|| *Comments on the 2009 LifeLock 400:* View the most recent comment <#92> | Post a comment <#post> 1. dUDE gUY posted: 06.14.2009 - 7:43 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Mark Martin wins his fifth race at Michigan by leading only the last lap, after Jimmie Johnson and Greg Biffle run out of gas in the final laps. 2. Neal posted: 06.14.2009 - 7:54 pm Rate this comment: (1) (3) Wow...a completely boring race decided by fuel mileage. Go figure. Since Detroit's cutting back on their support for NASCAR can NASCAR cut back on their support of MIS - PLEASE? Between MIS, Auto Crap Speedway and New Suckshire, there are 6 races that are never worth a damn. 3. Candraco posted: 06.14.2009 - 8:02 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) i thought it was just going to be another johnson blowout... how very wrong i was, just when i was about to declare it a wasted 4 hours to see johnson win yet another race it was worth it to see what happened on the last lap. coming to the white flag johnson runs out of fuel for the second week in a row which IS TOTALLY AWESOME!!!!!! but then biffle runs out which i didnt care and here come the old man martin and gets the win, alright helped me out in yahoo fantasy standings at least. it was an awesome finish. tony gets a 7th and retains the point lead for the third straight week :) 4. hyperacti posted: 06.14.2009 - 8:16 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) I said this on another website: "Hard to believe that someone can be in their prime at 50 years of age." Wow. Mark is in control of Sprint Cup atm. 5. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.14.2009 - 8:22 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Did you see Mark Martin when he got out of his car? He had battery problems and had to cut off his air box. Yet he looked like he had just been on a Sunday cruise. Johnson and Biffle baited each other into running out of gas. I liked that. They are racers and wouldn't back off with a shot at the lead. We need more of that attitude. Dale Jr faded late again. People blamed that on Tony Eury Jr, but it happened again. 6. Anonymous posted: 06.14.2009 - 8:34 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Topical Michigan race. It doesn't matter if it the cot or the old car for Michigan. The track always has the capabilities of boring racing. Exciting finish. Mark Martin pasts Bobby Isaac in career wins. Mark has 3 wins in a season for the first time since 1998. Good run by Bill Elliott. 7. WillG46 posted: 06.14.2009 - 9:27 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Dale was nursing a broken shock mount the last 100 miles or so. 8. Haywood posted: 06.14.2009 - 9:28 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) jfudjaoisdufiasdf i'm SO SICK of reading this was a good race. the finish was exciting, but the race SUCKED! this track needs to be blown up. if nascar is looking for reasons fans are tuning out, THIS RACE should be a prime example of why. 9. Smokefan05 posted: 06.14.2009 - 9:34 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Jimmie runs out of gas (haha) and so does THe Biff on the last lap. And Mark "the kid" Martin wins it. Good for Mark. Good runs for JaimeMc, Elliott Sadler, Bill Elliott and Robby Gordon. 10. Bronco posted: 06.14.2009 - 9:42 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) With the win, Mark sets a new record for worst starting position of a Michigan race winner and fewest number of laps led. I am glad it was Mark that was able to capitalize on someone else's problems. The way his career has gone, he has usually been the guy who runs out of gas on the last lap. The Dale Jr/McGrew combo has yet to produce any real results. I know next week is basically a write off for him since Sonoma is one of his worst tracks, but I pray that he has a strong run at Daytona. To those who think Michigan is a boring track, I ask that you watch a few older races on Youtube. It's not as exciting as Daytona or Talladega but it's still pretty good overall. And a great run for Awesome Bill, making his final start at the track he owned in the mid 80s. 11. Baker posted: 06.14.2009 - 9:45 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) First time Jimmie Johnson has ever had bad luck late in the race that ultimately cost him the victory...and I loved every second of it. Great run for Mark Martin if he gets a string of Top 10s here the next 4-5 weeks to assure his spot in the chase he's my front runner to dethrone Johnson as Champion. 12. hyperacti posted: 06.14.2009 - 10:05 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) I'm sick of people saying that races suck, tracks suck, and nascar sucks. NOBODY IS FORCING YOU TO WATCH. I for one have thoroughly enjoyed EVERY RACE this year. You guys must all be so spoiled my gosh. I thought Pocono was good, I thought Michigan was good, and I think New Hampshire is good. I think California is good too. I just don't see what it is you guys think is so suckish about these recent races. The racing has been great all year. People just mad their drivers aren't doing good perhaps? 13. billchill posted: 06.14.2009 - 10:27 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) i agree with you hyperacti. dale earnfart is having a shitty season and since 99.9% of the people on here are his fans than that must mean all the races suck. 14. posted: 06.14.2009 - 10:29 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) hyperacti I agree. This was a typical Michigan race. Good job Mark. 15. Burton 31 & Martin 5 fan posted: 06.14.2009 - 10:30 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) i agree hyperacti, jeff isnt doing great, but i still pull for him anyways, im tired of mark "the old man" martin winning these races tat he lucked out on. YA RIGHT! GO MARK!!! 16. Baker posted: 06.14.2009 - 10:33 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Its not the tracks...its the cars you want proof? Just watch races from the 70's and 80's even early 90's before they went areo crazy. Cars were able to race each other then dicing back and forth for position lap after lap. Today's cars are too areo dependent they can't get close enough to race without wrecking or slowing down yada yada. 17. Neal posted: 06.14.2009 - 10:34 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) I just don't see what it is you guys think is so suckish about these recent races. The racing has been great all year. ----- What planet are you from? Is NASCAR paying you by the word? There's more to NASCAR's decline than the economy. When they have to wait until the last freaking minute to sell out a Bristol race, something is VERY wrong. The new car is a bore to watch on every track except for Daytona and Talladega. Bruton Smith destroyed Bristol when he re-banked it. NASCAR continues to reward Southern California even though the track is usually about 60% full. There's what's wrong with NASCAR in a nutshell. Michigan was only 80% full today. 18. Jrister24 posted: 06.15.2009 - 12:08 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Jimmie Johnson leads 146 laps and runs out of gas on the final lap to finish 22nd. I bet he was so upset, however he stuck around and gave a championship interview! Say what you want about Jimmie, but he's a great champion! I could only imagine the temper tantam Kyle Busch would have had if that was him! Anyways, this race was 195 laps of bordom & 5 laps of excitement 19. Anonymous posted: 06.15.2009 - 12:30 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) hyperacti, I not saying the race is boring since Mark Martin won a first place. Mark Martin is one of my favorite drivers. Outside of the last 10 laps of the race, it is not an exciting race. Michigan can be hot or cold in terms having good racing. The only way to save some of the Michigan races in terms of excitement in the past is fuel mileage. Not having a lot of cautions is not an issue. Passing the lead is tougher here for the most port than other tracks. The 1999 Michigan race that Dale Jarrett is proof of Michigan having the capabilities of being a very boring race. Dale Jarrett was one of my favorite drivers at the time, but that race was a true snooze fest. Remember Michigan is the reason Auto Club Speedway was built. That track is built similar to Michigan, but slightly less banking with even less excitement. 