Just less than a month after NASCAR veteran Larry Carter joined Robby Gordon Motorsports as a “consultant” we are hearing he has been named crew chief of the #7 team. Carter would take over the spot from Iain Watt who has been in the position since January.
Gordon and his team have struggled this season, averaging just a 34th place finish. On top of that they are in a precarious owner points situation. With one race to go before this season’s points take effect, Gordon sits 38th. Given his average qualifying position (38.8), without the guaranteed starting spot he runs the risk of not making races.
That struggle with performance coupled with RGM’s history of crew chief longevity (or lack thereof) make this move less than surprising.
Over the last few seasons Robby Gordon has had a staggering number of guys on top of the box. Since 2005 Doug Richert, Peter Sospenzo, Kirk Almquist, Frank Kerr, Gene Nead, Walter Giles, Bob Temple and Greg Erwin (in no particular order) have all come and gone.
Many throughout the sport have their opinions about the organization and the reasons for the high turnover. Gordon’s demeanor has been blamed, as has his unrelenting control over the team. Beyond second hand information though I unfortunately can’t give a comprehensive explanation.
Obviously Gordon has a drive and passion for racing that few others around the world of motorsports have. That said, his Cup operation has problems. There is absolutely no reason why any team should go through the number of crew chiefs his has gone through. All of the guys who have held the position are competent team managers (most have wins, one has a championship) so you’d think one of them would have clicked.
At this point the team would be well served to do some self reflection. Without some changes in the very near future I would be willing to bet Larry Carter and Iain Watt won’t be the last guys to hold the title of crew chief at Robby Gordon Motorsports.
Fallout from the Carl Edwards, Brad Keselowski payback incident at Atlanta led the news this week. After speculation about Edwards’ punishment, NASCAR President Mike Helton announced on Tuesday, Edwards would be placed on probation for three races. He emphasized the sanctioning body’s concern with the car getting airborne at a track like Atlanta. In other news, Sports Business Journal reported this week NASCAR and the sport’s top teams are close to finalizing a deal that would create a licensing agency. The move, prompted by the financial woes of Motorsports Authentics, is designed to centralize the sport’s fragmented licensing business. This is the NASCAR week that was March 7 to 13, 2010.
NASCAR critics need to get a clue
Wild Ride: The short and brutal life of a NASCAR engine
A day on the war wagon leaves lasting impression
NASCAR, top teams creating new licensing agency
Is it too early to ask what’s up with Stewart-Haas Racing?
Vintage Insiders
The Future of NASCAR Media
Team Radio Traffic Should Be Beyond Reproach
**Remember if you have a NASCAR blog or website and would like a recent article you wrote featured in this section email me and you could be part of next week’s NASCAR Week That Was. Please only send stuff you have written.**
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.
NASCAR policies often ebb and flow in their enforcement. In the past we’ve seen a sanctioning body that really likes to loosen things up when people start complaining; but when that inevitable watershed event occurs enforcement gets ramped up again.
In true NASCAR form, this season brought us one of those promises of lighter enforcement. They wanted to foster an atmosphere of self-policing (within moderation of course). In response to that just more than a month ago Robin Pemberton looked at the gathered media and said, “Boys, have at it.”
Well Sunday in Atlanta, NASCAR got their wish; the boys had at it. After getting wrecked early in the race, Carl Edwards returned to the track 153 laps down and quite clearly took out the guy who helped him into the wall earlier.
That guy, Brad Keselowski, has made a name for himself in his very short career of getting involved in incidents like this one. Remember the Brad K. v. Denny Hamlin feud just a few months ago? Right or wrong, being aggressive and unapologetic about it is his style.
So with that, it was only a matter of time before an incident like this one occurred and it came as no surprise (to me at least) that Brad K. was involved.
I applauded NASCAR’s move before the season began and I still believe it was a good call. I think this incident though should be a wake up call to everyone in the garage. There’s self-policing and then there’s self-policing. Everyone needs to agree this sort of thing can’t be tolerated. Obviously Carl didn’t mean for Keselowski to get airborne, or expect that happen, but the possibility always exists at 200 mph.
That said though, I have a hard time justifying a suspension, and I’d be surprised if NASCAR issued one (famous last words). Even more, of all people to be calling for someone to get suspended for aggressive driving, it’s almost laughable that person is Brad Keselowski. By all means he deserves to be angry for what resulted from the payback; he could have been seriously injured (thankfully he wasn’t). But if ever there was a situation where that old idiom ‘the pot calling the kettle black’ applies, this is it.
No question, it’s unfortunate this happened. Frankly drivers should know better than to do things like this. While I can’t say what the proper punishment should be here, Robin Pemberton has said NASCAR will evaluate the incident further. If there are additional penalties, we’ll likely hear about them by Tuesday.
So what do you think? Was the retaliation justified? What, if any, should the punishment be for retaliating on track?
Three weeks into the season and our reigning champ has shown once again he’s the man to beat. After a dismal run at Daytona, Jimmie Johnson has now captured two of three races – he’s fifth in the points. In other news, TNT announced this week veteran NASCAR broadcaster Adam Alexander would take the reigns as their play-by-play announcer for 2010. Alexander replaces Bill Weber, who was released in the middle of TNT’s TV run last season. This is the NASCAR week that was February 28 to March 6, 2010.
