where near the depth of talent. CART was a Stepping stone to F1 not the other way around. Mansell came to CART over a money dispute. N/H & Lola paid him the money Williams wouldn't and no other team had a seat for him(At least a competitive seat)n so he split to the US. Had one good season and then wore out his welcome as his career quickly declined.

We're going to have to agree to disagree here.

[Chris R]

Nope.

Some people liked to say it but is was not true. An F1 car Back then accelerated faster, braked harder and turned quicker than a Champ car.
While there were some excellent drivers in CART it had no where near the depth of talent. CART was a Stepping stone to F1 not the other way around. Mansell came to CART over a money dispute. N/H & Lola paid him the money Williams wouldn't and no other team had a seat for him(At least a competitive seat)n so he split to the US. Had one good season and then wore out his welcome as his career quickly declined.

It all depends on your point of view - the F1 cars of the era would not have been effective oval racers and the CART cars had to do both... Also, take a look at the recent (past 18 months) test in Motorsport magazne of a mid 1990's Penske - even the euro-centric reporter had to admit the Indycar was far better than he expected in terms of performance/technology - if I recall correctly he placed it favorably with its contemporary F1 cars....

All that being said - if you want the ultimate in racing technology - F1 has been the only answer since the dawn of the turbo and ground effects...

As far as the depth of field - I think CART might have actually been better ON AVERAGE in some seasons - F1 had a couple of guys who were better than anyone in CART and CART had a couple of guys that were worse than anyone in F1 - but in any given race there were more race winners and more people capable of winning in CART than F1 in many if not most races....

from the split on there is absolutely no question F1 asserted its previously debatable dominance and rapidly became the incontestable pinnacle of motorsports - but don't let the doldrums of post-split AOWR take away from the fact that CART circa 1984-1995 was as good as it gets in motorsports plain period... Yes F1 BECAME the clearly dominant sport and AOWR descended into a near joke but for those of us who were around for the heyday of CART, the debate about which was better was robust and legitimate.... don't let the past 15 years cloud your judgement about that era....

I have to say typing this just makes me so mad about what happened to the sport - 15 years shot to he**

[Mightyreds]

Don't think CART and F1 were close, even in CART's best day, but they were getting closer and close enough for Bernie to work against CART.

CART was considered a top level race series, something the irl never was and something indycar has a lot of work to get close to.

[Anubis]

As a long time F1 fan, I found CART in the late 80s to mid 90s far more enjoyable to watch, both for the variety of tracks and the fact you never really knew who was going to win. There was also a lot to be said for the purity of the cars, rather than the F1 arms race. F1 may well have had a core of World class drivers, but outside of that group (Senna, Prost, Mansell etc), I don't think the field was any more talented than a lot of the CART drivers of the day. Berger, Patrese, Alesi, Hill hugely better than Tracy, Al Jnr and Michael Andretti? I don't know how many of the AOWR drivers of the era seriously looked at F1, but to be honest, if they were making a living and winning races in the US, why would they want to jump ship to F1 where all the top seats were generally tied up anyway? With respect to the midfield teams of the day, why would you struggle for unheralded minor points in a Sauber when you could fight for a championship in the US? I'm sure a few of the Cup guys have the talent to drive in F1, but again, unless a "too good to miss" offers comes along (and realistically, who is going to make that offer? Torro Rosso maybe, given the Red Bull connections?), why on earth would they make that move? Given the current mess in F1 with talk of fake rain, KERS and flappy rear wing passing zones, the Indycar series feels much more like proper racing to me, even allowing for things like push to pass. I don't really care about the relative talent levels as long as I can see a race rather than nonsense such as "you can open the rear wing flap for x seconds if you're y seconds behind another car in z sector of the track". Indycar needs to promote that aspect as it'll never be able to compete on a technological level. Leave that to F1 and DTM.

[garyshell]

As a long time F1 fan, I found CART in the late 80s to mid 90s far more enjoyable to watch, both for the variety of tracks and the fact you never really knew who was going to win. There was also a lot to be said for the purity of the cars, rather than the F1 arms race. F1 may well have had a core of World class drivers, but outside of that group (Senna, Prost, Mansell etc), I don't think the field was any more talented than a lot of the CART drivers of the day...

