[Seadog]

Originally Posted by 50mcrewguy I don't think we will be ready for Winchester (work gets in the way!) Maybe Toledo if we can get together the parts and the time when we get home from Richmond. (Crewing the 94 sc car, driver Mike Lichtey from Canada)

Good Luck!

[Honest-Sam]

Originally Posted by openwheelKT Really tough situation to change and make all sides happy.

It really is. I think it'll take several changes at once just to arrive at a happy medium. I can't see any one, single change, all by itself, making a difference without causing harm somewhere else.

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by Kirk Spridgeon Frank - that's what I was saying above. They do it in CRA, and it works great when we go out there in the fall for the Oval Nationals. I love it. And the penalty for not making it through the heat is not crazy....you just can't start in the front three rows. Kinser - I honestly couldn't tell you where it has all gone. I'm sure Kevin Miller would like to know, too. But I can tell you that USAC LOSES money by sanctioning races and showing up to work them. The sanction fee does not even cover their costs. But you always hear about how terrible that sanction fee is and how they're raking in the dough.

Not that it means anything to you, but I have agreed with just about everything you have typed on this thread. Your use of common sense is nicely applied. And your grammar is exemplary.

Since this thread has migrated to this topic, I had to reply.

I've been saying it and saying it and saying it: USAC needs to look at how the AMA Supercross events are packaged. Those shows pack BIG venues, are very efficiently run and have a "big deal"-type feel to them. And let's face it, if you like motorcycles the racing is great, but what USAC has to offer is light years better, IMO. The AMA markets these guys' faces and names, and then pairs the recognition and the racing with a really cool driver intro deal where they walk through the crowd, etc.

Kevin said USAC continues to chase TV. If they could land some sort of deal and pair that up with something in the ballpark of what the AMA does, the sky may be the limit. The racing sells itself and there are personalities -- a lot of them young -- out there that would also sell themselves. If USAC is already losing money putting on shows, what's a little more over the course of a year or two to work towards an actual profit? I highly doubt the AMA is losing money with 25,000 (maybe more, I don't know) asses in the seats at football stadiums across the U.S.

The days of household, Indy-made names alone drawing 10,000+ fans to Buttf&$#, Indiana are gone. That pipeline has been closed, and we all know it. Doesn't work anymore. What does work in this day and age, apparently, is the AMA's method and if you ask me, USAC needs to take a long look at it.

[Seadog]

Originally Posted by Fisher79 Since this thread has migrated to this topic, I had to reply. I've been saying it and saying it and saying it: USAC needs to look at how the AMA Supercross events are packaged. Those shows pack BIG venues, are very efficiently run and have a "big deal"-type feel to them. And let's face it, if you like motorcycles the racing is great, but what USAC has to offer is light years better, IMO. The AMA markets these guys' faces and names, and then pairs the recognition and the racing with a really cool driver intro deal where they walk through the crowd, etc. Kevin said USAC continues to chase TV. If they could land some sort of deal and pair that up with something in the ballpark of what the AMA does, the sky may be the limit. The racing sells itself and there are personalities -- a lot of them young -- out there that would also sell themselves. If USAC is already losing money putting on shows, what's a little more over the course of a year or two to work towards an actual profit? I highly doubt the AMA is losing money with 25,000 (maybe more, I don't know) asses in the seats at football stadiums across the U.S. The days of household, Indy-made names alone drawing 10,000+ fans to Buttf&$#, Indiana are gone. That pipeline has been closed, and we all know it. Doesn't work anymore. What does work in this day and age, apparently, is the AMA's method and if you ask me, USAC needs to take a long look at it.

You have excellent points here. However, USAC is already behind the eight ball when using moto-cross as a model. Moto-cross can set up and tear down in a large stadium in any large metro area in a few days. Located right in the middle of potentially big populations. A number of USAC's venues are as you said in BF, Indiana which complicates the big crowd draws. With moto it's 50,000 fans within a half hour versus USAC's 1,500 fans within two hours. And USAC's venues at best hold 3,000 or 4,000, save Phoenix, Richmond and a couple of others.

And it will have to be promoted and sold as "totally bad to the bone action". We as die-hard fans know it is, but USAC has to convince the 15 - 25 year olds that it is.

Also, we all as die-hard fans/drivers/owners hate the cars with starters, but I believe it is imperative to bring these cars into the 21st century and make them more TV "friendly" if that is the direction we want to go with this. It's a necessary evil.

Just my two cents.

[Gary Silverman]

Originally Posted by Fisher79 I've been saying it and saying it and saying it: USAC needs to look at how the AMA Supercross events are packaged. Those shows pack BIG venues, are very efficiently run and have a "big deal"-type feel to them. And let's face it, if you like motorcycles the racing is great, but what USAC has to offer is light years better, IMO. The AMA markets these guys' faces and names, and then pairs the recognition and the racing with a really cool driver intro deal where they walk through the crowd, etc.

