Filed under: Other Racing Series
Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments
There's a place in the world for people who are calm and patient. There's a place for people with short fuses. There's a place for both the reverent and the irreverent, the conservative and the liberal, the skinny and the fat, the blonde and the brunette and the fan who thinks car racing's too slow and another who thinks baseball's too fast.
We don't all have to be alike. It takes all kinds.
Sometimes it bothers me when I see, in some subtle way, sameness being encouraged and even enforced. I hate to see some little kid medicated because he likes to run around wide open. I hate to see someone lose his (or her) temper and then have others say he (or she) needs "anger management."
In fact, as a general rule, I mutter something rude every time I hear it said that someone "has issues." Does that mean he's weeping uncontrollably and no one knows why? Then perhaps he should have "tissues."
I don't mean to demean physicians of various kinds. Or counselors. Or clergy. They're experts at what they do, and my opinions are most certainly amateur by comparison. I just think it's sad, though, when a person reaches some stage at which medication is prescribed to "adjust" or "modify" behavior.
It gives me the willies. Or a One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest flashback.
My family is full of eccentricities. The matriarch was a workaholic. She went into a funk when she wasn't working, and when she finally had to retire, it spurred a downward spiral in her health that killed her in a tragically short period of time.
I tried to tell her she had to stay active, but if she listened, you couldn't prove it. Another recurring strain in the family psyche is being hardheaded.
One relative works extremely hard at times to avoid telling the truth, or at least anything resembling "the whole truth and nothing but the truth." I don't think she's ever been on a witness stand, but I'd sort of like to see her repeat that swearing-in litany. I know she'd at least have to pause and gulp or something. It's not as serious as it seems. She just doesn't like bad news and hides it until too late.
One sibling's hands get clammy. One relative forgot how to match clothes when he reached 65, and within a year, he'd gotten to where he absolutely delighted in matching plaids with stripes and stripes with polka dots.
Me? I'm absentminded. I'm way too fat. I don't get angry very often, but when I do, it's a doozie. I sometimes crack jokes that others consider a bit too irreverent. People say "hey, that's not funny!" but it's funny to me. Sometimes people are laughing when they say it's not funny, which is ... funny itself.
I suspect that most football coaches, if required to undergo "anger management," are also going to have to manage a few more losses. I'm glad the men who landed on the beaches at Normandy hadn't undergone "anger management" before they charged into the surf.
Life just works better if somehow we manage to solve our own problems. And it's happier once we accept the weaknesses we can't change ... and live with them.
I’ve been following the Carl Edwards/Brad Keselowski reaction all week, because I was curious how everyone would respond to the incident. Between Twitter, forums, blog comments, and the writers, I’ve read a lot. Journo weighed in on the topic here on Monday. Some folks have made some really great points, and I can understand most sides of the controversy. What I don’t understand, is those that think this decision by NASCAR is going to somehow turn the drivers into wreck ‘em derby maniacs who now won’t fear the consequences.
This idea that somehow some horrible precedent has now been set in terms of how NASCAR will govern the on track action just isn’t true. The sport’s leadership handles these special situations on a case-by-case basis, and will dole out penalties accordingly. They actually handled this specific incident very similarly to how they’ve handled other recent retaliation situations.
In this country, many courts of law decide cases by precedent. Past decisions do affect how future cases are decided. But guess what? NASCAR isn’t a court of law. They don’t need to take past decisions into account when they are trying to figure out penalties for a special situation. Why? Because absolute consistency isn’t necessarily needed. When Denny Hamlin wrecked Keselowski at Homestead, a one lap penalty was sufficient because Hamlin did what he came to do and NASCAR couldn’t let him get away with it. At Atlanta, Edwards was obviously furious, and he needed to be parked for his own good.
I understand that before the season started, they basically told the drivers to “have at it.” And while this may have played a role in their decision making, they actually went harder on Edwards then they did on Hamlin and Juan Pablo Montoya at Homestead last season; and those wrecks happened before they changed their stance. So trying to say that NASCAR went easy on Edwards because of this new philosophy just doesn’t hold water.
When issues like this arise, it always seems like we hear somebody say that NASCAR needs to lay out a penalty schedule so that every infraction is dealt the same penalty. Well guess what? Just like every other sport, NASCAR penalizes the regular infractions the same all the time. Unapproved adjustments, engine changes, pit road speeding, and a ton of other infractions are dealt with the same way.
