What Makes a NASCAR Champion: Wins or Consistency?

The ultimate argument remains whether the Chase is good or bad for NASCAR. Consensus is probably that the Chase has been great for ratings and fan interest through the finish of the season. The minority will probably point out that the season prior to the Chase is pretty much meaningless as long as you're in the top 10, but the reality is that drivers outside of the top 5 really haven't contended historically anyway. The Chase rules state the top 10 drivers and/or any drivers within 400 points make the Chase. In two seasons, nobody outside of the top 10 has been better than 400 points out and the Chase has not been bigger than 10.

Should Kurt Busch have won in 2004? Realistically, no, he should not have won, but he did win within the rules given to him. Busch was not the "best" driver of the season, but since when is the "best" driver always the champion in NASCAR? We wouldn't have had a Chase if Matt Kenseth hadn't proven one season earlier that a one-win season is worthy of a Championship. Benny Parsons happened to prove the same thing with the points system in 1973 and then it was changed a year later (yielding repeat champion Richard Petty, who happened to win ten races that season).

People have always contended that wins should drive the Championship (a worthwhile argument), but NASCAR has historically given credit to consistency over wins. Rusty Wallace, for example, had no wins in 2005 but made the Chase as a top 5 driver. A driver can win a championship, even today, without any wins in a season. Is it right? Maybe ... or maybe not. Wins matter, no doubt, but let's look at the historical matchup (1975 to present, as provided by Nascar.com) of the champion and the winningest driver.

YEAR / CHAMPION / MOST WINS (if different than Champion)
1975 Richard Petty (13)
1976 Cale Yarborough (9) / David Pearson (10) (22/30 starts)
1977 Yarborough (9)
1978 Yarborough (10)
1979 Petty (5) / Darrell Waltrip (7)
1980 Dale Earnhardt (5) / Yarborough (6)
1981 Waltrip (12)
1982 Waltrip (12)
1983 Bobby Allison (6) / Tie with Waltrip (6) (+4 top 5's)
1984 Terry Labonte (2) / Waltrip (7)
1985 Waltrip (3) / Bill Elliott (11)
1986 Earnhardt (5) / Tim Richmond (7)
1987 Earnhardt (11)
1988 Elliott (6) / Tie with Rusty Wallace (6) (+4 Top 5's)
1989 Wallace (6) / Tie with Darrell Waltrip (6) (4th place!)
1990 Earnhardt / Earnhardt (9)
1991 Earnhardt (4) / Davey Allison and Harry Gant (5 each)
1992 Alan Kulwicki (2) / Elliott and Allison (5 each)
1993 Earnhardt (6) / Wallace (10)
1994 Earnhardt (4) / Wallace (8)
1995 Jeff Gordon (7)
1996 T. Labonte (2) / Gordon (10)
1997 Gordon (10)
1998 Gordon (13)
1999 Dale Jarrett (4) / Gordon (7)
2000 Bobby Labonte (4) / Tony Stewart (6)
2001 Gordon (6)
2002 Stewart (3) / Matt Kenseth (5)
2003 Kenseth (1) / Ryan Newman (8)
2004 Kurt Busch (3) / Jimmie Johnson (8)
2005 Stewart (5) / Greg Biffle (6)

I highlighted where the results would have been different if the winningest driver was the champion instead of the most consistent one. Something might be said to how history would have been rewritten (significantly, I might add) in that circumstance. Dale Earnhardt would not be tied for most championships in NASCAR history in the wins-based book. In fact, Earnhardt would not even be #2 any longer (losing five (5) of his championships in this scenario - he would have won only two championships by virtue of most wins). I didn't go back before 1975, but you can be assured that Richard Petty would not have lost any championships on a wins basis (200 wins in a career equals lots of championships anyway).

In the net gains and losses for championships, check out these stats (for the table above):
Richard Petty - 7 (shows net -1, but earlier net +1)
Cale Yarborough - 3 - no change
Darrell Waltrip - 3 +1 (possibly +2) to 4 Cups! (even greater status)
Dale Earnhardt - 7 -5 to only 2 Cups! (much less impact in history?!?)
Terry Labonte - 2 -2 to 0 (zero) Cups!
Rusty Wallace - 1 +2 to 3 Cups! (from star to superstar status)
-->The biggest winner, Jeff Gordon - 4 +2 to 6 Cups! (would be #2 all-time)

Be careful what you ask for in a most-wins scenario. Great drivers are still great regardless if they have the most wins in a respective season versus their peers, but Dale Earnhardt would be only a 2-time champ instead of a 7-time champ in a winner-takes-all system. It doesn't diminish what Earnhardt did in his career - he DID have 76 wins in his career, after all.

Since Jeff Gordon is probably the most polarizing driver on the circuit today, giving him more championships than he has already would probably make a majority of fans pretty unhappy.