Lack Of Change In Sprint Cup Schedule For 2010 Isn’t Necessarily All Bad
Elsa/Getty Images
Fans hoping for a major shakeup of the Sprint Cup schedule in 2010 are likely due for a big disappointment.
It would appear from various reports of late that NASCAR will essentially keep things the way they currently are and apply the same agenda for next season.
The only exception is moving up Dover’s traditional late May/early June race to mid-May, but that’s due more to how the calendar falls than anything else.
And, as a result of Dover moving up, Pocono’s first of two races will also move up a week, falling into Dover’s old slot in the first weekend of June.
I really had hoped for some significant changes in 2010, not only on the schedule, but also the long-held hope that franchising would finally come to the sport, a topic that seems to be just as contentious among Cup team owners as the national health care plan President Obama wants to see in this country.
Right now, I’d say the prospect of franchising is essentially dead for at least the next two to three years, if not completely so forever.
I’d also hoped that several tracks that currently are not in the Chase for the Sprint Cup would finally get well-deserved berths in NASCAR’s premier 10-race playoff series.
Who among us wouldn’t want to see the likes of Bristol, Daytona, Indianapolis, Darlington and maybe Las Vegas in the Chase?
Or, at the very least, offer up one or two of those each year as a wild-card entry in the Chase, thus adding another element of drama into its format.
Unfortunately, all those dreams are just that, if you believe the rumors. We likely won’t see any changes now until 2011, if then.
But as disappointed as I and I’m sure millions of other fans may be if reports of the schedule being relatively unchanged prove to be true, I also can understand NASCAR’s reasoning to maintain the status quo for one more year.
In a very tough economic climate, it’s hard to justify making major changes in the schedule for fear of upsetting the apple cart any further, so to speak. Given how many empty seats we’ve seen thus far in 2009, NASCAR can’t afford to see even more seats unfilled in 2010.
As a result, it’s financially better to stick with the tried-and-true for yet another campaign, rather than run the risk of alienating fans, particularly those who like the way the Chase and the tracks within it are currently made up.
If and when the economy comes back to full strength is the right time to start making changes and shaking things up on the schedule, not now.
While we may be in for another mundane season of same old, same old in terms of tracks and where they fall on the schedule, at least we’re not seeing any reduction of races – and that’s perhaps the best news of all.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 08/11 at 10:14 PMWhy mess with perfection?
Matthew Mark
I agree that it would be nice to have a few “rotating” tracks in the chase, but then NASCAR would have to release the schd two years out. For the tracks that only have one race each year, as soon as that race is over, they start to market for next year’s race. If they start to rotate a few tracks for the chase, this would affect the rest of the schd. thus needing the race dates to be set further in advance.
We all know that the NASCAR front office has a hard time making decisions, so I don’t ever see the rotating track idea coming to fruition.
Brian Battaglia - aka: - Taglia
.jpg)
| 
|