But in special situations, like the one we saw in Atlanta, NASCAR must decide penalties on a case-by-case basis. Why? Because there are too many factors that go into what went down, and there is no way for the sanctioning body to be prepared for every possible dust-up. We’ve seen NFL commissioner Roger Goodell handle many different player incidents all separately, and I don’t see anyone calling for his job.
Moving forward, you aren’t going to see drivers wrecking each other and going crazy because Carl Edwards wasn’t suspended for life. There will be no “vigilante justice,” as one writer suggested. Drivers know NASCAR is in charge and that they will rule on events as they see fit. The powers that be have shown plenty of times in the past that if they feel a situation has become out of control, they will step in with harsh penalties to send a message.
As I’ve said before, if Keselowski spins harmlessly through the tri-oval grass, we are never having these discussions. There would be talk about how Keselowski got what was coming to him, and how Edwards overreacted to a racing incident. Endless discussions of precedents and rules and governance would have never entered anyone’s minds.
Carl Edwards, Ryan Newman and Brad Keselowski have all gone airborne on the curved front straights of tri-oval tracks.
On Tuesday, NASCAR president Mike Helton said he was far more concerned with Brad Keselowski's Dodge taking flight than he was with the boot from Carl Edwards' Ford that sent it sailing.
OK. What makes race cars fly?
1. Cars designed to stick to the pavement going frontwards are often prone to losing touch with it going backwards. NASCAR thought it had this problem solved with roof flaps. Apparently not.
2. While it's true that a wing designed to push down pointed one way will likewise push up headed the other, the same is true, to some extent, with spoilers. Race cars took off and flipped before the wings, too.
3. Here's an aspect seldom considered: the shape of the tracks. Eleven Sprint Cup tracks have curved front straights. One of the reasons stock cars tumble into catch fences (in fairness, rarely) is that they roar down the front straights pointed, at an angle, toward the grandstands. On so-called "true ovals" (a term, by the way, about as silly as "true freshmen" in colleges), the cars come off the turns parallel to the grandstands. Sometimes cars leave the ground on the back straights of these 11 tracks, but it's practically unheard-of for them to tumble to the outside (into the grandstand fencing). There may be an example, but I can't think of it.
So-called "tri-ovals" or "D-shaped" tracks are popular because they afford better sight lines for fans. It does make sitting in those grandstands just a bit more dangerous, though.
What makes NASCAR concerned about its race cars taking flight is the possibility of the unthinkable: a disaster resulting from a car, or parts of it, injuring dozens of spectators. Carnage in the grandstands could shut down the sport.
No drivers have been injured recently. The car is doing its job. The catch fence did its job nearly a year ago at Talladega, though some fans were injured by debris and part of the fence was destroyed while, uh, doing its job. The importance of protecting fans with those fences is more crucial to the future of the sport than anything else.
Here's the worst-case scenario: What if, somehow, two or more cars sailed into the fencing at virtually the same time? Even though it's unlikely, it isn't impossible. And it's scary.
The tracks can't make these fences too strong. They can't study the dynamics of protection too much. They can't take too many precautions.
Helton, at least, sounded like a man who realized this.
Say what you want about Bruton Smith, you can’t accuse the guy of not speaking his mind. And you can bet when there are eager reporters around him the gospel according to Bruton is about to be preached.
Though it might have gotten lost in the noise about Carl Edwards and Brad Keselowski, Smith took time this past weekend to give his take on the state of the sport, and the changes he would like to see made.
Among his comments, Smith lamented his investment in Motorsports Authentics calling it the “worst decision I have ever made in my business life.” He also said he believes he can get a Kentucky Cup race on the schedule for next season (see stories here, here and here).
Always interesting though were Smith’s suggestions on how to improve the sport. He suggested:
I haven’t been the biggest advocate of moving the end of the year banquet to Las Vegas, but it clearly is a market that embraces the sport. Could they support two races a year? Probably. And why not finish the season in the place where you’re going to hold the banquet?
Smith said the health of the sport will be tied to the venues on NASCAR’s schedule. I think he makes an important point that the sport needs to stage events where the market is most likely to embrace the product. Unfortunately for Smith, NASCAR isn’t too likely to take dates away from the France family controlled ISC.
Another point Smith made was the need to remove the emphasis of points racing. Do you tune in every week to see your favorite driver run conservatively in order to maintain his points position? I’m guessing the answer is no. While I agree with him on that point I think altering the payout system penalizes those underfunded teams who do actually run full races (ex. Front Row Motorsports). I can’t say I have a better suggestion on how to get drivers to be more aggressive on track though.
On the topic of start and parks (though I could care less) I’m warming to the idea of making fields smaller. Maybe we need to go back to having the size of fields fluctuate depending on which track we’re at. It would redistribute the purses and give S+P’s less of an opportunity to participate.
I can’t say I agree with everything Smith said or suggested, but some of it made sense. For all his eccentricities I think he does a good job of understanding the wants and needs of fans. As one of the sport’s biggest stakeholders NASCAR ought to bring Bruton Smith to the table a little more often.
While NASCAR drivers figure out how much license they have to play rough on their oval playground, the ruling elders of NASCAR take a rather lax approach to letting them know.
What I assumed, when NASCAR made its "have at 'em" pronouncements in January, was basically that the officials had decided to "let 'em play." The way it works in basketball, right? No more rinky-dink fouls.
It's one of the more common remarks of coaches at courtside.
"Hey! Hey! Let 'em play, will ya?"
Apparently, though, what NASCAR meant was that there would really be no officiating at all. The Sprint Cup Series is like "shirts and skins," with fouls called under some sort of informal honor system.
"Foul!"
"Aw, man, I didn't touch you!"
"Yeah, you did, dummy, 'cause I called a foul."
Once upon a time, NASCAR decided it was too difficult to keep different kinds of cars competitive with one another, so it decided to make the cars all alike. Now NASCAR has decided it's difficult to officiate what goes on, so it's decided to ... literally ... "have at it" ... and ... "let 'em race."
It's astonishing. It's outrageous. But it's consistent. When NASCAR officials decided they were going to let drivers work their difficulties out among themselves, they weren't kidding. Had Judge Roy Bean, and not Mike Helton, been announcing the decision on Tuesday, he wouldn't have changed many words.
Carl Edwards admitted he used his Ford as a battering ram and turned the Dodge of Brad Keselowski during Sunday's Kobalt Tools 500. The race was probably a success for the sponsor since, within the garage, tools, Kobalt and otherwise, were really important. It was a showcase for the entire tool industry.
He got three weeks' probation, which for the entire time I've written about NASCAR, has been a synonym for "nothing."
Old timers can talk all they want about "the good old days," but if you check the records, the moonshiners of the 1940s and '50s never wrecked nearly as often as the upwardly mobile dandies of today. That's because they needed those old Fords to make a moonshine run down to Chattanooga on Monday night. The drivers of today don't have to fix or pay for what they tear up. It shows.
I am not unsympathetic to Edwards' plight. He, like most men who choose to race automobiles for a living, is excitable, competitive and spirited. At some level, Edwards must have cast himself as Will Kane and Keselowski as Frank Miller. In "High Noon" (1952), Kane was the sheriff left all alone to face Miller, who was out to get him.
Kane, of course, had a badge, at least, when he decided "enough is enough" and took on Miller and his gang. Edwards took the law into his own hands.
Another classic movie, "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre," defines NASCAR's current view of law enforcement.
"Badges? We ain't got no badges. We don't need no badges! I don't have to show you any stinkin' badges!"
Kurt Busch picked up his first win of the season in Atlanta. It was also the second straight win in the spring Atlanta race for the Dodge driver, this time with Steve Addington, his brother's former crew chief. (Photo: John Clark/NASCAR This Week)
At least for now, Kurt Busch has the upper hand in the family.
Kurt and his younger brother, Kyle, are both legitimate stars in NASCAR's Sprint Cup Series. Kurt won the 2004 (now Sprint, then) Nextel Cup championship, and his second consecutive victory in Atlanta Motor Speedway's Kobalt Tools 500 was the 21st of his career. Kyle, nearly seven years younger, has won 16 times in the sport's premier level.
There's another notable connection. Kurt Busch's crew chief, Steve Addington, was Kyle Busch's crew chief until this season. After Kyle fell short of making the Chase in 2009, Dave Rogers replaced Addington ... and Kurt hired him.
Kurt Busch made the Chase last year, finishing fourth in the final point standings. Crew chief Pat Tryson moved to Team Red Bull and driver Martin Truex Jr. at season's end.
"I'll tell one thing that changed, and it changed for the better," said Kurt. "Steve Addington has taught me how to drive cars differently, how to look at them differently ... When you get 'up on the wheel' for somebody like Steve, good things happen."
"I'm still great friends with Kyle," said Addington, "but it's a good feeling. It's a relief in a certain way."
Kurt Busch said his latest victory was particularly satisfying.
"I feel like we won the race outright," he said. "No doubt we did our job on pit road. No doubt we did our job on long runs, and I think we hit the right combination for restarts. That's what I'm proudest of."
Thanks to NASCAR's new overtime policies and several late crashes, the race ran 16 extra laps. Addington said there was no strategy capable of preparing for such a scenario.
"We tried to keep the balance on our car," he said. "We were good on fuel for all three green-white-checkered restarts, even if we went to (the limit of) three.
"We just stuck with what we'd been doing all day."
But Kurt Busch said this was no time to relax.
"We need to have some more consistency," he said. "We've been competitive in three out of the four races so far, and the race we weren't as competitive as the others was our best finish (before Atlanta).
"That's what a championship team does."
It’s the first off week of the year for NASCAR. None of the top three series are in action this weekend, but TNI keeps trucking along with another Ask The Insiders Wednesday. If you don’t know what this post is, we answer any and all reader questions every Wednesday, right here. So if you’ve got one, click on the ”Ask the Insiders” tab at the top of the page and send one to us. On to the questions…
1. From Ric:
It’s been said that the haulers carry enough spare parts to build another car. How close is that statement?
Pretty darn close. Haulers carry everything from spare engines and transmissions, to sheet metal and nuts and bolts. And if a part isn’t on the hauler, it could probably be robbed off the backup car. – T.C.
2. From Kevin:
Hey TNI, What are your feelings on the spoiler and the fairness of the mid season change. Do you think teams like RCR are tickled to have it considering they have FINALLY found speed with the winged car. Now to have to go backward essentially and retool your whole fleet of cars, that’s not totally reasonable IMO. Now RCR and other teams will have essentially wasted all that work this offseason and now have to start over.
I think the answer to your question is determinant on whether the spoiler has a big effect on set-ups and the like. We really don’t know what will happen with the change, other than the little bit of testing teams have done. I doubt RCR is thrilled by this move; and it certainly stinks if you’re a team with little or no funding. That said, in my opinion, it will change things, but I don’t think it will change things substantially, so teams like RCR will probably be OK. – Journo
3. From Kenny:
I’m now reading a terrific book, “The Physics of NASCAR.” Reading that the wheels are “toed-in” or “toed-out” makes me wonder, does this alignment (and camber) make your job harder? On a normal consumer car, the four tires are set pointing straight up and down and are set parallel to the centerline of the car.
The toe isn’t usually an issue. Camber does affect the front tire changer and front tire carrier. The right front doesn’t cause any problems, but the left front does. Changers have to get low to see all the lugs, and pretty much angle their pit gun to hit the lugnuts square. The tire carrier must also make an adjustment, so as to get the wheel on the studs squarely. – T.C.
4. From Mike:
I was wondering if you could talk about the orange/white tape or paint that’s on the sides of the Goodyear tires after a pit stop? My guess is that it has something to do with checking the wear pattern…
I wrote a post back in 2008 explaining this exact topic. Find it here. – T.C.
5. From Scott:
Hey Guys, All this talk about ’start and park’ teams got me wondering about racing in general and more specially about cars that are not on the lead lap. I’m wondering how you, the garage, NASCAR, etc would feel about pulling cars off the track that couldn’t mathematically win the race. For example, if a car has an early problem and hits the garage. They do amazing work and repair the vehicle but end up 50 laps down. So when the lap count hits so that there are only 49 laps left that car would have to leave the track. This would lessen the number of cars on the track near the end and potentially decrease yellows or other collision concerns. Thoughts? As always, thanks for the great read! Great job guys!
I think it’s an interesting idea, the problem is, it doesn’t let guys improve their position if they’re able to continue running. Say you’re in 40th 50 laps down and the five cars in front of you are out. Shouldn’t you be able to make up those spots if you’re able? At the point when you can’t win a race, it’s about points and money. If you’re prevented from improving from going back out on track you won’t be able to do that. Plus what if the race goes longer than the prescribed number of laps (through restarts)? Lessening the number of cars won’t necessarily lessen the number of cautions. Toward the end of the race a lot of wrecks occur with lead lap teams. – Journo
6. From Barb:
Why does it appear that most of the Cup drivers are afraid to tangle with Jimmie Johnson on the racetrack? They all seem leery of getting into him. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone pull a bump and run on Jimmie during a race. I know why Jeff Gordon doesn’t, (part team owner), but why the others? He needs to be challenged more often.
I think it’s a matter of perception. I can say it’s not something I’ve noticed and after thinking about it do we really see drivers get into other drivers very often? It happens, but I don’t think Jimmie receives special treatment over anyone else. – Journo
7. From Marcus:
I’ve noticed that when a crew member or shop member or driver is penalized for drug use it always says actions detrimental to stock car racing. What does this mean?
It means whatever you want it to mean. At least that’s how NASCAR uses it. Anything that can be construed as damaging to stock car racing can fall into that category. That includes crew members who fail drug tests. – Journo
8. From Lee:
I live in Central Arkansas and noticed about a dozen haulers heading east on I40 om Monday (3/1) afternoon. Obviously, they were coming from Las Vegas. My question is..do the teams have more than one hauler? Were the ones I saw heading back to the shop, and they already have a new one heading to Atlanta for the race this weekend? It seems that it would be hard to get from Las Vegas to Charlotte, unload the car/s from the previous race, load the new cars up and make it to Atlanta for practices.
It takes approximately 36 hours driving time to get from Las Vegas to Charlotte. For west coast trips, most teams run with two truck drivers, that way the truck never stops. So assuming the race is over on Sunday evening, the trucks could be back in Charlotte sometime on Tuesday. Atlanta is only a four hour drive, and Cup teams didn’t park until Thursday. That leaves about a day and a half to restock and reload the haulers. The only time extra haulers are used, is to shuttle cars out west to the actual race haulers. This happens for back to back west coast races, like California-Vegas. – T.C.
9. From Ross:
Wondering your take on this: I was watching Idol last week and they’re running a spot with Carl Edwards talking about Ford. Not only is he not in a race suit but there aren’t even graphics identifying who he is. Now I can see why Ford’s ad people don’t want Edwards wearing a suit with Aflac plastered all over it but is it possible that Carl Edwards is actually recognizable to the average American Idol viewer? If that’s the case, then NASCAR really has come a long way.
I haven’t seen the commercial, but obviously Ford thinks he’s recognizable enough. I’m not sure I’d agree. I can’t say what Carl’s Q-score is, but I would imagine it’s not high. You’d think they would have at least had him in a firesuit, but maybe we’re further along than I thought we were. – Journo
10. From Alex:
2010 mid season changes to the cup cars: spoiler , nose and what else. I have been out of touch for a bit . Never liked the ” WING” or the splitter. What are the proposed changes for 2010 in a nutshell?
The only proposed change right now, is that the wing is being replaced with a spoiler, most likely at Martinsville in a few weeks. NASCAR is also making a small change to the rear quarter panels on the car to help with the new aerodynamics. The noses and splitters will remain unchanged. – T.C.
11. From Savannah:
Hi Guys, Since Brad Keselowski has entered the NASCAR Sprint Cup series, it seems that he has made more enemies than friends. What are the thoughts of the drivers and crew members of Brad? Also, what are your opinions? I found it interesting that Carl Edwards took the action that he did in today’s Atlanta race. Brad definitely needs to learn not to be as aggressive as he has been in some of the past races. Will the Edwards/ Keselowski feud become one for the record books over the next year? Thanks for answering all of the questions. Have a great week off!
There are definitely some veteran drivers who won’t be joining the BK fan club any time soon (see Edwards and Denny Hamlin). While I can’t speak for everyone, I think most see him for what he is. He is a very aggressive, young driver who is looking to make a name for himself and be successful. And en route to being successful, it would appear as though he doesn’t care who he runs over to get there. But what I hope he is learning, is that he can’t get where he wants without at least some respect from his competitors. I appreciate his aggression and know he has talent, but he still has some learning to do. Something tells me that Brad and Carl will steer clear of each other from now on as well. – T.C.
12. From Jeanette:
Journo- I’ve noticed here and there that some of the photographers on pit road and in the garage wear their vests inside out. Is there a reason for this (like some inside joke) or do they just not pay attention when they put them on. Also – what are the numbers for?