Don't worry, the "reporter" will be along any minute to tell you just how wrong you are.

Gary

[anthonyvop]

Don't think CART and F1 were close, even in CART's best day, but they were getting closer and close enough for Bernie to work against CART

Bingo!

[anthonyvop]

As a long time F1 fan, I found CART in the late 80s to mid 90s far more enjoyable to watch, both for the variety of tracks and the fact you never really knew who was going to win. There was also a lot to be said for the purity of the cars, rather than the F1 arms race.

That is your preference. A matter of taste.


F1 may well have had a core of World class drivers, but outside of that group (Senna, Prost, Mansell etc), I don't think the field was any more talented than a lot of the CART drivers of the day. .

Every series is judge and it's performance level based on it's core of drivers. And F-1's core was far superior at that time.

[Chris R]

I decided to take two races from 1990 - CART at Long Beach and F1 at Monaco.

Starters in race - LB 25 Monaco - 31!!
Winners (then or later) in respective series - LB - 14 (56%) Monaco - 9 (29%)
Formula 1 winners(then or later) LB- 2 Monaco- 9
Indycar Winners (then or later) - LB - 14 Monaco - 3
Formula 1 Champions - LB - 2 Monaco-4
Total Career Wins in respective series LB - 312 Monaco 176
Total Career wins in Indycar LB -312 Monaco - 8
Total Career wins in F1 LB - 26 Monaco -176
Total Career Championships in respective series LB - 22 Monaco - 11 (I am counting Mario's and AJ's USAC championships too - it is 12 without them)
Total F-1 Championships - LB- 3 Monaco - 11
Total Indycar Championships LB- 22 Monaco - 1 (I am counting Mario's and AJ's USAc championships too - it is 12 without them)

So that is it for straight up stats - I think those bear it out that it is pretty darn hard to say which has the better series - looks like a pretty even field to me all said and done....

Now - for a subjective looks at things:

Generally accepted "Great" drivers in the field - LB - 7 (Unser Jr, Emmo, both Andrettis, Mears, Rahal and Foyt) Monaco - 4 (Senna, Prost, Piquet, Mansell)
Real "clunkers" in field - LB - 6 (Bren, Dacco, Lewis, Ribbs, Hiro, Hall) Monaco - 15 (Croullard, Javiehto, D. Brabham, Bernoldi, Caffi, Nakajima, Foitek, Barilla, Alliot, Larini, Nannini, Suzuki, deCearis, Pirro, Martini)
You can argue if Michael Andretti is "great" and perhaps some of those F-1 clunkers are better than I remember - but I think you see that the general quality of the fields is again similar - I think the great f-1 drivers tend to be a little greater and they were also in the prime of their careers whereas the CART field had some real old timers in it.... if you aggregate career talent these fields are VERY comparable. One could make a good argument that either one is better than the other.

My point is, the ABSOLUTE (and undefended) statement that F1 was clearly better is not accurate. It is a very valid opinion but one that does not have such overwhelming statistical or even analytical subjective support that the conclusion is undeniable. I respect the opinion of those that believe F1 was better but ask that they consider that, in the given time period, it was not nearly the given that it clearly is today.

[DBell]

Those numbers are interesting, but misleading when you look at some of them. Out your greats for CART in 1990, I would have to remove, arguably, Emmo, Mario and definitely AJ from being great at that time in their careers. With Emmo, you can still make a case that he great by 1990 and I wouldn't argue much, but he was clearly well past his peak by then. Mario was competitive and still capable of winning, but also well past his days as a top dog. AJ hadn't won in years by then and was closer to the clunker end than he was to the front end by 1990.

Out of the F1 greats, only Piquet was on the down slope while the others were at or close to their peaks.

Out of your clunkers for F1, I would take most of them over the clunkers for CART any day. David Brabham may have had a poor 2 seasons in F1 with cars that struggled to make it out of pre- qualifying, but his sports car career has been very good and I wouldn't classify him as a clunker at all. Alessandro Nannini was in no way a clunker. He won the 1989 Japanese GP and had 9 or 10 podiums in his brief F1 career. He was in a helicopter crash in 1990 that severed one of his arms and ended his F1 career.

Imo, I think the strength of the field by comparison in 1990 clearly favors F1. Senna and Prost weren't just greats, they were two of the very best ever in F1.

