Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 128
  1. #101
    Senior Member garyshell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    6,411
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bugeyedgomer
    it worked for over 80 years
    And you honestly believe that what worked then would fly now? If so, I think you're dreamin'. What you are suggesting would be the death knell for the sport. The economies of racing are very different now. We don't see folks lining up to run additional cars. Cut off a revenue stream for the teams like that and where will you get enough cars to fill a field?

    Gary
    "If you think there's a solution, you're part of the problem." --- George Carlin :andrea: R.I.P.

  2. #102
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    266
    Like
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Indy is all that matters. You don't think you could get 33 entrants?

  3. #103
    Senior Member garyshell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    6,411
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bugeyedgomer
    Indy is all that matters. You don't think you could get 33 entrants?
    Oh, that's just priceless. If there was not a full season to run, no you wouldn't get 33 entrants. The days of cheap one off teams are long since gone. The costs to field a single car at Indy have to be amortized over more than just one race. And like I said, if you cut off the revenue stream you seem to want to eliminate, several eams would fold. We barely got 33 cars this past year.

    Gary
    "If you think there's a solution, you're part of the problem." --- George Carlin :andrea: R.I.P.

  4. #104
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    266
    Like
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
    IMS doesn't need to be bothered with the grumpy owners. All it has to do to hold a successful Indy 500 is announce the date, sell the tickets and open the gates.
    If the owners want to gripe and complain, let them do it amonst themselves on their own dime. Until then, they should just shut up and show up. Or go to NASCAR, which is a lot more flexible and open to owners complaints.

  5. #105
    Senior Member garyshell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    6,411
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bugeyedgomer
    IMS doesn't need to be bothered with the grumpy owners. All it has to do to hold a successful Indy 500 is announce the date, sell the tickets and open the gates.
    If the owners want to gripe and complain, let them do it amonst themselves on their own dime. Until then, they should just shut up and show up. Or go to NASCAR, which is a lot more flexible and open to owners complaints.

    Check the calendar. The year is 2012, not 1952, 1962, 1972 or even 1982. IMHO, your scenario would result in the demise of the sport and with it the 500. There is no way that race could stand on its own given the economics of open wheel racing in this time.

    Gary
    "If you think there's a solution, you're part of the problem." --- George Carlin :andrea: R.I.P.

  6. #106
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,009
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bugeyedgomer
    More grumbling from the team owners


    IMS should cut them loose and let them see what it's like without the support they are given
    Why not. as long as they bring flying dentist back and Jack Arute to tell us how good this is, I'm for it.
    Keep it fast, keep it real!!!

  7. #107
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,009
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by bugeyedgomer
    Indy is all that matters. You don't think you could get 33 entrants?
    With all do respect I just think ,nuts!
    Keep it fast, keep it real!!!

  8. #108
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    2,443
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    The days of "schedule it and they will come" are over.... Everyone needs to work together.... That being said - it seems like the team owners need to get over some things.....

    I would say this is also an example of the weakness of "socialized" sports - the series has set so many parameters at this point that there is not alot of flexibility to innovate either the racing equipment or the business model.....

  9. #109
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    8,772
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I'm with the owners ...

    The HG wanted control of the sport and they got it...

    Now they have no F'en idea what to do with
    Sarah Fisher..... Team owner of a future Indy500 winning car!

  10. #110
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    5,522
    Like
    0
    Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by garyshell
    That sounds like a "cut off your nose to spite your face" kind of move to me.

    Gary
    I ahve to agree with bugeyedgomer on this one.

    They have created an entitlement team owner class. Of course they don't want more races. Of course They don't want new aero packages. Why should day if they are doing ok with all the subsidies they receive and enough sponsorship to cover 15-16 races but not 20.

    Isn't anyone curious how Sarah Fisher an keep on going all this time with little or no sponsorship?

    I have said it for years. Open up the rules. I would prefer a series with 12-16 well-funded/Well-run cars than a series of 26 cars where half of the field has no chance and add nothing to the series besides a bigger grid.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •