Fuel Team Boycott - your opinion? (2 Viewers)

[The Counterfeiter]

Something needs to happen here. If teams get to Atlanta and have problems with track prep and if the Nitro Extortion continues . . . I say park 'em!
IF you win a National Event in TF or FC, you probably still lost money. For the other 15 competitors and those who don't qualify, every race is an economic disaster. I realize teams with sponsors need to be racing to show some exposure, but with miserable TV ratings and one lane race tracks the prospect for continuing existing deals or attracting new sponsorship is bleak.

So . . . do the pro racers stand together and demand some solutions?

 

[Buddy]

I think boycotting Saturday would be more effective... That way everyone has a chance to qualify and race...

CJ Curtsinger

 

[D]

If they (PRO/PRO2) could stand together on this and park all of the pros for a race or two that would be great, however the competitive/drug addict nature of racers would make some break ranks and that's why purses have remained stagnate and NHRA continues to poach sponsors.

S/F
D

 

[turbo ken]

They should park them for a race or two.

 

[.]

I'm surprised they haven't already done it. What's the use of having a group to represent the racers when they won't stand up to the NHRA? Yes, I think they should boycott for several reasons, track conditions, payouts, etc.

 

[rocketman]

The NHRA owes them a raise due to the cost of nitro and fuel for the trucks. Without the pros NHRA has nothing.

 

[merc49]

The easiest thing in the world to say is, "What THEY should do is...".

I doubt anyone is ready to organize fuel teams into any kind of boycott. It could be professional suicide. People, think before you type.

And what the hell does this mean, "drug addict nature of racers "?

That's just wonderful.

 

[PJ]

But Bob its "edgy" if we say that


They boycotted once before and it worked however I doubt they could come together to do it again. Plus there is the sponsorship issue. Missing race could cause problems with sponsors and their contracts. Although didn't f1 do that over a tire issue a year or two ago?

 

[turbo ken]

The IHRA would welcome them with open arms, the popularity of IHRA would explode, and the NHRA would shrivel up and die (the big show cars is all the NHRA has).

 

[yoda]

I think boycotting Saturday would be more effective... That way everyone has a chance to qualify and race...

CJ Curtsinger

Nope- Only 12 would be in from Friday, remember?

 

[Buddy]

Good point, so boycott the Friday sessions and just qualify on Saturday...

CJ Curtsinger

 

[Wes]

The IHRA would welcome them with open arms, the popularity of IHRA would explode, and the NHRA would shrivel up and die (the big show cars is all the NHRA has).

Ya beat me to it, Ken! If for just one event the teams chose an IHRA event over an NHRA fiasco things would begin to change for the better.

 

[luxexpress]

Ya beat me to it, Ken! If for just one event the teams chose an IHRA event over an NHRA fiasco things would begin to change for the better.

Do any event conflict this year? I think the problem with this would be that most of the NHRA cars run on their sponsors money so they would need permission to skip a NHRA event. However, an IHRA event near a large enough market, maybe Epping (Boston) or Milan (Detroit), may be something a sponsor could agree to. It would certainly get the full attention of the gang in Glendora.

 

[Alan]

Although didn't f1 do that over a tire issue a year or two ago?

I believe at Indy a couple years ago, cars running Michelin wouldn't run, only the guys runnning Bridgestone (or vice-versa, I might have it backwards) but I know the field was reduced to about half of a normal race field.

 

[kegs]

I doubt any racer with a big sponsor would even consider sitting out a race. Why take the chance on losing them? I'm sure all sponsorships require the racer to attend all 24 races.

 

[none]

Hell, the FANS ought to boycott. I feel sorry for the paying customer in Atlanta next weekend, if they going to be subjected to the same show that we just saw in Houston and Vegas.

 

[megadeth]

I think something needs to be done but it's hard to boycott all the teams would need to get it sanctioned with all the sponsors and plead their case.
If that is what they decide and get it sanctioned it would take a least a couple of races before it would go down.

 

[PJ]

I doubt any racer with a big sponsor would even consider sitting out a race. Why take the chance on losing them? I'm sure all sponsorships require the racer to attend all 24 races.

Ya know what there there may be some wiggle room in that. I remember when the extra race was added some team were complaining about it as contracts where already set for sponsor dollars.

If the contracts is for them to run 23 races well then they all just happen to sit out the same race. They still fulfill their commitment to the sponsor while also sending a message

 

[FABMAN]

SPONSORS, maybe they're the ones that need to meet with NHRA chiefs and lay down the law, after all they are the ones investing the millions on these teams. Can you imagine 20 CEO's setting at the table with Graham and Tim.

 

[Alan]

Tim.

Tom???

Maybe sit out a Friday Q session, that would put the fans in an uproar, and NHRA would have some serious explaining to do..