Business Owner Finds Deals and Thrills in NASCAR
Hunter back on the beat
Bruton Smith outlines how he’d fix the sports
Bodine finds biggest win at a different kind of track
Being in the top 12 this early is no guarantee of making the Chase
Will NASCAR learn from US Fidelis collapse
Fan Camping Areas: Enter If You Dare
The Most Powerful Men In NASCAR
Following Sunday’s race in Atlanta the Cup Series will enter its first off week of the season. While there won’t be any racing, teams will still be hard at work preparing for the impending switch over to a spoiler.
The upcoming test at the Charlotte Motor Speedway will be the first chance many of these teams have had to try out the new configuration at a track on the Cup schedule. With limited testing and existing notes and information that will soon become (at least somewhat) out of date could this spoiler become a game changer for the season?
The opinions among the drivers are mixed as we have seen over the last few months. Some say 2010 will be split down the middle, while others think the change won’t make much of a difference.
Thanks to the engineers, and NASCAR and team testing we have some idea what this move will do to the downforce of the car. The real test though will come when we have a full field at a place like Texas or Charlotte.
It’s only been since January that teams have known about this and with time ticking away until NASCAR takes the track with the new spoiler, it’s got to be an interesting time to be an engineer at one of these teams. For some organizations, like Richard Childress Racing, that are just getting back on track with their performance the overwhelming question is, ‘will this throw a wrench into our improvement.’ If you’re over at Hendrick, the question is, ‘are we going to be able to maintain our dominance.’
Despite questions they may be asking about what this means for them, they’re not alone in their uncertainty. As those in charge at NASCAR have noted it will take some time to see how this will change things. What happens if this move has no effect, or things actually gets worse? Without the benefit of a lot of on track testing this is a bit of a craps shoot.
Personally I don’t have a clue what’s going to happen. I believe there will be some effect, but given the talk from all parties involved I don’t necessarily believe the impact will be huge.
Change or no change, I can’t say I’m a fan of making a move like this several races in (though I applaud NASCAR for identifying and remedying a problem in a timely manner). However this plays out, it will no doubt be interesting to see how this testing goes and how well this change is received by drivers and fans alike.
So what do you think? Will the spoiler make a difference in the racing or is all this much ado about nothing?
If you watched the Nationwide race this weekend it was hard not to notice the two white Fords. Normally this paint scheme (or lack thereof) is saved for those underfunded, or unfunded programs, with little known, or older drivers. Not the case here. The teams both came out of the Roush Fenway stable and piloting the cars were two of the sport’s brightest young prospects: Colin Braun and Ricky Stenhouse Jr.
The sight of those unsponsored Roush cars was certainly odd. This is a team that is among the best in the garage at selling sponsorship (not so much keeping it though) and certainly one of the most competitive in the Nationwide Series.
This season the team has both of the rides in question partially funded by existing deals with Conway Freight and Citi Financial, but up to now has been unable to lock down deals to fund the cars for the whole season.
If this was just about any other organization this might be a source of concern for the drivers; think JR Motorsports, Earnhardt Ganassi Racing. Fortunately for these guys that’s not the case at Roush.
As odd as it may seem to see a team like Roush run without sponsorship, especially that blatantly, this is not the first time Roush has run one of its teams without a primary sponsor. Carl Edwards ran a good portion of the 2003 truck schedule without sponsorship and other Roush prospects have done the same, including Erik Darnell, Ricky Stenhouse Jr., David Ragan, and Colin Braun.
While this may seem a lesson in how to lose money, it really says so much more.
The commitment of Jack Roush to his development program and its drivers shines through in this moment (and others like it). Few owners these days are willing to give young, untested drivers the opportunity to show what they’re made of without funding. Not Jack Roush. His commitment to drivers he sees as future stars, or at the very least worth developing further, is highly commendable.
On top of that it signals to potential sponsors Roush’s commitment to keep those teams running in spite of adversity. It says with Roush you’ll find stability and you’ll find an owner willing to put performance and future development above the almighty dollar. It says this isn’t a team that’s going anywhere.
In a world where money has become a synonym for talent, I respect Jack Roush’s willingness to find real talent without deep pockets. He’s using his fortune to help those without it, and usher in the stars of tomorrow. It’s a shame there aren’t more owners willing or able to do the same thing because, after all, isn’t this the way things ought to be?
Start-and-park teams were the talk of the week after NASCAR confiscated the #66 Prism Motorsports car for a post-race inspection. The sanctioning body inspected the car in the garage at Las Vegas to allow the team to qualify for Sunday’s race. In sponsorship news, Earnhardt Ganassi Racing picked up McDonald’s for 11 races this season with Jamie McMurray. The team said the deal had been in the works for some time. And finally, legendary NASCAR crew chief J.C. ‘Suitcase Jake’ Elder died this week at 73. Elder, who worked and won with some of the sport’s most prolific drivers, had been in failing health since a stroke in 2006. This is the NASCAR week that was February 21 to 27, 2010.
