No loss of momentum...the Indy 500 PR juggernaut rolls on....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbyars

Worked REAL WELL for CCWS and the DP-01, didn't it?

Your problem is that YOU want to try the same old things that have driven two series into bankruptcy. I would submit to you that EVERYTHING TG did is far superior with far superior results. One thing is certain...CART and CCWS are gone because they failed. The 92nd running of the Indy 500 is scheduled for this Sunday, and I have absolutely no doubt there will be a 93rd next year, a 94th year after that, a 95th year after that.....

If you were going to invest significant money, in retrospect, what would have been the wisest investment - CART/CCWS or the IRL?

I think you are right. You DON'T understand the business model. You also don't seem to grasp the drawbacks of the business model that is a proven non-starter, twice over.

---

Perhaps the unsuccessfulness of CART is a matter of perspective.

1991:
http://www.champcarstats.com/year/1991.htm
You could power your car with:
Cosworth DFX
or
Cosworth FS
or
Ilmor "Chevy"
or
Alfa
or
Judd
or Buick

For chassis you could run a:
Lola
or
Penske
or
Truesports (yes, somebody other than Penske or Gurney would still make their own car)

'94:
http://www.champcarstats.com/year/1994.htm

Engines:
Cosworth XB
Ilmor C
Ilmor D

Chassis:
Lola
Penske
Reynard

Half the races that season, outside of the month of May, they sent teams home on Saturday. Too many teams for the pit space or space on track, indicating a lot of teams felt it was the place to be.

'96:
http://www.champcarstats.com/year/1996.htm

Engines:
Cosworth XB
Cosworth XD
Ilmor "Mercedes"
Honda
Toyota

Chassis:
Lola
Penske
Reynard
Eagle

From a motorhead perspective, it's hard to see CART as less successful than what we have now.

If CART was unsuccessful, I hope the future brings more of the sort of unsuccessfulness that CART had.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbyars

If you were going to invest significant money, in retrospect, what would have been the wisest investment - CART/CCWS or the IRL?

---

No disrespect meant toward you, but the saddest thing whenever I read through piss & moan threads like this... people continue to think of the world only as chocolate vs. vanilla. A wise investment is not choosing the one which doesn't fail, but choosing one which succeeds. Would I buy GM or Ford? Uh... neither. I own Toyota and Hyundai ADR's. I believe in trends. So if I was pressed to invest significant money in an auto racing enterprise, which series would I choose, CART/CCWS or the IRL? Again, neither. I'd have chosen NASCAR. In fact, I did, in a way... when I bought stock in ISC and SMI a decade ago - but I'm not a 24/7/365 NASCAR fan. If the IRL had been a public company, I would have shorted it, just as I shorted MPH in its last two years of life. I made a few bucks on CART on the way up, but I made a lot more on the way down. But that didn't affect my appreciation for CART's style of racing. Why do people choose investments based on emotion? I don't know, but it seldom works out for them.

Though it's not where it once was, the Indy 500 was, is and may continue to be the most watched open wheel race in the U.S. But sponsors aren't restricted to open wheel racing, rather it's a broad universe of sponsorship possibilities. Prior to the split, the Indy 500 was in the Top 10 in the Forbes rankings of Global Event Values. The Daytona 500 was not in the Top 10. By 2007, Indy had dropped out of the Top 10 and Daytona was at #4. Based on ratings decreases and event ranking decreases, I think my IRL short would have worked out pretty well too... though maybe not as well as the one on CART/MPH. For the past decade AOWR has looked like that TV show called The Biggest Loser... is second place in that contest anything to really brag about?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miatanut

If CART was unsuccessful, I hope the future brings more of the sort of unsuccessfulness that CART had.

---

It'll take years to climb back to that level of "unsuccessfulness", if it ever happens.

Businesses that are truly broken do need to be restructured. Businesses that have general, basic problems usually implement continuous improvement initiatives - they don't set off bombs on every floor. 20/40 hindsight says that the situation between CART and IMS needed a kick of continuous improvement, not a total restructuring. But fixing what isn't really broken is what some people do. And God bless 'em. The France family and Bernie Ecclestone are thankful. I'm sure Bernie's girls aren't cheap to buy Xmas presents for.