20. Zed 3_88fan4eva posted: 06.15.2009 - 1:08 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) I agree with you hyperacti, this may of not been the most exciting race to watch but its not like we can have a car into a fence or someone spining someone on the last lap every week. This may of not been the greatest race but it was an ok race. Could be alot worse Mark the kid!!!! I cant belive how happy he is right now, even when he had a terrible qualifying run he still looked and sounded like he was having a blast....I just hope that his patience can pay off and he finally gets his championchip that he so badly deserves. Great run for Sadler and Awesome Bill as he is also showing that he can still run great at his age even in sub-par equipment Also somthing I forgot to mention last week, but I think that TNT has gotten alot better in there race coverage even thou they are still showing too many commercials but they definatley have improved.....but I still miss BP thou And I wish the best recovery for Johnny Benson who got banged up in a crash last night. Hope he finds a way back into a truck very very soon 21. BON GORDON posted: 06.15.2009 - 1:11 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) I agree with hyperacti 100 percent. There always seem to be people that complain about the racing or the race track. The racing is fine (but I'm sure somebody will disagree with me...typical). Watch a race from the 60s or 70s. Two cars would finish on the lead lap and it would either be Pearson or Petty most of the time. The damn racing is fine. The COT is here to stay and as long as the drivers are safe that's all that matters to me. Some races are going to be better than others. Michigan and Pocono arent my favorites either but oh well. They're still NASCAR races baby. What the hell did you think you would see when you turned on the television and turned it to TNT? Go watch reruns of Roseanne or something else if this doesn't float your boat. Seriously, enough is enough guys. I'm a NASCAR fan and Sunday to me means race day no matter if they're five wide for the lead or just playing follow the leader. This season of NASCAR is one of the best in years. Thank god we have guys like Stewart, Martin, and Gordon running strong and winning races again as well. 22. Art D posted: 06.15.2009 - 1:15 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) That was a good race with a thrilling finish. Unfortunate that #48 and #16 ran out of steam. As long as #24 piles on the Top 5's, I'm happy. The race did not suck. No track in Nascar sucks. Only the attitudes of whiners suck ("yeah, going fast in circles is soooooooo boring, OMG"). Be glad that Michigan sees two race events per year, because if Nascar axed one of them, the same whiners would cry about only having one, ie, see Darlington. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing an extra road course event or two put in the schedule. 23. 18fan posted: 06.15.2009 - 1:47 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) I went from jumping up and down in excitement(Jimmie runs out of gas)to mad(I realize Mark is going to win)in half a lap. I like Mark, but I don't like Hendrick because of the way he dismissed Kyle from his team. Kyle ran like crap yet again, it is getting frustrating because he either runs great, like at Bristol or Richmond, he runs like absolute crap, like Pocono or Martinsville, or is running good and gets wrecked(Talladega, Daytona) He was so consistent last year and he's not anymore. Maybe running the full Nationwide schedule caused that.Good thing he probably won't run for the championship in that series anymore. 24. Kit posted: 06.15.2009 - 1:48 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) "I for one have thoroughly enjoyed EVERY RACE this year. You guys must all be so spoiled my gosh. I thought Pocono was good, I thought Michigan was good, and I think New Hampshire is good. I think California is good too." Did you start watching recently? "I just don't see what it is you guys think is so suckish about these recent races." Haha, watch the 1988 season. 25. Jeff posted: 06.15.2009 - 2:00 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) You must have issues if you think California is an exciting track. I think it'd be nice if they upped the number of starters at places like Michigan,maybe 50 cars or something,so we'd see passing in traffic to keep things interesting,instead of a parade. Only problem is,right now,if you start 50 cars,10 of them will park in the first 20 laps. 26. Kit posted: 06.15.2009 - 2:02 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) "Danica Patrick will be in NASCAR next season. If NASCAR executives can pull it off. George Pyne -- the former NASCAR Chief Operating Officer, and thus one of the top officials in stock car racing, and now head of IMG sports and entertainment, the high-buck talent marketing agency � and key NASCAR executives are together working the entire Sprint Cup garage trying to put together a package for Patrick to run NASCAR next season. Finding sponsorship is quite likely not the big issue, as hot a property as Danica Patrick is." So let me get this straight. NASCAR will sue Mayfield for "taking money away from fellow competitors" yet at the same time fine Carl Long an astronomical amount. Now they want to stick in a driver who isn't even successful IN HER OWN SERIES to come over and race in a more demanding sport. 27. CarlEdwards99 posted: 06.15.2009 - 5:53 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) as someone who Mark was my favorite driver until he stopped racing full time and still consider myself a fan of his (along with Carl of course)I can tell you that's typical Mark Martin. Mark could go out and dominate 10 races and not win 1 of them, but than go out and win a race he has no business winning. That's how it has always going for the guy. 28. CarlEdwards99 posted: 06.15.2009 - 6:22 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) couple of cool stats: -first race since the Atlanta spring race 04 that a race had less than 4 cautions -this is Marks 3rd win since Phoenix. That's as many wins he had from spring Talladega 2000 to Phoenix this year 29. Red posted: 06.15.2009 - 7:16 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) I agree Hyperacti. All these fans who pine for the "good old days" conveniently forget that back in the 70's and 80's it was commonplace for one driver to lap the entire field and for 20 cars to drop out with mechanical problems. Is that really what people want?! While NASCAR has certainly become too corporate for my taste, the competition now is better than ever. 30. John Royal posted: 06.15.2009 - 8:52 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) For everybody that says racing back in 80-90s was crap, watch race like 1982 Mountain Dew 500 at POCONO(!), and after that come to say todays racing is better. There might be five cars at lead lap, but those were best of the best and put down helluva show for whole race. It said so many times that aerodynamics killed the sport, and that is the main reason of competition being what it is. Why do you need to deny something that is obvious? And when there are tons of proofs too. Go to Youtube watch some old races. Just for example: Johnson was unbeatable at this Michigan race, until Biffle got the lead and Johnson had nothing for him until they started fuel race. And all top-10 cars were all the time sperated by few seconds. After the race Edwards said that this race and track is great to drive and drivers like it, but admitted that it might not be much of a fun for spectator. BON GORDON: Improved safety isn't ANY reason to defend bad racing, because all the new COT safety innovations can be utilized together with any changes to car. I know we can't get back to times when they drove 200mph with brick shaped cars, just because such cars aren't manufactured anymore. But it looks like any cars wont be manufactured soon and atleast not for NASCAR competitions, that's why you can easily change the COT to whatever shape provides best racing. And yes, I would like to have mechanical failures as a winning/losing factor too. Anything over clean air -factor. 31. John Royal posted: 06.15.2009 - 9:05 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Red, You apparently make your statement about competition based on numbers. True is that there are many cars on the lead lap, there are only few cars to drop out, overall speed differences are small. Lead changes are happening at pit lane and on restarts because of phony cautions. NASCAR is just AFRAID to let race go under green for long times (1998 Michigan, and todays situation is even worse). At todays Michigan race, only one caution was from a reason. How do you say competition is good? When one dominates 80% of the race and then can't just challenge somebody who gets by him just because of phony caution? Oh that is just so stupid. This race would have been horrible without late fuel drama. Not only because nothing happened, but because obviously NASCAR tried to get something to happen and EVEN THAT didn't make any difference. 32. Anonymous posted: 06.15.2009 - 9:13 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) The problem with Michigan for the most part since the late 1990's is the passing is hard due to aero. It is to easy for the car to spread out. That is why there there are not a lot of cautions at this track or passing. While you can get great finishes, the place can't give a race constant good race like it did back in the 1970's and early 1980's. The track began inconsistent for good to great races since Nascar brought the old car to cup races back in the early 1980's. Michigan is better open Wheel track than a stock car track. There used to be great races at Michigan in Open Wheel. There used be a lot of passing the leader on the track. If you watched Cart races at Michigan like I did back in the late late 1990's to the early of this decade, you would say the same thing. When is the last time Nascar had over 50 lead changes at Michigan in a 3 out of 4 race span like Cart did from 1998 to 2001? You are lucky to get 20 to 30 lead changes at Michigan for a cup race with most of them happening on pit road. The track hasn't had that 33. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.15.2009 - 10:37 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) "i'm SO SICK of reading this was a good race. the finish was exciting, but the race SUCKED! this track needs to be blown up. if nascar is looking for reasons fans are tuning out, THIS RACE should be a prime example of why." "I am glad it was Mark that was able to capitalize on someone else's problems. The way his career has gone, he has usually been the guy who runs out of gas on the last lap." "Its not the tracks...its the cars you want proof? Just watch races from the 70's and 80's even early 90's before they went areo crazy. Cars were able to race each other then dicing back and forth for position lap after lap. Today's cars are too areo dependent they can't get close enough to race without wrecking or slowing down yada yada." "The new car is a bore to watch on every track except for Daytona and Talladega. Bruton Smith destroyed Bristol when he re-banked it. NASCAR continues to reward Southern California even though the track is usually about 60% full." " know we can't get back to times when they drove 200mph with brick shaped cars, just because such cars aren't manufactured anymore. But it looks like any cars wont be manufactured soon and atleast not for NASCAR competitions, that's why you can easily change the COT to whatever shape provides best racing." I agree with all of these points. 34. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.15.2009 - 11:12 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) Here is my take on the excitement (or lack of) of today's races: Aero is absolutely responsible for this. It started in the mid 90's and has declined ever since. When Chevy came out with the bullet shaped Monte Carlo, it was on (or off) from there. Ford soon introduced the Taurus, Pontiac redesigned their Grand Prix, and they were all totally dependant on the air to achieve max speed and grip. The problem is that the car in front gets clean air to press the car to the track, and the cars in back don't, leading to a big disparity in handling, leading to the leader being virtually unpassable. That was also the era when big tracks started dominating the schedule. I look at 1995 as the transition year of NASCAR into its new era which directly led to what we are seeing today. First of all, the guard was changed. Hendrick, with Jeff Gordon and Evernham leading the way, took their spot as the premier organization, which they still hold. Bobby Labonte ran his first year for JGR. DJ had his first year with Yates. It was also RCR's last year as a true threat week in and week out (I know they finished 2nd in 2000, but they had nothing for Bobby Labonte and JGR). Junior Johnson got out for good, Bud Moore began his descent into oblivion, the Wood Brothers had their last year of respectability. But most importantly it was the beginning of the end of fun races on big tracks. As I've mentioned before, compare the Brickyard 400 in 1994 to 1995. In 1994 Jeff Gordon in a Lumina and Ernie Irvan in a T-Bird, both very boxy compared to later cars, put on a hell of a show. They passed each other many times in the final laps before Ernie cut a tire leaving the race to Jeff. It was an awesome duel. The 1995 race on the other hand totally sucked (and this is ME saying this! Earnhardt won!). Whoever was out front was unpassable. Gordon in his new Monte Carlo dominated at first, but once he got passed was totally out to lunch. Dale Earnhardt, driving about a 12th place car, gets out front with great pit work in his Monte Carlo, and is unpassable to the very end. Rusty Wallace and Dale Jarrett both caught him from large distances, but stalled out once they got in his air. It was the start of what we are seeing today. Plus the tracks changed. Work began on big cookie cutters in Texas and California (leading to similarly boring cookie cutters in Chicago and Kansas). The great short track in North Wilkesboro, realizing its days were numbered after Staley's passing, added new seats and suites to the backstretch and redesigned pit road in a desperate (and ultimately futile) attempt to stay with the "modern" NASCAR. This led to Rockingham losing both dates and Darlington losing one. They were all great tracks that we could use nowadays. Now it has all come to a head. Long time fans like myself are finding it harder and harder to stay interested in this sport I was obsessed with for so long. Time to go back to the past. The COT looks like nothing anyways, so there is no reason we can't go back to the old shoeboxes (with all the safety features of today) of yesteryear. Very little spoiler and a completely flat front end. And it is time to reconfigure some of the current tracks. California, Texas, Kansas, Chicago, Vegas, Charlotte, and Michigan need major overhauls. Put Bristol back the way it was. And go back to the long course at Sears Point. It was so much fun to watch them go through the carosel then haul ass up the drag strip. I don't understand why Bruton does half the stuff he does. 35. Anonymous posted: 06.15.2009 - 1:54 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) They raced the drag strip at sears point? I didn't know tar 36. Kit posted: 06.15.2009 - 2:39 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "Mark could go out and dominate 10 races and not win 1 of them, but than go out and win a race he has no business winning. That's how it has always going for the guy." That's because he's not aggressive enough on the track. Even with Hendrick, when he has a car capable of winning the race, he'll finish with a top 5. This is why he hasn't won a championship. He was about four seconds behind Biffle and Johnson before they both ran out of gas. I think he should have been closer. 37. Kit posted: 06.15.2009 - 2:40 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "80's it was commonplace for one driver to lap the entire field and for 20 cars to drop out with mechanical problems. Is that really what people want?!" This wasn't true with the late 80s and early 90s which was a hell of a lot better than racing today. 38. Kirkyal posted: 06.15.2009 - 3:15 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) What an awesome ending! The rest of the race was not a classic but the last 20 laps were fantastic! Well chuffed for Mark Martin, thought Johnson had it in the bag... then thought Biffle had it in the bag... but at 50 Martin beat the lot! 39. Neal posted: 06.15.2009 - 3:24 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) They raced the drag strip at sears point? --- Yup, before Bruton butchered the track with that idiotic "chute," the cars used to drive through the keyhole, around the carousel, and up the far end of the drag strip before making a 180 degree hard right at turn 7. The IRL course now is what the NASCAR course used to be. 40. John Royal posted: 06.15.2009 - 3:38 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Kit, I believe if Mark had raced them down he would have also go out of fuel. He did run out of fuel on parade lap. Sometimes it pays off NOT to be aggressive. 41. Kit posted: 06.15.2009 - 4:18 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "Sometimes it pays off NOT to be aggressive." True, but for every race he won by not being aggressive, there's two or three he could have won by being aggressive. 42. Smokefan05 posted: 06.15.2009 - 7:15 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Jeff Burton said "racing today is better than it was back in the 70's and 80's. No disrespect to back then, but today is better." And you want to disagree with Jeff Burton? Go for it. People today aren't race fans, they are whiners saying they are race fans. With the old car once you got out front, you were gone, with the new one, it's the same thing. Michigan has a history of producing racing like this. It's nothing new. For those of you who have been around since the 80's, you know what i'm talking about. So don't BS. And i know someone will say "your new fan." You don't know me, so don't even lable me as one. 43. hyperacti posted: 06.15.2009 - 9:25 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) I bet if you time-traveled back to the 80's and showed the fans a race from 2009, they would think that it's way better than anything they have. I betcha Nascar in the year 2050 is pretty darn awesome compared to what we have now. 44. Mike posted: 06.15.2009 - 9:36 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Agreed completely Smokefan05! This could finally be the year for Mark Martin. Most likely he would be leading the points right now if he didn't have that bad luck to begin the year. Another good step in the right direction for Jr. There is still some work to do but the 88 team is making great progress. 45. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.15.2009 - 10:39 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "Yup, before Bruton butchered the track with that idiotic "chute," the cars used to drive through the keyhole, around the carousel, and up the far end of the drag strip before making a 180 degree hard right at turn 7." Yeah, it was great. They didn't use the whole drag strip, just the end of it which led to many great passing opportunities with three sharp turns. "Jeff Burton said "racing today is better than it was back in the 70's and 80's. No disrespect to back then, but today is better." And you want to disagree with Jeff Burton?" Yeah, I'm gonna disagree with him right now. Remember, this is a guy who aspires to be a politician. The fact is they can't race side by side anymore, not even on the smaller tracks. In the late 80s and early 90s, there were side by side battles all over the track. They could actually RACE. Just go to YouTube, they have all sorts of races from that era. Sure, only 5 cars finished on the lead lap, but nowadays 30 cars finish on the lead lap after a long, single file parade. I'll take the old days anyday. smokefan05, are you Brian France? 