In a week that sees the Nextel Cup series on hiatus, the only significant race heading into Easter weekend is in the Busch series. The Busch cars will be running in Nashville on Saturday to stay off Easter on the calendar.
Nashville Superspeedway is one of those interesting tracks that is not owned by either of the powerhouses of ISC or SMI. Nasvhille is owned by Dover Motorsports Inc., which is not surprisingly the owner of Dover International Speedway in Delaware as well. Clearly, the track ownership would love to see a Cup race come to their unique venue, a 1.33 mile oval in Nashville, TN, but not for the sake of one of their Cup dates in Dover. I would compare the situation of Nashville's track to Kentucky Speedway in Sparta -- location, location, location.
As the NASCAR powers that be continue to look for schedule expansion, a track like Nashville is not on the radar despite being a high-quality venue covering a good-sized fan base. Why ignore Nashville as a potential Cup venue? Well, it doesn't help that Bristol is the eastern corner of the state and that Talladega is nearly due south. Kentucky, likewise, is in the same "vicinity" as Nashville and has Indianapolis nearly due north. I think that tracks like Nashville and Kentucky, not to mention Gateway (St. Louis) or the Milwaukee Mile, would simply add some variety to the already crowded NASCAR Cup schedule.
Consider that the Busch series runs a fairly diverse schedule by comparison to the Cup guys. In a 35-race schedule (only one fewer than the Cup schedule), the Busch races repeat venues nine times (Daytona, California, Bristol, Texas, Phoenix, Lowe's, Dover, and Nashville). Where the Busch schedule is more interesting, in my eyes, is the inclusion of these tracks: Nashville (twice), Kentucky, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Indy Raceway Park, and Memphis. Notice that each of these locations is in the midsection of the country, maybe not by coincidence. The Cup series could just as easily run at some of these same venues, not to mention venues it abandoned in the past (like Rockingham and North Wilkesboro, among others). Isn't diversity a good thing?
Yes, having more venues open and successful is more difficult, but doesn't an expansion of the sport's fan base across the country translate to more success in the long run? I think that it does. The "sacrifice" in the Busch schedule is not running some of the Cup tracks more than once or at all. Pocono (two races in Cup) and Infineon don't make the cut in Busch racing. Talladega, New Hampshire, Martinsville (new in 2006), and Michigan only appear once in Busch versus twice in Cup. Is the racing any less significant as a result?
A Cup schedule without two races at Pocono, New Hampshire, Martinsville, Dover (maybe), Michigan (though not likely), and (God forbid) Lowe's wouldn't be the end of the world. If the effort is made to still hit these locations at least once a year with a Cup race, the venues would still be inclined to make their venues worthy of attendance. Yes, revenue would suffer with one race versus two, but the difference can be made up with seating (expansions in time) and higher demand with less chance to get a ticket. It can work ... as interest in singular races would build with the schedule more spread across the U.S.
I didn't intend another discourse on why the Cup schedule isn't what it should be, but I hope that diversity in Cup continues to be a consideration.
Happy Easter everyone!
No comments:
Post a Comment