The sure fire way to tell if you made the right or wrong choice: if what you end up with, after doing either, is worse than what you had before, ya definly gots it wrong. Or as a pal of mine used to say after a major executive FUBAR: "how's that workin' for ya?" :dozey:

Actually had some coverage of the IndyCars on primetime news last night!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miatanut

Perhaps the unsuccessfulness of CART is a matter of perspective.

1991:
http://www.champcarstats.com/year/1991.htm
You could power your car with:
Cosworth DFX
or
Cosworth FS
or
Ilmor "Chevy"
or
Alfa
or
Judd
or Buick

For chassis you could run a:
Lola
or
Penske
or
Truesports (yes, somebody other than Penske or Gurney would still make their own car)

'94:
http://www.champcarstats.com/year/1994.htm

Engines:
Cosworth XB
Ilmor C
Ilmor D

Chassis:
Lola
Penske
Reynard

Half the races that season, outside of the month of May, they sent teams home on Saturday. Too many teams for the pit space or space on track, indicating a lot of teams felt it was the place to be.

'96:
http://www.champcarstats.com/year/1996.htm

Engines:
Cosworth XB
Cosworth XD
Ilmor "Mercedes"
Honda
Toyota

Chassis:
Lola
Penske
Reynard
Eagle

From a motorhead perspective, it's hard to see CART as less successful than what we have now.

If CART was unsuccessful, I hope the future brings more of the sort of unsuccessfulness that CART had.

---

And exactly what happened to all of that once INDY was removed from the picture????? Anyone? Bueller?, anyone?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nigelred5

And exactly what happened to all of that once INDY was removed from the picture????? Anyone? Bueller?, anyone?

---

Exactly what happened to Indy when Indy was removed from the CART schedule? Is the glass half full or half empty?

The thing was growing like gangbusters until it was formally split in two.

The big questions are, now that it is reunited, will it again follow the trajectory in increase in fans, teams, sponsorship, etc. that it followed from '79 to '95?
Will we see a schedule full of healthy venues or full of struggling venues in service to a single venue?
Will the sport be run for everyone in the sport or will it be run for the benefit of a chosen few?
Would Il Leone have come here to race if the environment was like we have currently?

I think we know the answers to those questions. I would love to be surprised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbyars

I would submit to you that EVERYTHING TG did is far superior with far superior results. One thing is certain...CART and CCWS are gone because they failed.

---

Well, the bit about "EVERYTHING" is a bit of hyperbole, don't you think? I believe even "king" George in his own words admitted that there were some missteps along the way. And while CART did declare bankruptcy, which by any measure is certainly a failure, technically CCWS was purchased by the IRL which COULD leave the concept of failure open to interpretation. Clearly, I am quibbling semantics with that. CCWS was most assuredly not a success, but if the investors intent was to build it into something they could sell, then maybe in their eyes it was not a "failure".

Gary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbyars

Worked REAL WELL for CCWS and the DP-01, didn't it?

Your problem is that YOU want to try the same old things that have driven two series into bankruptcy. I would submit to you that EVERYTHING TG did is far superior with far superior results. One thing is certain...CART and CCWS are gone because they failed. The 92nd running of the Indy 500 is scheduled for this Sunday, and I have absolutely no doubt there will be a 93rd next year, a 94th year after that, a 95th year after that.....

If you were going to invest significant money, in retrospect, what would have been the wisest investment - CART/CCWS or the IRL?

I think you are right. You DON'T understand the business model. You also don't seem to grasp the drawbacks of the business model that is a proven non-starter, twice over.

---

What has the Irl done so great in 12 years? I can tell you what it has done.Bring open wheel racing to its knees.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CARTDM15

What has the Irl done so great in 12 years?

---

Survived.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbyars

Survived.

---

I'm not sure whether I should laugh or cry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbyars

Survived.

---

By finally learning to adapt. Champ Car kept moving closer to the European model and hoped that fans who had shown no interest at all would finally pay attention. Never happened.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CARTDM15

What has the Irl done so great in 12 years? I can tell you what it has done.Bring open wheel racing to its knees.