But the thing you are missing is the fact is that a big part of the appeal of Supercross is that kids actually own and/or ride dirt bikes. And they have major manufacturer support as a result, which is where much of the heavy promotion actually comes from.

In modern circle track auto racing, there is no connection between what's on the track and what those in the stands would ever tinker with or drive. That's not just a USAC issue, and I have no idea how you solve it without starting from scratch (and still probably failing anyway).

Quite frankly, if you compared the average age of the spectators to the competitors in a USAC national series race... Chris Hanson from Dateline NBC would be ready to do a sting operation right there.

Originally Posted by Seadog You have excellent points here. However, USAC is already behind the eight ball when using moto-cross as a model. Moto-cross can set up and tear down in a large stadium in any large metro area in a few days. Located right in the middle of potentially big populations. A number of USAC's venues are as you said in BF, Indiana which complicates the big crowd draws. With moto it's 50,000 fans within a half hour versus USAC's 1,500 fans within two hours. And USAC's venues at best hold 3,000 or 4,000, save Phoenix, Richmond and a couple of others. And it will have to be promoted and sold as "totally bad to the bone action". We as die-hard fans know it is, but USAC has to convince the 15 - 25 year olds that it is. Also, we all as die-hard fans/drivers/owners hate the cars with starters, but I believe it is imperative to bring these cars into the 21st century and make them more TV "friendly" if that is the direction we want to go with this. It's a necessary evil. Just my two cents.

Good points there, too.

What if they set up a tiered system in which they ran these Supercross-type events near big/bigger markets: Kamp and Route 66 (CHI), Granite City (STL), Lawrenceburg (CIN), Anderson, ORP and Terre Haute (closest good dirt facility to Indy, unless you count Kokomo), Knoxville and Osky (Des Moines), Las Vegas, Perris (LA), Devil's Bowl (Dallas), the list goes on. The rest could just be your "average" show.... Maybe there would be some trickle-down in fan interest.

As far as starters, I don't think they're a necessity at all. Again, look at what the AMA does. They run all the practice and qualifying stuff during the afternoon, and while the gates are still open, that stuff takes place prior to the advertised time on your ticket stub. Get all that stuff out of the way and you're down to your heats, B and feature, which you can easily do in a two-hour window. And nearly everyone already re-works the track; so why can't there be a re-work in between the preliminaries and when the bulk of the crowd arrives?

Just throwing ideas out there. Growth is good.

---------- Post added at 05:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:00 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Gary Silverman But the thing you are missing is the fact is that a big part of the appeal of Supercross is that kids actually own and/or ride dirt bikes. And they have major manufacturer support as a result, which is where much of the heavy promotion actually comes from. In modern circle track auto racing, there is no connection between what's on the track and what those in the stands would ever tinker with or drive. That's not just a USAC issue, and I have no idea how you solve it without starting from scratch (and still probably failing anyway). Quite frankly, if you compared the average age of the spectators to the competitors in a USAC national series race... Chris Hanson from Dateline NBC would be ready to do a sting operation right there.

True, but when I talked about the young personalities it was with the thought that the Chad Boats, Cole Whitts, etc. could connect with a younger fan base. And isn't that what anyone is shooting for these days?

As far as kids owning bikes, that is true. But show me a kid (or an adult, for that matter) who doesn't get fired up at a non-wing sprint car doing its thing and I will show you a person with no soul! That's your connection right there.

[jonesy112]

Instead of going to starters (an thus increasing the costs to the teams) to make the race evening more 'tv friendly', how about figuring out a way to get more puch trucks at the events. Be able to push off a whole feature in one shot (24 cars, 24 trucks). That would help with packaging it for tv, as well as increasing fan interest. Lets face it, todays youth are used to instant stimulation. If you force them to sit through a 10 minute break everytime a race starts or there is a red flag becuase there are 3 push trucks shoving off 22 cars, they will lose interest in the racing and look for another form of entertainment. And if we dont have that 8-15 yr old crowd getting hooked on racing now, how bad of shape is everything going to be in 15 years down the road.

As much as most of you hate wing racing, take a look at Knoxville and how they package the nationals for Live tv. They have the trucks to push off a whole feature at once, quick cleanups and restarts after reds. Before we got to showing the racing on tv, we need to package it so when people watch it, they are hooked the first time.