If it is I’m not privy to it. I would imagine it’s guys (and gals) not noticing and throwing the vest on. The numbers are there to identify the photographers. – Journo
13. From Marc:
Do extra laps beyond the scheduled distance in green-white-checker finishes, including the yellow-flag laps count for all purposes in races? With the current rule, there can be as many as four extra green-flag laps in addition to as many yellow-flag laps as needed to clear the track. If they count for all purposes, this could change the winner of the bonus for the most laps led and could allow a car that is, for example, 25 laps down to finish ahead of a car that fell out with 20 laps scheduled to go, right?
Yeah, pretty much. If a race goes beyond it’s scheduled distance, the number of total laps run is counted just like if the race had gone the prescribed amount of laps. Now you know why, in many cases, teams work so hard to get their car back on the track after a crash. You never know what might happen. – T.C.
14. From Rob:
Question about pit officials. What are the two officials in white jumpsuits looking at when you are doing your pit stop work? Why are there 2 of them per car? How mant total on pit road? Who pays them? How much do they make? Do you have any good stories about them and things they may have done or not done?
There is one official assigned to each pit. Often times you will see two, because if they are available to do so, they will help each other out. They are watching to make sure we don’t jump from the wall too early, that the car is in the stall correctly, that fueling is done within the rules, and that all the lugnuts are installed, among other things. They are paid by NASCAR, and probably make a reasonable living. And there isn’t enough room in this post to recount those stories. – T.C.
15. From Lost, Just Lost:
Well NASCAR has had their say. I found it interesting. Seems to me that the message was more for Brad than Carl. Carl got a three race probation, what ever that is. Brad got knocked out of a sixth place finish. Am I missing something or was NASCAR sending a bigger message to Brad than to Carl?
Without being a party to NASCAR’s conversations over the last couple of days it’s hard to say. I know there has been some buzz that that might have been NASCAR’s intention, but I think more than anything they’re working off their recent precedent. Consider the Denny Hamlin/Brad Keselowski and Juan Montoya/Tony Stewart incidents at the end of last season as examples of how NASCAR has recently reacted to payback. The punishments haven’t been severe and I think if Brad hadn’t gotten airborne, we probably wouldn’t even be having this conversation. – Journo
And that brings yet another “Ask The Insiders Wednesday” to a close. Thanks to everyone who sent in questions. And remember, if you’d like to be a part of next week, click on the ”Ask the Insiders” tab at the top of the page and send your question in!
Filed under: Carl Edwards, NASCAR Crashes
HAMPTON, Ga. - What happened at Atlanta Motor Speedway on Sunday was predictable and understandable, but that doesn't mean Carl Edwards shouldn't have to pay some penalty for "dumping" Brad Keselowski near the end of the Kobalt Tools 500.
Why is it understandable? Edwards thought, in the supercharged atmosphere of his cockpit, that Keselowski had it coming. He's not alone in that view. Late last year, Denny Hamlin made no bones about it when he spun out Keselowski. He'd vowed to do it a week earlier.
There were two differences. One was that Keselowski's Dodge turned over at Atlanta Motor Speedway after Edwards' Ford bumped and drove through it. The other was that, unlike Hamlin, Edwards said he was sorry.
Sorry, of course, doesn't cut it, as any number of miscreants could attest.
But there's no need to crucify Edwards, either. He's a racer, not an accountant. The heady experience of roaring around and around, on the edge of out of control, lap after lap, isn't particularly conducive to turning a cheek instead of a fender.
Not every driver takes matters into his own hands, but most have done it, to one extent or another, and every driver has thought seriously about it. The vigilante creed of the Sprint Cup Series is a more dangerous version of the Golden Rule: "Drive unto others as they drive unto you."
One of Edwards' virtues was honesty. He didn't deny that he meant to spin Keselowski out. He denied that he meant for Keselowski to bounce off the wall and turn upside down. I believe him.
But circumstances do count.
Edwards is basically a good guy. A little over-enthused at times, but once again, he is, after all, a racer. Keselowski's also a little over-enthused at times, and he's a newcomer to the Sprint Cup club. A good many members question whether or not he's paid his dues.
In the long run, this will probably benefit both parties. The rivalry will eventually morph into grudging acceptance of each by the other. This may not be a smooth transition, but a transition will occur. It always does. Feuds don't last forever. The one between Dale Earnhardt and Bill Elliott didn't. The one between Richard Petty and Bobby Allison didn't.
Edwards and Keselowski will have to get along because, ultimately, there's no other practical choice.