---

As another poster said all it really did do was survive and that is because it has the 500.
As far as rules go, the IRL cut-off its nose to spite its face, for all practical purposes.
The current optimistic rhetoric about open wheel racing, is really because it has replaced all the: you ****, no you ****, no you *****-- rhetoric which died with CC--that has been more prevelant than either series was.

If Mr. George thinks he can stick with some quasi-spec rules crap simply because the 100th anniversary of Indy will get press, he is a moron, but remember this is the gent who crapped on his own "vision."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CARTDM15

What has the Irl done so great in 12 years? I can tell you what it has done.Bring open wheel racing to its knees.

---

well it had Danica stomping around like she was wanting to engage in some serious fighting, like a real pro wrestling champ

Too bad, it did not happen, cause it would have been fun stuff for sure.
Too bad it was not some other female driver involved!! Could have been a real hair puliing cat fight
MEOW

:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FormerFF

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the 500 will edge out the Charlotte NASCAR race in TV ratings.

---

Limbs can be dangerous places.
http://sportsmediawatch.blogspot.com...ox-office.html

Quote:

---

Update: NASCAR did end up winning the ratings battle with the Indy 500. The Coca Cola 600 drew a 4.7 final rating (up 7% from the 4.4 overnight) while the Indy 500 finished with a 4.5 (down 12% from the 5.1 overnight).

---

Would this be the case if there were never a split?
Can the sport still be fixed (in our lifetimes)?

IMHO the main reason CART failed was because of mismanagement in the late 90's that pi$$ed off the manufacturers to the point where they jumped to the IRL and took most of the top teams with them.

Until that point, the IRL was irrelevant apart from the Indy 500. Tony George simply new that he wanted control, which he didn't get with CART running the series so he created his own, much the same way as a spoilt child behaves.

The IRL of the late 90's had several ex backmarker teams from CART plus some new teams, with Z grade "stars" such as Billy Boat and Eddie Cheever. Compared to this, CART had some of the top teams in American motorsports with much higher quality drivers such as Jimmy Vasser, Paul Tracy, Alex Zanardi, Juan Montoya, Bobby Rahal, Michael Andretti, Dario Franchitti, etc...

If you look at the Indy 500 in 2000, 2001 where some top CART teams "raided" it, they literally blew away the competition in the IRL. In 2002, Penske (who had jumped ship that year) won it from Team Green (who were full time CART at that point) in a very close finish.

I think this speaks volumes for the level of competition in the IRL at that point for the regulars. Panther Racing is one exception. If it wasn't for them in 2002, Penske would have had a much easier time of it.

After CART lost the big name teams, the momentum swung to the IRL and quickly went bankrupt (only to be ressurrected in a foolhardy move by the "three amigos"). However, along the way many of the smaller teams in the IRL dropped out (or in the case of Conquest, jumped the other way to CART). From that point I think it was pretty obvious that the IRL would eventually win.

However, this "victory" is not through anything that Tony George has done IMHO. When the big name teams came in with the support of their big name manufacturers (Toyota and Honda), they started to exert their obvious influence on the league to remake it into the type of series they preferred racing in.

Fast foward to 2007 and the IRL looked much more like the CART of the mid to late 90's than the significantly weaker CCWS. I was a big CART fan of the late 90's, but I didn't even watch most races in the 2007 season, simply because I didn't care anymore. I'm guessing that many other people felt the same way and ultimately (and for the good of the sport), CCWS was folded up, leaving the IRL as the only top level open wheel series in North America.

So where does this leave us now. Yes the IRL IndyCar series is on an upswing, but it's only just coming off life support IMHO. Yes there is momentum, but there is still a long way to go. I won't really say that IndyCar is back to full strength until there is more than one competitive chassis manufacturer and more than one engine manufacturer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miatanut

Limbs can be dangerous places.
http://sportsmediawatch.blogspot.com...ox-office.html

Would this be the case if there were never a split?
Can the sport still be fixed (in our lifetimes)?

---

This is only the case because NASCAR for all practical purposes, has its own network.

NASCAR is losing viewership and attendance, even with its own network, but that makes the rating for Indy even better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AussieV8

The IRL of the late 90's had several ex backmarker teams from CART plus some new teams, with Z grade "stars" such as Billy Boat and Eddie Cheever. Compared to this, CART had some of the top teams in American motorsports From that point I think it was pretty obvious that the IRL would eventually win.

