The View from Here: The Business of NASCAR

I’ve been on vacation for the past few weeks and thus haven’t been submitting any blog entries, but now it’s back to work.

And, with the Race for the Chase nearing its end, everyone’s attention is on who will make the Chase—and it’s close. But rather than ramble on that topic, I’d like to address recent comments by #31 regarding the “long-term health of NASCAR”.

It seems that Jeff Burton believes it’s in the best interest of NASCAR, the teams, and the sponsors if the number of cars attempting to qualify for a race is limited to the 43 slots.

“The philosophy of having 48 cars all vying for 43 sports, I know that’s cool and everything. Or the thought that if you’re not good enough, you just go home because you don’t deserve to be in the race. But that’s not economically sound,” said Burton in an interview at Michigan last week.

He believes that spreading the sponsorship dollars over more cars de-values the sponsor—and even hurts teams because the sponsors will, in the current economic climate, not be as willing to risk backing a team that possibly will not make the race.

“Forty-three cars that are assured of being in the field is the best scenario for our sport,” Burton stated.

I’m not even saying the "F-word” (and here's more on the "F word") but to me it certainly sounds like that’s what Jeff is saying. And how does a team get to be one of the 43?

Here’s a thought for you -- if the number of cars attempting to qualify for a race is limited to 43, how do we get new drivers, new teams, and new sponsors into the sport? Yes, the sponsors of those 43 teams are quite happy knowing their driver will be in the race but I think it’s short-sighted in the long run.

But that’s simply the view from here.

Jon