Nitromater

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!


NHRA Leaving ESPN for Fox Sports 1 in 2016

1320Classifieds.net

Post your FREE Drag Racing classified ads today.
No Fees, No Hassle, just simple and effective Ads.


i realize there are some among us that only want to see racing sans fluff......please notice the high ratings for the
wildly stupid & contrived 'outlaw street racing' 'reality' shows; notice in a half hour episode how often you actually see the cars
racing vs. scripted dialogue (drama) amongst actors......i would bet you see cars racing maybe 5 minutes out of a 30 min show.
case and point i have a mid 30's nephew that is hooked on that show and talks about it using the driver's actual names
and/or handles......i just shake my head.....he'd never pay to go to a drag race, but watches that crap religiously.

do not expect the new fox telecasts to have less 'fluff', whether racer interviews, technical pieces, or misc. stories.
it is what keeps a viewer tuned in as storylines develop; whether per race or ongoing updates from race to race.

when you watch nfl games, do you know the player's names?.....it's all about human interest....it sells.
But the difference is, is that show is "reality" television, and this is the broadcast of a professional sporting event. I hear what you're saying, and there will be the extra "fluff" pieces are a just today's fact of television. However, there are many instances of repeated "fluff" pieces and topics during the currently contracted NHRA production shows, that could still get their fair coverage, and would leave time to show - as I used for example before - the LODRS finals. This is, of course, contingent on the LODRS finals being run within enough time of the Pro finals to make editing.

I don't believe comparing the way the NFL does feature pieces is comparable, as the game itself is presented live and the networks are bound by the timeframe of the game. Most NHRA broadcasts, currently, are pre-edited and presented in time delay format.
 
....it's all about human interest....it sells.
I realize we're on the same side of this argument....

sex sells

human interest stories bore.

Hey, if it's an amazing story, sure, let us hear it. If it's a funny story, sure, let us hear it.

Problem is, a story that matches that criteria comes twice, maybe three times a season (whatever the sport). Media types seem to have four or five "amazing stories" for every hour of sports coverage. It's all manufactured soap opera drama queen fluff, and it's like the sound of fingernails dragged across a chalkboard to me.

They (media directors, producers and writers) can't help themselves. It's what they know. They try to make a feel-good movie out of almost everything they create, including drag racing. They have no problem hi-jacking a sport and making it their opus to film and television dramas. (thankfully, at least documentaries are for the most-part, untouched by such practices)

They don't "get it" and they never will. They are about as out-of-touch with reality as people can get. Case in point. The newer Godzilla film shows a bunch of SEAL-types doing a HALO dive into a big city. As if HALO dives aren't fascinating, dangerous, and exciting enough to be watched, the director/producer added smoke streamers to each SEAL because it "looked cooler" which just ruined that whole scene if you are one of those that actually understands what HALO is, and why it's used in certain circumstances

Film and media students are told that human interest is what people really connect with. Guess what film and media students. That's total academic B.S.

Sure, there's the larger portion of the public that are mesmerized by contrived movie scene-type pseudo-sports with a brief splash of actual sport thrown in so the manly men-types can say it's not a soap opera when caught gossiping about what Jeremy did to Austin, and can you believe what Mel told Larry?.....but, it's soap opera kid stuff, and we all know it. (your mid-30's nephew and his viewing habits is a good example)

I totally understand that's the current "average" American viewer. But I think they've been trained year after year since almost birth to not only accept this as interesting format for almost everything in a motion picture/video medium, but respond to it as if it's needed...like currency one can barter "coolness" and "social relevance" in today's society.

I have no issues with people enjoying what they enjoy. Hey, it's their thing man, they should enjoy it.

I have a real reaction to people taking my thing, and transforming it to better align itself with their thing so they can take a few sips, then we never see them again, but my thing is forever changed, and for the worst.

TV contracts for professional football is a big money thing for owners, but so is the stadium gate and it's concessions.

I believe the sport has to have a strong, and vibrant fan base FIRST, before it can be transmitted to television.
I honestly think pro football could exist without TV coverage and continue to fill the stadiums, but the same cannot be said for TV coverage only, without the ability for fans to go see the actual games. The sport would die, slowly perhaps, after-all, it's been built for so many years, it'll take a few to die out, but it would.

In that way, drag racing is much the same, but we're already on our way to alienating the fans that go to the track AND the sports fan that wish to watch it televised, all so they can say they are trending on twitter.

Pardon my language, but seriously, F**k that.

It's not human interest stories that keeps sport-minded people coming back, it's the actual sport. We all can easily wrap our heads around that. If there's no sport being represented, it's a terrible film, made for TV movie, or daytime drama. Those things have a following, yes, but it's not the same people that would actually go to a game or track. The less sport they show, the more it becomes a crappy film student project, and no sports fan wants to visit the location where that is filmed.