---

THat is only if one holds a myoptic opinion.
CART did not have better drivers, CART had big buck teams.

Any semi-compentent driver can win when the drivers team outspends the competition ten to one.

So much for momentum

http://sportsmediawatch.blogspot.com...ox-office.html

NASCAR did end up winning the ratings battle with the Indy 500. The Coca Cola 600 drew a 4.7 final rating (up 7% from the 4.4 overnight) while the Indy 500 finished with a 4.5 (down 12% from the 5.1 overnight).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

NASCAR is losing viewership and attendance, even with its own network, but that makes the rating for Indy even better.

---

The NASCAR ratings slide stopped.
NASCAR has been posting ratings gains at every race so far this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AussieV8

The IRL of the late 90's had several ex backmarker teams from CART plus some new teams, with Z grade "stars" such as Billy Boat and Eddie Cheever. Compared to this, CART had some of the top teams in American motorsports with much higher quality drivers such as Jimmy Vasser, Paul Tracy, Alex Zanardi, Juan Montoya, Bobby Rahal, Michael Andretti, Dario Franchitti, etc...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

THat is only if one holds a myoptic opinion.
CART did not have better drivers, CART had big buck teams.

Any semi-compentent driver can win when the drivers team outspends the competition ten to one.

---

In the context of the list of CART drivers that was part of the message that you didn't include in your quote (and I am including above for clarity), can you with a straight face really say that those drivers were not better than what the IRL offered at the time? None on that list would fall into the "semi-competent" classification.

Gary

The crowd in attendance at Indy seemed bigger than in previous yrs as opposed to seeing it on TV - turn three didn't have as many fans dressed in aluminum.

Compare the ratings/buzz/time put into Indy vs. any other race on the schedule, and its history, and it far surpasses anything else out there. By default, mainly. Ratings for CC's 14 races last year COMBINED barely equal Indy's mark. It is still the biggest race and will continue to be.

The only reason the pundits/media people are saying the series is on the upswing is because it is literally starting from rock bottom. It couldn't go any lower. As much as people gloat about the influx of talented Champ Car drivers/teams, fact is there are still ride-buyers out there.

It's not the best drivers, there's still hacks like the IRL has always had and CC had in recent years since CCWS took over the CART assets. Viso replaced Doornbos b/c of cash. Philippe has no seat because he wants to be paid. Only reason Camara is in a seat is because the check cleared to bounce Perera. Marty Roth? Fine as an owner but needs to get out of the cockpit.

The buzz at Indy may have been back but there's still a ways to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

In the context of the list of CART drivers that was part of the message that you didn't include in your quote (and I am including above for clarity), can you with a straight face really say that those drivers were not better than what the IRL offered at the time? None on that list would fall into the "semi-competent" classification.

Gary

---

Had the IRL drivers driven for the mega buck teams I have zero doubt they would have performed quite well.
Had the above drivers driven for the low buck teams they would have done no better than the ones that had to.
It is well know that by the time CART came into existence talent played second fiddle to the sponsor bank roll a driver could bring to any team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

The NASCAR ratings slide stopped.
NASCAR has been posting ratings gains at every race so far this year.

---

Time will tell. THe season is only four months old.
Of course then maybe the NASCAR network has gone into overdrive to reduce losses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

So much for momentum

http://sportsmediawatch.blogspot.com...ox-office.html

NASCAR did end up winning the ratings battle with the Indy 500. The Coca Cola 600 drew a 4.7 final rating (up 7% from the 4.4 overnight) while the Indy 500 finished with a 4.5 (down 12% from the 5.1 overnight).

---

THis so called momentum is something some dreamer made-up.
The press, in all its ignorance, acted as if by magic that this so called merger was going to bring back the glory days of Foyt, Unser, Andretti, Rutherford, Sneva etc., with the same magic a magician uses to pull a rabbit out of a hat.
Of course that magic is as much a scam as this so called momentum is.

Until there are rules that make open wheel racing more than a high buck SCCA spec. race, it is same dung, same pile.
There are plenty of sprint car tracks around the country which have just as much talent and a far more exciting show, not to mention more variation of equipment.