[Chris R]

I missed Nannini as an F-1 winner so add one to that column and certainly take him out of the clunkers.... like I said - that was pretty much subjective (so prone to many errors!!)...

Your point about Foyt is right - but even if you take all his numbers out, the CART field is pretty strong... Fittipaldi was the defending champion that year.... Mario was winding it down but still competitive... THe whole thing highlights one big difference between the series then and (perhaps) now - CART gave a driver a much longer productive career.... and often rewarded racecraft over shear speed - longer races on average etc.... The series each rewarded driver differently and for different skills....

As for F1 clunkers vs. CART clunkers - I would grant you the worst of CART was worse than the worst of F! - but a clunker is still a clunker....

[Mightyreds]

In my opinion the bottom half, or the clunkers, in any series are irrelevant. There are ride buyers, field fillers in every racing series and there always will be.

The true measure of any racing series are at the front of the grid, both in drivers and equipment. When you compare that CART wasn't too bad, but not in the same class as F1.

But more importantly CART was different. A more varied type of racing that in some aspects asked more of a driver, and that made CART worth watching.

[nigelred5]

I think one could argue that a driver in F1 had potential for a longer carreer in 1990 than currently. These days, 30+ y/o F1 drivers are the exception. No one would even dream of starting an F1 carreer at 30, let alone 40 and being competetive. That is still a distinct possibility in Indycars. A seven time champion is proving he's no longer competetive, being regularly outdriven by a much younger teammate. F1 drivers started much later in age than the peach fuzz drivers F1 sees now. Mansell was what 39 when he won the F1 title and 40 when he won the CART title? Prost won his first of 4 at age 30, his last at almost 40. Senna was comparatively young winning his first at age 28. The only thing in the comparison I really have to keep in focus is the availability and access to top level equipment. Sure, there's always been the bottom dweller teams on both series, but it has a always been for more likely for more teams and drivers to be successful in CART/Indycars.

[Hoop-98]

Agreed. The real difference between F1 & CART was the cars. In F1 you have the flavor of the year/month/week with which car is the best. You can not win unless you're in one of those cars or are very lucky. With CART the cars were much more equal and, more importantly, all the teams had access to the best car if one proved superior. That left much of the deciding factor to the drivers and teams. A big reason why I prefer/ed CART/IndyCar over F1. Not that I don't follow F1 at all because I do.

I agree with much, but certainly CART from the Chevy A until the 2002 season was very much about the 'Package".

From the Mercedes pushrod, to the SST (Single Sided Turbos) advantages were found each year. When it came to everyone having access, well sorta, except you signed a contract, so you couldn't get the best stuff unless you had a crystal ball.

I actually found that very cool. I think more often than not the package differences in CART were similar in magnitude to F1.

I think maybe the pointy end of F1 was more "pointy" but you weren't going far in CART if you signed with the wrong teams either.

jm2c

rh

[nigelred5]

Well, the Merc pushrod engine was an Indy only deal, like the fast but unreliable high boost Buicks of the day. engines were generally the deciding factor, but CARt daid a fair job of keeping things balanced until the whole pop off valve debacle.

The big difference was in CART, you could change if you found something wasn't as competetive. It was always great to see lola/march lola/penske march/ penske lola/reynard battles all spiced up with engines from multiple mfgrs. There was always a good chance of seeing 4-5 different COMPETETIVE packages on track.
Teams did change chassis from time to time, but I agree, it you weren't running the right package, and especially the right engine, you were probably toast.

[ykiki]

Teams did change chassis from time to time, but I agree, it you weren't running the right package, and especially the right engine, you were probably toast.

That was VERY true in the CART glory days. But one big difference between CART and F1 that I enjoyed from year to year was that if a team picked a dog of a combination one season, they could very well end up with the right package the next. Seeing a mid-field team like PacWest win a few races was a joy to watch. Heck, even Dick Simon's team went from back marker to competitive. There were times when Raul Boesel looked like he'd win one, only to have some quirk of bad luck ruin his day.

However, if you were in F1, the Minardi factory was still producing Minardis and if you hit the engineering jackpot you'd find yourself midfield (or maybe get a point when half the field's engines would blow up). Unfortunately, you were probably still 2 laps down...