Without sports fans to pay the gate, there's no tracks. No tracks, no racing. No racing, no racing TV.

Folks can quibble about the merits of sponsor exposure and such, but you're not really talking about the sport, you're talking about the business of sport. I can find as much enjoyment from watching NFC as a Big Show FC. That's me, my views, and two cents.
 
Last edited:
NHRA needs to go back and look at what they did in the 90's....if they are going to produce in house....NHRA Today was the best as was Diamond P's coverage. That is what a live coverage should look like, and that is what all around coverage should look like.
 
If they want drama,maybe cover the smaller teams more? I get sick and tired of seeing JFR and DSR and their respective heads talking past each other, if they need great material how about showing the hectic pace in the pits for teams like Zizzo and Karamesines and Novelli? These are the teams that deserve the focus, the guys that represent what drag racing used to be and should still be. Going out, gambling a little and hoping that everything works.
The television show needs to serve as an advertisement for the actual show, convince the casual fan that they need to go and experience the adrenaline rush for themselves.
 
........It's not human interest stories that keeps sport-minded people coming back, it's the actual sport......

truly both are needed......a sport must be entertaining on it's own merit to illicit an audience......but the players must also
contribute to the entertainment........ i.e. tiger woods and lefty for years in the pga; as soon as these player's skills decreased
so did tv ratings for the pga, thank goodness for rory, spieth, and other young talent today.
it's bill billachek, tom brady and the patriots
it was earnhardt, petty, yarlborough and many others in nascar for years
it was jordan, magic and bird that carried the nba for years, then a void until kobe, lebron and arguably a few others
it was foyt, unser, mears, rutherford, johncock who carried indy cars.....now i'd argue their drivers are known only by dedicated fans.

prudhomme, garlits, muldowney, bernstein, glidden who carried the nhra for years.....i would argue only force has come close
to filling those kind of shoes in last 10-15 years.......hate to admit it, but maybe schumacher has also to a lesser degree.

i don't care for fluff just for fluff's sake, but at least introduce me to the players and give me a little background.....who are they,
where are they from, tell me something interesting about their team and/or owner.......go to an nfl game and see all the
'star' player jerseys in bleachers or at your local bar on nfl sundays.....people buy these jerseys because they connect
to particular star players; it connects them not only to the team, but to the entire league.

old diamond P coverage was mentioned.....i can remember watching that and they would break from the racing and run maybe
a 5 minute human interest story; granted it was an edited show, but there was nothing about those broadcasts i didn't like.

tell me about kalitta airways, about j. force growing up in so cal., about schmacher electric, about head, inc.,
about erica enders, about the history of the drag strip the show is coming from, etc., etc.

i would watch drag racing if i knew none of the participants because i've loved the sport since my youth.
i would not watch another sport such as arena football or college basketball as i know none of the players, yet i'll tune into
my mn vikings religiously because i follow them and know the team inside and out......
just as i do nhra drag racing; unlike the general public, they need a little extra information besides just the pure sport being contested.

just my .02
 
Guess I won't get to watch anymore drag racing on TV. It would cost me $8.99 a month to get the station. Sorry but I feel that it isn't worth it to me to spend money like that for one channel that carries the sport for just a few months a year. I was very happy watching ESPN3. I was able to watch the live action and not worry about whatever bad time slot ESPN put the delayed broadcast. Now there will be nothing.
 
Guess I won't get to watch anymore drag racing on TV. It would cost me $8.99 a month to get the station. Sorry but I feel that it isn't worth it to me to spend money like that for one channel that carries the sport for just a few months a year. I was very happy watching ESPN3. I was able to watch the live action and not worry about whatever bad time slot ESPN put the delayed broadcast. Now there will be nothing.
I don't know, sounds like cheap entertainment to me, but I'm a Drag Racing racer, fan for over 40 yrs love watching when I can't attend. Fox Sports will do an excellent job.
 
I don't know, sounds like cheap entertainment to me, but I'm a Drag Racing racer, fan for over 40 yrs love watching when I can't attend. Fox Sports will do an excellent job.
Wish it were that simple. I am retired and living on a fixed income. Not much wiggle room for me. I have to pay for my internet access which I really want to keep. Every month I get notice that something is going to cost me more. This includes electric, water, cable, car and home insurance, and medical costs. Paying $8.99 a month for a channel that I would be watching for just a few select months isn't all that feasible for me. That is $107.88 a year and one new prescription for me would wipe that out. Not every person has a steady supply of disposable income. Sadly I fall into the "watch every penny I spend" bracket. I have to prioritize my spending.
 
Ways To Support Nitromater

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top