Bob
PS--ON a positive note, our paper yesterday had an article about INDY, with Patrick and Fisher, and pretty much called Patrick the prima-donna she is, and said Fisher is from a racing family and has a racers heart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

It is well know that by the time CART came into existence talent played second fiddle to the sponsor bank roll a driver could bring to any team.

---

Well known by whom? When CART came into existence the business model was Sponsor --> Team Owner --> Driver
not Sponsor --> Driver --> Team Owner.

Or are you saying that the team owners decision on which driver to hire was influenced by what the sponsor might think of the driver. If that is what you meant, I agree. However if you are saying it was up to the driver to go find the sponsor and bring them to the table, I don't think that started to occur until well after CART came into existence.

Gary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miatanut

Perhaps the unsuccessfulness of CART is a matter of perspective.

1991:
http://www.champcarstats.com/year/1991.htm
You could power your car with:
Cosworth DFX
or
Cosworth FS
or
Ilmor "Chevy"
or
Alfa
or
Judd
or Buick

For chassis you could run a:
Lola
or
Penske
or
Truesports (yes, somebody other than Penske or Gurney would still make their own car)

'94:
http://www.champcarstats.com/year/1994.htm

Engines:
Cosworth XB
Ilmor C
Ilmor D

Chassis:
Lola
Penske
Reynard

Half the races that season, outside of the month of May, they sent teams home on Saturday. Too many teams for the pit space or space on track, indicating a lot of teams felt it was the place to be.

'96:
http://www.champcarstats.com/year/1996.htm

Engines:
Cosworth XB
Cosworth XD
Ilmor "Mercedes"
Honda
Toyota

Chassis:
Lola
Penske
Reynard
Eagle

From a motorhead perspective, it's hard to see CART as less successful than what we have now.

If CART was unsuccessful, I hope the future brings more of the sort of unsuccessfulness that CART had.

---

You kind of disproved your own point with this post.

Sure, CART was great when it had the INDY 500 and for a few years after the split when it still had all the top teams and drivers.

But what eventually happened to CART again WITHOUT Indy?

Bankruptcy.

CART was successful for a while until it tried to survive without the one thing AOWR needs to survive. Then it became unsuccessful and will forever be remembered for being unsuccessful because of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nigelred5

They just don't know what Indy means.......... ;)

---

I got it, Nigel...good one!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by garyshell

Well known by whom? When CART came into existence the business model was Sponsor --> Team Owner --> Driver
not Sponsor --> Driver --> Team Owner.

Or are you saying that the team owners decision on which driver to hire was influenced by what the sponsor might think of the driver. If that is what you meant, I agree. However if you are saying it was up to the driver to go find the sponsor and bring them to the table, I don't think that started to occur until well after CART came into existence.

Gary

---

By the eighties, many drivers had sponsors WITH THEM, or had quick access to one, IF they got the ride.
Straight talent getting a ride petered out in the seventies, with and actually before the death of USAC--sadly.
The Parsons, Vukovich, and other members of what racing rags called the "'missing generation" of drivers, had talent, but the old guard did not retire and by the time the old guard did finally start to hang it up,(some forced out not for lessening talent, but the money behind the newbies was more important than the talent of the Rutherfords and Unsers) the team owners were lookin for daddy war-bucks foreign drivers that came with sponsors, talent was optional.
The "'missing generation" got rides where they could but even with some high finishes or rare victories, always were pretty much stuck with grade B rides, at best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -Helix-

You kind of disproved your own point with this post.

Sure, CART was great when it had the INDY 500 and for a few years after the split when it still had all the top teams and drivers.

But what eventually happened to CART again WITHOUT Indy?

Bankruptcy.

CART was successful for a while until it tried to survive without the one thing AOWR needs to survive. Then it became unsuccessful and will forever be remembered for being unsuccessful because of it.

---

The bankruptcy happened after Penske jumped ship. Had the CART champion not jumped ship, the split would have ended years before it did, with a quite different result.

In any case, now that we are back to a single series, can we now expect to see the sport follow to follow the sort of trajectory of growth CART had in its first ten years?

The main part of my point is that we now have a single engine manufacturer, a single tire, a single chassis. Maybe the CART model was pretty good. No?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miatanut

In any case, now that we are back to a single series, can we now expect to see the sport follow to follow the sort of trajectory of growth CART had in its first ten years?