46. Smokefan05 posted: 06.15.2009 - 11:14 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) hyperacti i agree. But will the world be around in 2050? Who knows. I have great respect for NASCAR days past, but those days are not coming back, no matter how much you wish for it. NASCAR is what it is. You want to relive the old days? Watch vids on Youtube. Or build a timemachine. NASCAR is what it is, no one is forcing people to watch. 47. Bronco posted: 06.15.2009 - 11:30 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) I actually believe that the so called "golden age" in NASCAR was from about 1990 to 2003. That was the age when racing was competitive in terms of cars finishing on the lead lap, TV coverage was good, you could pass anywhere you wanted on a restrictor plate track, it didn't cost a small fortune to field a competitive team, the points system wadn't tampered with, and winning a pole actually meant something. Last but not least the CARS! I was just watching a Pepsi 400 from the late 90s and the cars looked so much cleaner and sounded a hell of a lot better. NASCAR started to screw around with the sport in 2004 when the big money Nextel sponsorship and Brainless Brian stepped in. I don't mind change, but the fact is that NASCAR has changed far too many things over such a short period of time that it makes it hard for fans to still recognize the sport. If it were up to me this is what I would fix. 1. Get rid of the idiotic manufacturer format for the Bud Shootout and go back to the old style polesitters and previous winners format. It was a joke to have guys like Stale Bread, Scott Slow and Sideways Sam in this year's race (and don't get me started on the "wild card" rule). 2. Scrap the cha$e and go back to the old system where a champion was crowned based on his performance over the entire system, not just 10 races. It pissed me off to see Dale Jr finish 12th and Carl get robbed of a championship last year. 3. Impose a rule so that Cup drivers can only race in a maximum of 18 races in a Nationwide season. I'm sure a lot of younger drivers were pretty pissed at watching Shrub destroy a trophy that should have been theirs. 4. Get rid of the yellow line rule. If it's paved, you can pass on it. Watch any late 90s restrictor plate race and tell me it wasn't exciting to watch Gordon, Skinner, Earnhardt make all those wild passes on the apron. 5. Redesign the CoT so that it actually resembles a stock car, not some winged monstrosity. 48. Red posted: 06.16.2009 - 12:48 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) John Royal, Let me rephrase my original post. The point I was trying to make (poorly) is simply that the DEPTH of competition is better now than it's ever been, and in that respect, I prefer today's NASCAR to the old days. However, I totally agree the on-track action and excitement was greater in the late 80's and early 90's than it is now. It used to be about the race, now it's about the show, and I hate that. And I absolutely despise modern-day NASCAR's attempts to artificially tighten competition with debris cautions, the lucky dog, the wave-around, and the Chase. In my perfect world we'd have the depth of today's field with the racing (real racing!) of 20 years ago. 49. Anonymous posted: 06.16.2009 - 12:54 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) I read on Jayski today that a possible redesign of the COT is in the works. Let's hope this time they actually make the racing better instead of worse. But that would make too much sense, so it probably won't happen. 50. Kit posted: 06.16.2009 - 4:01 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) "And you want to disagree with Jeff Burton? Go for it." Jeff Burton is behind the wheel for the entire race; he isn't watching it live. There's a difference between racing as an job for a driver and racing as entertainment for the crowd. Michigan might be a fun track for the drivers but not so much for the fans. If Jeff Burton actually thinks racing today is a lot better than the fender rubbing of 20 years ago, he's delusional. That, and drivers will rarely say what's really on their minds because they don't want to piss too many people off. "People today aren't race fans, they are whiners saying they are race fans." I find this extremely ironic for a Tony Stewart fan to say, considering the guy is the biggest crybaby in the sport. He whines about everything. "With the old car once you got out front, you were gone, with the new one, it's the same thing." You've never seen a race from the late 80s or early 90s apparently. "You don't know me, so don't even lable me as one." I can label you however I like based on what you write. 51. Kit posted: 06.16.2009 - 4:02 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) "Another good step in the right direction for Jr. There is still some work to do but the 88 team is making great progress." Yeah, he finished 14th in the same equipment that a formerly retired driver WON in. Yeah, he's doing great, huh? 52. Kit posted: 06.16.2009 - 4:04 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) "I bet if you time-traveled back to the 80's and showed the fans a race from 2009, they would think that it's way better than anything they have." Considering that several people on here are fans from the 80s and early 90s, you don't need a time machine. 53. CarlEdwards99 posted: 06.16.2009 - 8:21 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) "The point I was trying to make (poorly) is simply that the DEPTH of competition is better now than it's ever been, and in that respect, I prefer today's NASCAR to the old days. However, I totally agree the on-track action and excitement was greater in the late 80's and early 90's than it is now. It used to be about the race, now it's about the show, and I hate that." That's where I and I think a lot of others disagree. We watch NASCAR or any sport for that matter, for action and excitement. What good is 30 cars on the lead lap when they can not give you any action? For many of us watching parade laps is not good entertainment regardless of how many of those cars are on the lead lap. not saying you are right or wrong, entertainment is in the eye of the beholder, just saying that's where a lot of us disagree. 54. Smokefan05 posted: 06.16.2009 - 11:51 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) CarlEdwards99 is right here. We all see a race different. Entertainment is the eye of beholder. DSSF, if i was Brian France, NASCAR wouldn't be where it is right now. I hope that answers your question. If you prefer the old days fine, if you like the new days fine whatever. It's your life. I liked the 90's and i like todays racing. If you hate me for it, then i don't know aht your problem is. 55. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.16.2009 - 2:08 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "NASCAR is what it is, no one is forcing people to watch." You're right. Tv ratings and attendance reflect this. "NASCAR started to screw around with the sport in 2004 when the big money Nextel sponsorship and Brainless Brian stepped in." You're right. That was when they officially said "we don't care anything about the integrity of NASCAR as a SPORT, it is now the world's most expensive reality show." This is Brian France's legacy, and it ain't a pretty one. He will be reviled as long as there is a NASCAR. Speaking of watching old races on YouTube, I was watching the 1993 Hooters 500 yesterday and during one of the many cautions in that race (sealer on Atlanta? What were they thinking?) they sent it to Jerry Punch (or John Kernan, I can't remember) to talk about some highway safety initiative NASCAR was sponsoring. Basically some filler material fluff. The reporter said "I'm here with the VP of NASCAR", I looked at the screen and blurted out "Holy shit! That's Brian France!" My stomach knotted up and I felt this wave of anger go through my entire body. Just from looking at him! I was so disgusted that Brian France was on my computer screen! That is his legacy. 56. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.16.2009 - 2:13 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "Considering that several people on here are fans from the 80s and early 90s, you don't need a time machine." That's what I was thinking. That is when many of us became fans. It isn't like it was the 1940's or something. People like myself got to watch the late 80s and early 90s first hand and we remember how exciting it was. No need for time machines. Actually, NASCAR is lucky there are no time machines. What happened from 1995 onward helped soften the blow of what we are seeing today. If the 1994 racing season ended last year and suddenly we were forced to see 2009 directly afterward, NASCAR fans would riot. 57. Kit posted: 06.16.2009 - 3:19 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "If you hate me for it, then i don't know aht your problem is." Chill out. Just because you same something conflicting doesn't mean it needs to be personal. 