Pennzoil launches new product, but is Kevin Harvick, Richard Childress Racing part of its NASCAR future?
Remembering the brilliance of ‘Suitcase Jake’
KHI reaches back in time with West Coast pipeline
What have you done for me lately?
Questions arise over start-and-park cars
Moonlighting
The Race Track Gourmet
I know it’s a little early to start talking about the potential changes to the 2011 schedule, but why not? With California in our rear-view mirror and Atlanta now right in front of us, this season’s schedule presents us with two potential casualties for next year.
The ongoing saga of Kentucky Speedway looks to finally be coming to a close. After years of litigation and rulings in NASCAR’s favor, the former owners of the race track just had the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit turn down their request to reconsider the case. With that, the United States Supreme Court remains their last option for appeal. The court receives nearly 10,000 petitions to hear cases every year and selects generally fewer than 100 of those cases. That staggering number means this last ditch effort is a long shot.
Even still the group of former owners is fragmented (one side wanting to continue, the other not wanting to continue), so the process could continue. If that happens Kentucky Speedway will likely have to wait one more season, as NASCAR has held to not giving a race to the track so long as they are tied up in the court system.
Should this thing come to a close though, Bruton Smith and the rest of the folks at Speedway Motorsports are going to have a tough decision to make: which track loses its date?
From the get go it’s fair to assume Bristol, Las Vegas, Infineon, Charlotte and Texas probably won’t lost their dates. Smith has said in the past New Hampshire wouldn’t lose a date, but who knows. The other viable and perhaps most likely candidate is Atlanta. There was a lot of talk about this last year and I think it remains on top of the heap.
Not too far away from Kentucky is Kansas Speedway owned by the International Speedway Corporation. The track along with Penn Gaming is planning on building a hotel and casino on-site. Last week they gained approval for the project (and a gaming license) from the Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission. Now that the project is moving forward, ISC has to make the same decision SMI does: who loses that second date?
In January ISC’s Chief Operating Officer Roger VanDerSnick told USA Today the financial fortunes of Auto Club Speedway, Phoenix International Raceway and Michigan International Speedway would all be evaluated as they try to decided where Kansas’s second date would come from. In other words, they’re the most vulnerable. Martinsville, Richmond, Talladega and Daytona all also have two dates.
The specter of Martinsville losing it’s second date has been on the minds of everyone since Darlington lost its venerable Southern 500. I suspect though with NASCAR’s attempt to recapture the past, this move would not be their brightest. I picture fan revolt, the likes NASCAR has never seen.
So with that who should lose its date? Phoenix still does pretty well and certainly provides compelling racing. Michigan, though the racing isn’t always the greatest, does a great job packing the stands – that was quite evident last year. That leaves us with California, which has lackluster racing, ratings and attendance.
Despite Gillian Zucker’s best efforts at propagating the great things about her track, it just isn’t resonating. Check out NASCAR.com writer Joe Menzer’s take on California and Zucker’s “optimistic” attendance figures.
We still have time for time for things to change and NASCAR is a ways from creating the 2011 schedule, but changes could very well be upon us. With that said what do you think? Should Kentucky and Kansas get dates? Where should they come from?
The frenzy surrounding Danica Patrick in the weeks since she has begun her ascent to the highest level of American motorsports has been nothing short of a spectacle. When Patrick walks down pit road (or anywhere for that matter) a crowd almost constantly surrounds her, her pit stall is four and five deep and the huddled media jostles for a sound bite from her anytime she gets out of her car.
The media darling is certainly a popular presence in the garage right now. And why not? With her comes higher ratings and more page views. People want Danica, so Danica is what they’re going to get.
So you’d think a woman who loves attention and basking in the the lights of a TV camera would be more willing to talk following a race, something that just about every other driver manages.
Not Danica though. She got out of her car and stormed to her team hauler refusing interviews from ESPN (that pesky network that pays a lot of money to be there) and all others who tried. If you were willing to wait the half-hour afterward she did give those sound bites.
This isn’t even my gripe though. This is classic Danica (the sport’s first taste of her). The way it was handled by her representatives is what gets me. I’d expect a little more organization and order out of people who should be used to dealing with this (her frazzled looking, and dare I say acting, PR representative looked like this was a first for her).
The unfortunate part of all of this is not that media people are waiting (boo-hoo right?) but that it’s making the job for those who work in the sport that much more difficult. The poor teams that are parked next to her in the garage or on pit road (not to mention her own team) have to fight past (even larger) throngs of reporters and fans to do their job. In the case of her own team they now have to wait even longer to load their hauler and leave. Already difficult tasks now take a little longer.
I would think her top-notch representation would be a little better prepared to deal with a lot of people and a temperamental driver. In the future (because her finishing badly is likely to happen with frequency as she continues to learn) instead of making her team and a lot of other people wait, why not have a post race press conference (after the winner and second and third place finisher press conference of course) in the media center? It’s a win-win for everyone. Her representation gets rid of the fan element, she gets to fume for a while, and then gets to take questions in an orderly fashion. I’m sure NASCAR and the tracks would be pleased to set it up.