---

No-because for CART's first ten years it merely inherited the ascending state of open wheel racing, and most rules, that USAC had nurtured in the seventies, including road racing that USAC had already resumed.
Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

No-because for CART's first ten years it merely inherited the ascending state of open wheel racing, and most rules, that USAC had nurtured in the seventies, including road racing that USAC had already resumed.
Bob

---

I don't think there were any road races from '71 to '76. One in '77. On pressure from road racers in the group, there were three on the schedule in '78. Kind of hard to establish a trend there. Then CART did a maximum of three a year until '83.

USAC's influence graced CART for ten whole years?

Considering it was in the '90's that CART really took off, maybe that wasn't such a good thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Miatanut

I don't think there were any road races from '71 to '76. One in '77. On pressure from road racers in the group, there were three on the schedule in '78. Kind of hard to establish a trend there. Then CART did a maximum of three a year until '83.

USAC's influence graced CART for ten whole years?

Considering it was in the '90's that CART really took off, maybe that wasn't such a good thing.

---

CART took off in the late-eighteis and early-nineties because SCCA and IMSA road racing which, in various forms, had dominated US racing scene for approximately twenty years, began to self-destruct.

Stock car racing series, except for NASCAR, had had done the same thing so, the two biggest items left was Indy and CART, plus NASCAR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

Really? Refresh my memory. Which drivers brought the following title sponsors for various teams in CART? - Marlboro. Mobil 1, Pennzoil, Valvoline, Domino's Pizza, Machinist's Union, Toyota, Quaker State, etc.

Edit: Also forgot to add Budweiser and Miller Light.

---

Target, Kmart, Service Merchandise, Visteon, Kool, Shell, Texaco, McDonalds...

Owners have often had (personal) connections to corporate sponsors. And the more money they put in the kitty, the more influence they may have on the team owner to hire one driver over another. But like you, I don't know anything about any driver having any sort of special relationship with the sponsors that either of us named. At least in the primary car, top teams hired for speed in 1979 and they're hiring for speed in 2008.

Here's one thing that I think is being left out: if the commercial value is there, sponsors step up... if it's not there, they don't. Backmarkers, ridebuyers and Richie Rich wannabe racers have always been on the scene. Whether today or thirty years ago, other than a major decline in popularity and ratings, I don't see what's different in AOWR.

Momentum lost......TV ratings for Milwaukee .8 on ABC.Thats pretty sad.The 500 can't help the rest of the series.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CARTDM15

Momentum lost......TV ratings for Milwaukee .8 on ABC.Thats pretty sad.The 500 can't help the rest of the series.

---

That does it. The sport is officially dead!!!!

[quote="Wilf"]That does it. The sport is officially dead!!!![/QUOTE
Not the sport just the series.Indy is alive and well.How can we improve interest in the rest of the series? The 500 alone want do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CARTDM15

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wilf

That does it. The sport is officially dead!!!![/QUOTE
Not the sport just the series.Indy is alive and well.How can we improve interest in the rest of the series? The 500 alone want do it.

---

---

The IRL has to move from battle mode of the last 12 years to battle mode of the next ten years. Unfortunately, they went from battle mode to coast mode. They have become sloppy in execution in everything from media bull pens during qualifying to the actual broadcast of the race.

Look at the telecasts of the last two weeks. There is no continuity from going to break to resumption after the break. Their packages aren't sync'ed and yet they continue to air.

Yesterday it is purported to be a live, albeit, late broadcast. But they fully intended to tape delay the race, starting at 9:30 instead of the advertised 10:00. It got further complicated when NASCAR ran long. They either forgot all the webcasts started at 9:30 as well as the Canadian broadcast so they were really sloppy or unbelieveably arrogant believing no one would notice. Unfortunately, ESPN really complicated the problem by runing the tape delayed video under live audio. Oops.

You don't grow viewership by airing amateur telecasts and you don't get the respect of the media by letting certain elites walk all over you.

The battle for success will take at least ten years and every day they coast will lessen their chance for success

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChicagocrewIRL

AMEN BROTHER !!!

---

Too bad the sport had to be destoryed to prove you correct.

better luck next time.