July 19, 2007
By Rebecca Gladden

Rebecca Gladden

You know that little hole-in-the wall eatery in your town - the one that's been in the same spot for as long as you can remember?

Everyone knows about the place, but not because of the management's splashy advertising, mass mailings, giant billboards and other forms of self-promotion.

Customers flock there because of what it offers - most importantly, delicious food.

The eatery doesn't have to constantly remind you about how great the food is, because the food speaks for itself.

The point is that when you have a really great product or service, you don't have to keep hitting people over the head with it.

Conversely, the restaurants that spend the most time trying to convince you to eat there are typically the ones with the sub-par food.

That's the analogy that came to mind when I read a press release today from the NASCAR Public Relations Department entitled, "NASCAR Racing More Competitive Than Ever."

"Present-day NASCAR Nextel Cup Series races offer closer competition than anytime in history," boasts the first line of the press release.

In support of that claim, the remainder of the document details the results of a "new NASCAR statistical analysis," complete with averages, percentages, charts, and other numerical data.

Here's a sampling of the statistical revelations uncovered by this analysis, straight from the new release itself:

- In 1970, 22 of the 48 races featured only one car on the lead lap at the end of the race. Not since 1994 has a race ended with one car on the lead lap.

- In the early 1970s, it was common for a race-winner to have a margin of victory of multiple laps. Unimpeded runs to the checkered flag are a fading memory.

- Of the closest finishes since 1993, seven of the top 10 have occurred since 2000.

- This season, the margin of victory has been under a second in 10 of the 19 races. In six of those races, the race was run using the Car of Tomorrow.

- The percentage of cars on the lead lap has grown - and in some cases doubled. In the 48 races held in 1970, only 5.5 percent of the cars that started the race finished on the lead lap. That number has steadily grown.

- In 1970, 18 races were won by one driver. In 1971, one driver won 21 races. Since 2000, no driver has won more than eight races in a season. Through 19 races this year, 13 different drivers have visited Victory Lane.

- Per decade, the average breakdown is as such: 8.4 different race winners in the '70s, 10.8 in the '80s, 11.7 in the '90s and 15.3 since 2000.

- The races themselves continue to grow in competitiveness. The number of leaders per race has seen steady growth since 1970. In 1970 a race averaged four different leaders. That number has been at least 10 for the past three full seasons and currently the average for the 2007 season is 11.

That is to say, if today's racing is so much better than it used to be, wouldn't it be obvious to race fans and the media? Would NASCAR need to try to prove its assertions with a detailed statistical analysis like this?

Or could it be - despite the mathematical accuracy of NASCAR's assertion that this is the so-called "Golden Age of Competition" - that there are other factors at play which statistics don't address?

Factors which create a sense of disenfranchisement, even abandonment, among some of the sport's most loyal fans - ironically, the very same fans who helped build the sport during what NASCAR is now describing as the less competitive era.

Factors like the Car of Tomorrow (notice it was touted in the news release) and the loss of races at traditional tracks like Rockingham and traditional races like the Southern 500 on Labor Day at Darlington.

Factors like the Chase, the top-35 qualifying rule, the perception of drivers as corporate robots, the crackdown on creative crew chiefing, the Lucky Dog rule, the morphing of the Busch Series into MiniCup, the inability of one-car teams and driver-owner teams to compete equally, the distancing of the brand from its roots, the power wielded by big-money sponsors, and the overall micromanagement of the sport by the powers-that-be.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not anti-business and I know that marketing and innovation are a good thing, even for our popular little hometown restaurant.

But there is a fine line between necessary, desirable growth, and drastic changes that alter the very nature of a brand and drive away the loyal customer base that helped create it.

With the wholesale changes that NASCAR has enacted in recent years, they may have crossed that line.

Continuing on its current path of unbridled growth, NASCAR may already be feeling the effects of the law of diminishing returns, unable to attract new fans at a rapid enough rate to replace those who left.

Sagging TV ratings and unsold tickets at previously sold-out races would support that argument, despite the NASCAR's assertion that this is the "Golden Age of Competition."

It's not too late to reverse course, but at the very least, NASCAR should drop anchor and steady the ship before heading off into new uncharted waters.

If not, the seas ahead may be even rougher and NASCAR may find itself having to bail water.

The thoughts and ideas expressed by this writer or any other writer on Insider Racing News, are not necessarily the views of the staff and/or management of IRN.