58. Red posted: 06.16.2009 - 10:12 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) CarlEdwards99: "That's where I and I think a lot of others disagree. We watch NASCAR or any sport for that matter, for action and excitement." You clearly didn't read my entire post. At the end I said "In my perfect world we'd have the depth of today's field with the racing of 20 years ago." Hell, if I had to choose between having 35 competitive cars and having an exciting race, I'd take the exciting race every time. It seems like anyone here who makes a positive comment about today's NASCAR is condemned as a being new-age, fad-following idiot, and I don't think that's reasonable. There are certain aspects of modern NASCAR that are an improvemnet on the old NASCAR. As a whole, though, I agree that the sport was better in 1994 than it is in 2009, but that doesn't mean we can't appreciate what IS good about the sport today. If all you "old-school" fans are so discontented with modern NASCAR, why do you bother watching it or posting comments about it? I don't mean that in a critical way - I'm honestly curious. 59. CarlEdwards99 posted: 06.17.2009 - 9:18 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) "You clearly didn't read my entire post. At the end I said "In my perfect world we'd have the depth of today's field with the racing of 20 years ago." Hell, if I had to choose between having 35 competitive cars and having an exciting race, I'd take the exciting race every time. It seems like anyone here who makes a positive comment about today's NASCAR is condemned as a being new-age, fad-following idiot, and I don't think that's reasonable. There are certain aspects of modern NASCAR that are an improvemnet on the old NASCAR. As a whole, though, I agree that the sport was better in 1994 than it is in 2009, but that doesn't mean we can't appreciate what IS good about the sport today. If all you "old-school" fans are so discontented with modern NASCAR, why do you bother watching it or posting comments about it? I don't mean that in a critical way - I'm honestly curious." sorry for the misunderstanding. In your first post you said "the DEPTH of competition is better now than it's ever been, and in that respect, I prefer today's NASCAR to the old days" and I took that to mean you liked todays NASCAR over 1994. But I see you were simply saying you like the depth of competition aspect better today than 15 years ago my misunderstanding As for why I post about todays NASCAR. It's because I still love the sport and enjoy watching it, I just don't think it's as good as it was 15 years ago 60. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.17.2009 - 11:29 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Red, you make some good points. The problem, as I see it relating to the current depth in NASCAR, is that very few of the top notch drivers are in top notch equipment. JJ, Carl, Kyle, Gordon, Kenseth, the Biff, Mark and Stewart are the only really good drivers in really good equipment. Meanwhile you have drivers like Kasey Kahne, Martin Truex, David Reutimann, Bobby Labonte, and Marcos Ambrose that could contend for many wins a year if their organizations were on par with Roush, HMS, and JGR. Then you have people like Casey Mears, Joey Logano (the 19 year old version), Dale Jr, Jamie McMurray, and David Ragan taking up good rides that they have no business in. If all the good drivers could align with the good rides, then it would be really awesome. 61. Smokefan05 posted: 06.17.2009 - 11:47 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) It seems like anyone here who makes a positive comment about today's NASCAR is condemned as a being new-age, fad-following idiot, and I don't think that's reasonable. There are certain aspects of modern NASCAR that are an improvemnet on the old NASCAR. As a whole, though, I agree that the sport was better in 1994 than it is in 2009, but that doesn't mean we can't appreciate what IS good about the sport today. If all you "old-school" fans are so discontented with modern NASCAR, why do you bother watching it or posting comments about it? I don't mean that in a critical way - I'm honestly curious. Red | 06.16.09 - 10:12 pm I sometimes feel condemned. Yeah i like the modern NASCAR. That doesn't mean i'm a "new-age, fad-following idiot." (not bashing you Red or anyone else on here) I learn 6 years ago that complaining about things that are out of your power doesn't help anything. I agree with the final part of Reds post. 62. Anonymous posted: 06.17.2009 - 12:20 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "If all you "old-school" fans are so discontented with modern NASCAR, why do you bother watching it or posting comments about it? I don't mean that in a critical way - I'm honestly curious." 1) I don't watch it or follow it that much at all. 2) I used to follow it more and I still follow racing in general so it's enjoyable for me to discuss it with like-minded individuals. 63. Bronco posted: 06.17.2009 - 2:09 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "Then you have people like Casey Mears, Joey Logano (the 19 year old version), Dale Jr, Jamie McMurray, and David Ragan taking up good rides that they have no business in." I agree with all of those (add Bowyer to the list as welll) but please, Dale Jr doesn't belong in the 88? Who do you think should replace him then? I know Dale Jr has run poorly all season long but to say he has no business the in the 88 (and to lump him in the same category as Stale Bread, Casey Mears and David Ragan) is just laughable. People like you are ridiculous. Just because a driver struggles one year doesn't make him a bad driver. Of the "top notch" drivers you mentioned, the Biff has only been good in 2005, 2008 and then this year. The other years he wasn't putting up very impressive numbers. Kenseth and Gordon had disappointing seasons last year by going winless. Carl is not in the same form as he was last year and Mark had bad seasons in 2001 and 2003. My point is the sport is cyclical and to ridicule a driver of Dale Jr's caliber just because he's having a rough year is stupid. Like or not, the numbers he has put up in his career are still fairly impressive, and they're better than most of today's drivers can ever hope to achieve. 64. Anonymous posted: 06.17.2009 - 8:20 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Bronco, DaleSrFanForever always claims Dale Jr has very limited talent. In his eyes, he has as much talent as Micheal Waltrip. That is very little and thinks Dale Jr 's wins were because DEI Equipment only like his plate wins. 65. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.17.2009 - 10:12 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Wrong! If you would read any of my previous posts I have always maintained that Dale Jr has a LOT of talent. He just doesn't have the mindset to do much with it. Bronco, I absolutely think that Dale Jr doesn't belong in a top notch ride like HMS and here is why: He is a chronic underachiever. This is a problem that has surprisingly gotten worse for him over the years as he should supposedly be maturing. In his early DEI days he was always erratic. He would commit at least 4 or 5 mental blunders a year, but he could still rack up quite a few wins a year. 2004 was his high water mark. But even then he showed he wasn't ready to take a spot as one of the sport's elite that somebody with his talent could take. His performance in the cha$e showed it. He celebrated his dominating victory at Talladega by cussing in victory lane. This was the very year of NASCAR's "Do not cuss on tv or the radio or we will absolutely fine you 25 points!" policy. He had the luxury of watching others get in trouble for this, and still did it. Then he crashed himself out of Atlanta late in the race. And at Homestead he wouldn't even speak to his OWN CREW CHIEF!!! Most of us thought that would be a learning experience for Dale Jr and that he would continue winning but start curbing his mental mistakes. Oddly, it has been the exact opposite. He quit winning and his mistakes increased. That's what I am saying. He isn't willing to put forth the focus required to be successful at this level. He can't stay focused for an entire race often enough, and he certainly can't stay focused for a 10 month season. And it has gotten worse! He can't even make a friggin pit stop anymore! This isn't just a one year phenomenon, Bronco. He has continuously underachieved and thrown away good runs. Now he isn't even running good to start with. Nobody else in the Cup series has the long list of bonehead mistakes like Dale Jr. If anyone else did what he does, they would have been shitcanned a long time ago. But of course this is the "celebrity" era of NASCAR, where Danica Patrick is a hot commodity being chased by every team in Indy cars and NASCAR despite doing very little in good equipment. And Casey Mears keeps landing on his feet on great teams. Who should be driving the #88 car? Brad Keselowski. If the sponsors weren't so tied to Dale Jr, I would fire him and put Brad in that car right now. He has done something this year that "the great drafter" Dale Jr hasn't done in almost 5 years: Win a Sprint Cup restrictor plate race. 66. Red posted: 06.17.2009 - 11:17 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "Then you have people like Casey Mears, Joey Logano (the 19 year old version), Dale Jr, Jamie McMurray, and David Ragan taking up good rides that they have no business in." So true! Here's what I think the problem is: the criteria modern-day owners use to evaluate drivers now is pretty much ass-backwards. The top priority is for the driver to be good looking and sponsor friendly, with actual driving ability being nothing more than an afterthought. Guys like McMurray and especially Mears have good rides ONLY because they're handsome and marketable. As a fan, that makes me sick, knowing that there's probably a driver out there who would drive the #07 into championship contention, but he'll never get a shot because he isn't a pretty boy or a Waltrip-like corporate shill. Look at Johnny Benson. The guy wins the freaking championship and yet eight months later he's out of a ride, while his teammate (TJ Bell) still has a ride and full sponsorship even though he hasn't done jack in NASCAR. Or Paul Menard, who can't drive worth a shit, yet he stole that Yates ride from the more talented Kvapil and Gilliland just because his daddy is a billionaire. In my opinion, at least a third of the current Sprint Cup drivers do not deserve to have a ride in NASCAR's premiere series. 