[speed9]

:2:USAC wont pay more, they are, to busy getting their .25 off the ground. All this means to me is that they get their hand in the owners pocket faster. Big problem with USAC is that their drivers are going no where! Look at Darland, Coons and Brad Kuhn (and a lot more) why isnt USAC helping them and taking them to the next levet? USAC is only interested in getting money, not promoting a event or driver. When was the last time a Silver crown, Sprint or Midget driver from USAC went to another division, like NASCAR or IRL? How much did it cost the sponsers or parents to take their driver to the next level after USAC.
USAC plays favorites and always have, they make rules up as they go and enforce only the ones they want to when they want to. People are not dumb when they had enough they Quit. Promoting drivers that are only running a few races or have ties to some big names in racing is all USAC does, they only want the money or free stuff.
We can always watch Lawn Mower races from England if we cant get TV time from USAC.
Sory if I offend some USAC officals ( who go to the tracks ) but that is how I see if first handed. Your not loosing the big name teams even though some are cutting back, you are loosing your base the guy who loves racing and works for a living mon-fri at a real job. No race fan is going to pay to see a 6 car race no matter who is driving.

[Racerrob]

I have been sitting on the sidelines on this one waiting to see where this would go. If I am not mistaken, the proposals to save USAC, the car owners and the entire sprint car way of life boils down to: One chassis for pavement and dirt, limit tires/wheel width to make horsepower a non-issue, have a tire company invent a super tire that never wears out and never slows down, increase purses so that racers can afford to race, race closer to home so that travel expenses can be reduced and get TV coverage to make everything better.

Now I hate to be the wet blanket here but there are always unintended consequences to these proposals and if it were really easy to implement them don’t you think they would have made the move by now?

Let’s talk one chassis for pavement and dirt; How do you police that? I saw on an earlier post that there would be a limit as to the engine set back, offset and wheelbase. What happens when a local (which we rely on heavily at the dirt tracks) wants to run USAC. Do they have to buy a special car that conforms to USAC specs? Do we all run dirt chassis on pavement? What dirt wheelbase/engine set back? Do locals that have a slightly different car get to run?

Same for the tire/wheel rule; Do you think local racers on a limited budget will step up and buy new wheels and a spec tires to run just the USAC shows? If you could get the WoO, All-Stars, MSCS and whatever other sanctions together and agree to limit the RR this would work. Without it this is a pipe dream. The reason USAC went to 410 was because it became the standard for sprint cars by the WoO and local tracks. USAC made the switch so that more cars could run with them not as the leader of a larger CID movement.

Now on to the tires. Yes they are a MAJOR expense for both large and small teams. I have begged for a one set limit for over 1 year and it has gone nowhere. We run 2 sets typically for each racing night because every time the tire undergoes a heat cycle (run on the track) it slows down a little. Not wears out, but slows down. Therefore if my car is going to have a shot at winning I have to bolt on new tires each time my competition does. If we all have only one set then there is no competitive disadvantage.

Before we hear from Don Moore, hard tires are not the answer either because they slow down just as much if not more. They also lack grip which means the cars will slide more in the corners. The reason there is not more passing on pavement is generally the grove is narrow and the drivers (well most anyway) don’t want to slide into another car while attempting to pass. Most of them have learned that open wheel to wheel contact is not good for their health or the car’s longevity especially on pavement.

I know that Hoosier contributes to the point fund for each tire sold. It is here that USAC can be of the biggest help to the participant by negotiating hard with ALL the tire manufacturers to obtain the best price and most money for the point fund. There should be full open disclosure of each bid to the competitors and the contract should be rebid each winter. I don’t care which brand wins the bid if everyone has to run the same tire.

Now I have been very outspoken in the past when a promoter makes a killing on a USAC race via the back gate. I also know that promoters don’t always pack the stands and they have expenses as well. Too many promoters fail to promote nowadays. I would like to see a return to the days of a percentage of the gate against a guaranteed minimum purse Part of the sanction fee paid to USAC would be set aside for track specific marketing. Additionally the promoters would be required to spend a certain amount advertising the USAC race in the local media. USAC could leverage a revamped marketing department to helping the promoter with advertising copy and media buys. This would make USAC, the participants AND the promoter partners in putting on a quality product and producing a profit for ALL.

As far as racing closer to home/on more weekends, I am all for that. I burn EVERY vacation day, personal day and sick day that I get at the bank to attend all the races on the USAC schedule. My wife is very upset that I have not gone on vacation with her and the kids in 4 years. Most of our past vacations centered around a race somewhere that I left for two days early or stayed after for a couple of days. But realize that when you limit the series to a local base you also limit your ability to attract national sponsors for the teams, the events and the all important television.

In conclusion, I think we all recognize there is a problem. But beware of some of the “easy” fixes proposed because they may create more problems than they solve. Most of you probably remember the push to put starters on midgets since that would make the series more fan and TV friendly. Sounded like a good idea and it had a noble purpose but it almost killed the series. We don’t need to go down that path again.

The opinions expressed in this post are my own and do not necessarially reflect the opinions of my team or sponsors.

Rob Hoffman