67. Kit posted: 06.18.2009 - 1:13 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) "Who do you think should replace him then?" David Reutimann and Kasey Kahne come to mind. "Just because a driver struggles one year doesn't make him a bad driver." He's been struggling for several years. "Kenseth and Gordon had disappointing seasons last year by going winless." They have both won championships. "the numbers he has put up in his career are still fairly impressive" He has only 19 top 10s in 51 starts in a Hendrick car. I'm not on the "Dale Jr. sucks" bandwagon but I think he's been struggling for more than one year. 68. Dodge posted: 06.18.2009 - 6:45 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Well, DSFF is right. If DALE JR. has so much talent, then why is he always in the second half of the results so much? Don't even blame the crew chief. Dale Jr. has made so many pit mistakes. Plus, when Eury was on the box, he would not give enough info on how bad the car was so how was Eury to know what more the car needed. A crew chief can only do so much when his driver is basically on mute. 69. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.18.2009 - 11:20 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Red, that was an excellent post. I agree with every single aspect of it, and I am equally disgusted by this trend. 70. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.18.2009 - 11:30 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) You're right Dodge, what did everyone expect out of Tony Jr? I think he is a really good crew chief, and I hope he gets to be on the box again for somebody and not on the "R&D" team. He's had to work blind since he's been a crew chief. And here is something I thought about after Eury got shitcanned. In 2005, after Teresa split Dale and Tony up, she was CRUCIFIED for it (although the move initially had Jr's blessing). How dare she make Dale Jr have a new crew chief when he won't even speak to his current one. Looks like she knew what she was doing. Those two just can't produce the results they should. The sad fact is that Dale Jr needs somebody on the box who can scare him into focusing. He needs a fire lit under his ass big time. Tony Sr definitely did that for him. His Dad sure as hell put the fear of God into him. He is in the best equipment in NASCAR, he has top level racing talent, so he has a clear shot at being great, yet he can't focus long enough to do anything worth a damn unless he has somebody constantly cracking the whip behind him. What a shame. 71. smokefan05 posted: 06.18.2009 - 2:45 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) In my opinion, at least a third of the current Sprint Cup drivers do not deserve to have a ride in NASCAR's premiere series. Red | 06.17.09 - 11:17 pm Amen to that!!!!!!! 72. Bronco posted: 06.18.2009 - 10:19 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) DaleSrFan I understand what you mean when you say Dale Jr lacks focus (I do agree with that) but as I said earlier he is still light years ahead of Mears, Stale Bread and Ragan. And speaking of underachievers, I'm curious as to why you left Burton, Harvick and Bowyer off that list. The three of them have solid equipment yet all they do is make laps, collect top 10s, make the cha$e, and collect their multi million dollar checks. Thankfully this year Bowyer and Harvick are in no position to make the cha$e and hopefully Burton won't either. How much do they suck? All three of them combined have led only two more laps than Dale Jr all season!! "Who should be driving the #88 car? Brad Keselowski. If the sponsors weren't so tied to Dale Jr, I would fire him and put Brad in that car right now. He has done something this year that "the great drafter" Dale Jr hasn't done in almost 5 years: Win a Sprint Cup restrictor plate race." I had a good chuckle reading that one. Brad's Talladega win (at least for now) was a fluke, and everyone knows it. Brad is a good driver and he deserves a Cup ride but not at the expense of Dale Jr. I'm still not sure why you don't think Dale Jr is a great drafter. As I mentioned on his driver page, the only other driver better than him is Gordon, and Stewart is probably on the same level as him. To discredit all his restrictor plate success because of having dominant cars is just dumb. And I'm still wondering how on Earth you think the Biff is a top notch driver. Yes he's talented and pretty solid overall but he's not top notch. 73. Kit posted: 06.19.2009 - 11:28 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) "And speaking of underachievers, I'm curious as to why you left Burton, Harvick and Bowyer off that list." DSFF has stated many times in the past that RCR are underachievers, especially Harvick. Burton and Bowyer's problems are with their equipment. "As I mentioned on his driver page, the only other driver better than him is Gordon, and Stewart is probably on the same level as him." The results say otherwise. "Yes he's talented and pretty solid overall but he's not top notch." I kind of agree with you. The problem with Biffle is that he's very inconsistent. He has to have a perfect car to win. 74. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.19.2009 - 12:31 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) I agree about RCR. I left them off my list because RCR isn't an elite organization and Harvick, Burton, and Bowyer aren't performing at an elite level currently. They are actually a great fit for each other. I agree 100% about them just riding around and collecting points. As somebody who went to high school just one mile down the road from their race shop, I am very disgusted by this. Bronco, here is a trivia question: What have Jeff Gordon, Tony Stewart, Dale Jarrett, Jimmie Johnson, Brian Vickers(!), Kevin Harvick, Jamie McMurray(!), Ryan Newman, Kyle Busch, Regan Smith(!), Matt Kenseth, and Brad Keselowski(!) done that Dale Jr hasn't done? A: They have won a Sprint Cup restrictor plate race since George W. Bush's first term ended, or at least got to the checkered flag first before being screwed by NA$CAR. "Brad's Talladega win (at least for now) was a fluke" How was it a fluke? His car was so slow cars twice had to go under the yellow line to keep from running him over, yet he still drafted right to the lead, survived Carl Edwards coming across his hood, and made it to the checkers first. THAT was great drafting. THAT was great driving. I'd argue that Dale Jr and Michael Waltrip's plate wins were more of a fluke since they couldn't be passed. A fluke is running 15th all day, having the 14 cars ahead of you pit, then without the race ever going green again being given the victory. Brad earned his win. 75. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.19.2009 - 12:36 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) The problem with the Biff and the #16 team is the mistakes. It seems like every race, either Greg spins out, speeds on pit road, runs over his air hose or his pit crew has a bad stop late, leaves a lug nut off, or has bad pit strategy. And if all that doesn't happen, then they have a mechanical failure of some sort. It is always one or the other. But at least Greg hasn't made mistakes as often Dale Jr has. His mistakes are a result of trying too hard rather than not being focused. If they could ever put it all together, they would be very dangerous. 76. Bronco posted: 06.19.2009 - 10:16 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "Burton and Bowyer's problems are with their equipment." Don't give me that. For Bowyer to repair his car and send it back out after the Talladega crash shows that he must have some pretty good stuff. For Burton to take the points lead last year also shows that he must have some reliable equipment. "I agree about RCR. I left them off my list because RCR isn't an elite organization and Harvick, Burton, and Bowyer aren't performing at an elite level currently." They aren't an elite organization in 2009, but what about the last two years? Even when Harvick, Burton and Bowyer were solidly in the top 10 the past two years, they still rode around and collected points and paychecks. Here's a fun fact. In 2007 Dale Jr led 433 laps and ran up front quite a bit, but was doomed with six engine failures. That number alone (433) is more than what Burton, Bowyer and Harvick led in either '07 or '08, despite them having almost no DNFs. If that isn't underachieving I don't know what is. "It is always one or the other. But at least Greg hasn't made mistakes as often Dale Jr has. His mistakes are a result of trying too hard rather than not being focused. If they could ever put it all together, they would be very dangerous. " At the end of the day a mistake is a mistake no matter how it's made. To me running over your air hose and speeding on pit road is as much a lack of focus as anything Dale Jr has ever done. You did a good job listing the numerous ways Greg has cost himself wins and top 10s. I hope that shows you that he's isn't an elite driver, certainly not in the same class as Johnson, Gordon and Martin. I'm not sure what you're trying to prove with your restrictor plate statistics. It sounds like you're saying that because Dale Jr hasn't won at Daytona or Talladega since 2004, he is a poor drafter. In that case, I guess Sterling Marlin was also a poor drafter since all his wins came between '94-'96. And while we're at it, I guess Richard Petty and DW were also crappy drivers since both went 8 years between their final win and retirement. In any case, returning to my original point, I agree that Dale Jr has been an underachiever this year, but certainly not in his overall career. I find it odd that people consider Ricky Rudd, Geoff Bodine, Neil Bonnett and Harry Gant to be legends despite having only 18-20 wins and no championships while driving for top teams, yet Dale Jr supposedly sucks. 77. Kit posted: 06.20.2009 - 10:01 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "For Bowyer to repair his car and send it back out after the Talladega crash shows that he must have some pretty good stuff." No, consistently making top 10s and being a threat to win races shows that a driver has some pretty good stuff. "For Burton to take the points lead last year also shows that he must have some reliable equipment." No, he's just driving better than his equipment. This is Jeff Burton we are talking about. "It sounds like you're saying that because Dale Jr hasn't won at Daytona or Talladega since 2004, he is a poor drafter." No, it doesn't sound like that at all. As far as I can tell, DSFF is suggesting that Dale Jr. is a good plate driver BUT his many plate wins is more of a testament to DEI's plate track dominance than Dale Jr. Since their dominance ended, his finishes have been all over the place, same as anyone else. "I find it odd that people consider Ricky Rudd, Geoff Bodine, Neil Bonnett and Harry Gant to be legends despite having only 18-20 wins and no championships while driving for top teams, yet Dale Jr supposedly sucks." None of those drivers ever had a top-tier ride and the amount of support that Dale Jr. had. 78. Bronco posted: 06.21.2009 - 12:19 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) "No, consistently making top 10s and being a threat to win races shows that a driver has some pretty good stuff." What the hell are you smoking? When has Bowyer ever been a threat to win a race (in the Cup series). He has to his credit one dominating win at New Hampshire in 2007 and a 2008 Richmond win which basically fell into his lap. Sure he's finished 2nd a few times, but none of them were close 2nds. Sure Dale Jr has only won a few times in the last couple of years but he has been in contention numerous times (Talladega 2006 and Richmond 2008 come to mind). "None of those drivers ever had a top-tier ride and the amount of support that Dale Jr. had." Yeah right. Rudd drove for Bud Moore, Hendrick and Yates. Bodine drove for Hendrick, Junior Johnson and Bud Moore. Bonnett drove for the Wood Bros and Junior Johnson. And Gant came close to the championship a few times so he obviously had good stuff. You're nuts if you don't think those were top tier rides. 79. Anonymous posted: 06.21.2009 - 1:03 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Kit, I think you don't what a top tier organization was for most of the drivers you mentioned outside of Gant. How is Hendrick Motorsports wasn't considered a top organization for Geoff Bodine? Tim Richmond won 7 races in 1986 and Bodine won 2 races. Engines was the biggest problem for Bodine. The two teams appeared to do great with the addition Darrell Waltrip if there were not engine problems, but things didn't happen like that because Tim had medical problems. You could debate Hendrick not being a top ride for Rudd in the era he drove them, unlike Geoff Bodine. Hendrick was not completly back to the way they were in 1986 before Jeff Gordon and Terry Labonte joined Hendrick. How is Robert Yates racing not considered a top tier ride for Rudd? Rudd and Jarrett finished in the top 5 in their first 2 years together? Remember Robert Yates was a powerhouse back in the 90's and the early part of this decade before they went downhill starting in 2002. How is Junior Johnson not considered a top-tier Ride for Geoff Bodine? Bodine had a top 5 in points matter of fact. That organization only went downhill after the 1992 Championship they choked. How is the Wood Brothers not considered a top tier ride back in the late 70's and early 80's for Neil Bonett? You could make a case of Junior Johnson being more focus on Waltrip than Neil. That is the only argument you could have against Junior Johnson before 1993. You could say Bud Moore wasn't a true top tier time for Rudd, and Bodine. The same thing goes with RCR with Rudd. RCR wasn't the RCR we know before Dale Sr. became their driver after Rudd. RCR was only an upcoming organization at the time. 80. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.21.2009 - 12:09 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "At the end of the day a mistake is a mistake no matter how it's made. To me running over your air hose and speeding on pit road is as much a lack of focus as anything Dale Jr has ever done. You did a good job listing the numerous ways Greg has cost himself wins and top 10s." But he doesn't make them near as often as Dale Jr. What I said was that it was always somebody on his team, not always Greg. He seems to have lug nuts left loose more than anyone. It cost him a good shot at the championship in 2005. At least he can stop in his goddamn pit stall. "I agree that Dale Jr has been an underachiever this year, but certainly not in his overall career. I find it odd that people consider Ricky Rudd, Geoff Bodine, Neil Bonnett and Harry Gant to be legends despite having only 18-20 wins and no championships while driving for top teams, yet Dale Jr supposedly sucks." Let's take this one by one: Ricky Rudd: He drove for RCR before they were built to be a contender. Look at his stats in '82 and '83 and they aren't much different from Dale Earnhardt's in '84 and the second half of '81. He drove for Bud Moore well past that organization's prime. After he left, they only won like 3 more races until they closed shop more than a decade later. Kenny Bernstein's team was never a top level team. And his run at Hendrick was during the dreaded "Lumina Years". That was the period from 1989 to 1994 when every Chevy team, except RCR, struggled with week in and week out speed. He was hands down Hendrick's top performer while he was there, and even gave Earnhardt a great run for a while for the 1991 championship. Hendrick was fast with the old boxy Monte Carlo's of the 80's, and it wasn't until 1995, with the arrival of the new Monte Carlo, that they became truly dominant. By then Ricky had started his own team, with much more success than others who tried the owner/driver path. He never was with a truly elite team. Neil Bonnett: He is the only driver ever to win with RahMoc, in two different stints. That team existed for a long time, and only Bonnett had success. He drove for an unsuccessful 2nd Junior Johnson team that never had the support the #11 car got. Junior never had more than one car at a time to be successful. He drove for the Wood Brothers WELL past their prime (in his 2nd stint with them). Plus his career was really derailed by injuries. Harry Gant: Puh-lease!! He was the only driver to do anything worth a damn for the Race Hill team, almost winning quite a few times. And the Hal Needham/Jackson teams were never competitive outside of Harry. Rick Mast was never competitive in the #1 Skoal car, and Phil Parsons was only competitive on the plate tracks. Once Harry retired, that organizaton went straight to the crapper. Geoff Bodine: He suffered from "Jimmy Spencer Syndrome". That is he came from the modifieds and was way too aggressive. He never got over the fact that Cup cars weight twice as much with tires half as wide. Also, like Spencer, he let his emotions override his good sense way too often. All criticisms of Bodine are justified, just like Dale Jr. "In that case, I guess Sterling Marlin was also a poor drafter since all his wins came between '94-'96." His problem is he went to Sabates with his notoriously crappy plate program. Then, once they switched to Dodge, he was really doomed. They never had a good plate program. Yet he still almost own the Daytona 500 in '01 and '02. It isn't like Dale Jr who went to HENDRICK and still disappeared from the plate races. 81. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.21.2009 - 12:26 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "How is Hendrick Motorsports wasn't considered a top organization for Geoff Bodine?" They were during his run, but he was too aggressive. Once he got older and settled down, he got better results, but by then he was with a fading Junior Johnson team, a fading Bud Moore team, then his own team. "How is Junior Johnson not considered a top-tier Ride for Geoff Bodine? Bodine had a top 5 in points matter of fact. That organization only went downhill after the 1992 Championship they choked." Actually they were going downhill way before that. 1992 was just an aberration. They got Terry Labonte after Waltrip left in 1986, but their results really began to tail off. Once they switched to Ford in the late 80s, they were really doomed. Geoff did much better than Terry. What helped them in 1992 was the pure dominance of the Ford Thunderbird that year. The Luminas were pure junk that year, and the rest of the GM teams weren't much better. Bill's 1993 and 1994 seasons were pathetic. "You could debate Hendrick not being a top ride for Rudd in the era he drove them, unlike Geoff Bodine. Hendrick was not completly back to the way they were in 1986 before Jeff Gordon and Terry Labonte joined Hendrick." Again, that is because Hendrick, like every other Chevy team except RCR, struggled with the Lumina. Look at Darrell Waltrip. He won three races early in 1989, then they switched to the Lumina in mid season, and it was downhill from there. It killed Darrell's chances at the '89 Cup. He won the Coke 600, which at the time was a pure survival race, and got two short track wins later in the year, but that was it. He didn't win anything in 1990 (though his summer injury didn't help). HMS had one win that year, at the road course with Ricky Rudd. "How is the Wood Brothers not considered a top tier ride back in the late 70's and early 80's for Neil Bonett?" It was and he won a lot for them. But they were still doing limited schedules which gave Neil less chances to win. Plus he only drove for them for a few years. "You could make a case of Junior Johnson being more focus on Waltrip than Neil." Exactly. They put the #12 team in a totally different shop on the other side of his property. The 2nd Junior Johnson car never was up to speed. Outside of Neil, the only wins for a non #11 Junior Johnson car (since the 1970s) were Jimmy Spencer's suspicious restrictor plate wins in 1994. "How is Robert Yates racing not considered a top tier ride for Rudd? Rudd and Jarrett finished in the top 5 in their first 2 years together?" The #28 Texaco car went Downhill since Ernie got injured in mid 1994. Dale Jarrett struggled in it in 1995, and Ernie won only 3 races in '96 and '97. They then struggled really bad with Kenny Irwin, until Ricky stepped in. They then returned to respectability. 82. Anonymous posted: 06.21.2009 - 4:59 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) DaleSrFanForever, How come you didn't say Robert Yates Racing wasn't a dominating organization when Ricky was there from 2000- 2002? Yates wasn't starting to go past their prime till 2002. Rudd started to drive for Yates in 2000, the year after Yates won a championship with Jarrett. Yates was starting to lose it in 2002. They were a threat week in and week out to win. They were a great organization through 2001. They were starting to go downhill in 2002. From 1995- 1999 the 28 car problems was mostly the drivers except for 1995. Dale Jarrett in the 28 car - Driver was good, but Yates was behind in 1995. Ernie Irvan - Wasn't quite the same driver after the 1994 Michigan crash. Kenny Irwin, Jr. - Driver that didn't live up to his truck series potential and the driver wasn't as good as the car was capable of. 83. Kit posted: 06.21.2009 - 5:47 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) [quote]What the hell are you smoking? When has Bowyer ever been a threat to win a race (in the Cup series).[/quote] Bronco, you misread my post. From what I can tell, you suggested that Clint Bowyer is in really good equipment because he was able to get back onto the track after a wreck and finish the race. I response, I suggested that consistent top 10s and winning races is an indication of really good equipment, not finishing the race in a damaged car. None of those drivers you mentioned had the same level of support or equipment when they were young that Dale Jr. had. Hell, his father was probably the best driver in the sport. There's a lot to learn from that. I'm not even sure what we're arguing about anymore because I've already said my piece about Dale Jr.: he's an underachiever that lacks fire and focus. 84. Kit posted: 06.21.2009 - 5:48 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) "Rudd drove for Bud Moore, Hendrick and Yates. Bodine drove for Hendrick, Junior Johnson and Bud Moore." DEI of a few years ago and Hendrick of today had a much larger, dominating piece of the pie than any of those teams ever did. Dale Jr.'s problems isn't the equipment at all. 85. Anonymous posted: 06.21.2009 - 9:12 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Never mind DaleSrFanForever, You comment of Robert Yates Racing didn't come by the time I posted it. 86. DaleSrFanForever posted: 06.21.2009 - 11:27 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) One other thing I'll say, I don't think Ricky ever felt totally comfortable at Yates. He was only there for three years, and they had a pretty ugly divorce. Plus he was once sucker punched by one of his own crew members. But remember, he gave Gordon a bit of a run towards the championship in 2001. BTW, I know Ricky and RYR reunited in 2007, but that was mostly out of necessity. Ricky wasn't ready to retire quite yet, and Yates wanted a veteran to go with Gilliland who was tearing a lot of stuff up. He didn't need two crashing machines. 87. CBASS posted: 02.03.2013 - 8:43 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Sponsor updates #7 Red Stag by Jim Beam/ Kid Rock #33 Cheerios "Good For the Heart!" #12 Penske #18 M&M's/ RealChocolate.com #42 Target/ Polaroid #39 U.S. Army 234 Years #71 Charter Air Transport http://www.frontstretchphotos.com/p729189738 88. LASTCAR posted: 04.24.2013 - 12:58 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Tony Raines picked up the 5th last-place finish of his career in Sunday's LifeLock 400 at the Michigan International Speedway when his #37 Long John Silver's Dodge fell out with electrical problems after completing 17 of the race's 200 laps. Bob Jenkins' Front Row Motorsports team has achieved modest success in 2009 with driver John Andretti keeping the team's #34 in the top 35 in owner's points. Journeyman Tony Raines has been the driver of Jenkins' second car, the #37. On Friday, Raines qualified for his sixth race of 2009, his third behind the wheel of car #37, and started 41st with a speed of 184.535 mph. Andretti, in the other Jenkins car, qualified 10th to give the team its first top-10 start. On Sunday, Raines pulled behind the wall under green on lap 17 with electrical problems. Three other small teams pulled their cars behind the wall by lap 24. The finish was Raines' second last-place finish of the season, his first since the Subway Fresh Fit 500 at Phoenix two months ago. It is the first last-place finish for owner Bob Jenkins in nearly a year, dating back to when Brian Simo's #34 SoBe No Fear Ford fell out with transmission problems early in the 2008 Toyota / Save Mart 350 at the Infineon Raceway. It is also the first last-place finish for the #37 since Mike Skinner's Patron Tequila / BoSPOKER.net Dodge fell out with a rear end failure in the 2005 Dickies 500 at Texas and the first time the last-place finisher has fallen out with electrical problems since Aric Almirola's #01 U.S. Army Chevrolet in the 2007 Subway 500 at Martinsville. 2009 RANKINGS 1st) Dave Blaney (3) 2nd) Mike Bliss, David Gilliland, Tony Raines (2) 3rd) Todd Bodine, Patrick Carpentier, Matt Kenseth, Joey Logano, Mark Martin, Joe Nemechek (1) Visit http://brockbeard.blogspot.com/ for more. 89. Anonymous posted: 11.04.2013 - 12:46 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) it still amazes me that John Andretti qualified TENTH for this race in that Front Row Motorsports car, back when they had zero funds... 90. Windows Millennium Edition posted: 03.12.2016 - 8:05 pm Rate this comment: (0) (0) Sponsor updates: #33 Cheerios Heart Health #44 Stanley Tools/MAC Tools #1 GE Reveal/Target #17 Carhatt/USG #21 Ford Drive One./Motorcraft #82 Red Bull Cola #7 Red Rock Cafe/Jim Beam 91. Mile501 posted: 10.08.2020 - 11:33 am Rate this comment: (1) (0) Bill Elliott, who hung around the back of the lead lap throughout the race in the #21 Ford, should have stayed out to lead a lap during one of the caution periods. Why? The Wood Brothers' team failed to lead a lap in 2009, the only season since 1957 that the team has not led a single lap during a season. They have led at least 1 lap in every other season since 1957. 92. Rich posted: 12.06.2020 - 10:40 am Rate this comment: (0) (0) Bill Weber, Wally Dallenbach and Kyle Petty were the commentators. Lindsay Czarniak, Marty Snider, Ralph Sheheen and Matt Yocum were the pit road reporters. Larry McReynolds was the in-race analyst. Marc Fein was the studio host. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *Post a comment:* Your comment may not appear immediately - all comments must be approved by the moderator. Name: Comment: