NHRA Limits Number of Cars per each Owner in a Category (1 Viewer)

[Nitrohaulic]

Consolidation and refinement are the natural evolutions of any industry. Whether you think Walmart has a monopoly or not from your viewpoint is probably going to depend on whether you're saving money by shopping there or if you're being put out of business because they're beating you in the market.

I think this rule hurts drag racing as a whole. I think an owner who has been able to demonstrate successful marketing with several sponsors should be able to use that to be able to attract even more sponsors. Those are sponsors that the little guy may not have the track record to appeal to, anyways. This is just like "progressive" taxes. You're punishing someone for achieving.

The result without this rule would probably be just what it is in the trucking business. More company drivers and fewer owner-operators. In my business, we're always able to find little niches that bigger companies aren't able to or just don't want to bother fooling with. We're the sand around the boulders.

I think the more companies an owner is able to attract, the more it legitimizes drag racing as a marketing vehicle for everyone else. This rule may "feel good" to a lot of you, but I don't think it's a net good. This is protectionism.

 

[Rich]

That's sounds nice. But even under our capitalist economic system we have nonetheless found it necessary to pass laws like the Sherman Anti-Trust Act to insure competition. And I'm pretty sure that Theodore Roosevelt had more than his share of critics when he broke up Standard Oil.

 

[Nitrohaulic]

Which sounds nice is going to depend on where you're standing and what you believe in the first place. By the same thinking, Henry Ford should never have been allowed to apply the assembly line to auto manufacturing because he put thousands of independent individual car makers out of business by offering a better product at a lower price. The net result is the public and country as a whole would have lost without him.

If a Don Schumacher is able to appeal to ten companies that someone with little or no business track record will never be able to? If enough of these guys are allowed to bring in enough sponsors, you could see the need and justification for 32 car fields. That's just my supply side/pro growth thinking. I don't think the sport will grow faster by just waiting for more little guys to convince major corporations that they're worth a multi-million dollar gamble.

Is it not obvious that this rule is being put in place because NHRA must understand that an accomplished team owner is going to have leverage in attracting new sponsors?

 

[Gordon]

Personally, I'm not sure which side of the fence I'm on with respect to this new rule.

On the one hand, I think NHRA had to set the maximum number of cars per team, per class at least at or above whatever number of cars the team(s) now have, which is four: Don Schumacher's Funny Cars & John Force's Funny Cars (if we are to include Ashley's car). To set the maximum below that number of cars would alienate at least one sponsor and potentially two of them. Regardless of how they obtained the sponsorship, the fact remains, they obtained it for themselves & have a contract to uphold. To have to go to them because NHRA suddenly changed the rules would cause a lot of problems, not just for those sponsors who were affected, but also any future sponsors.

On the other hand, I'm against the growing size of some of the professional teams in NHRA. Sure, there are arguments for and against multi-cars teams - good arguments, even. There's been a lot of discussion regarding NASCAR's ruling on multi-car teams. I, for one, don't feel it's a fair comparison. Racing in circles with 41 other cars all vying to get to the front of the pack is not the same as two cars lined up side by side with one set to blow the hides off so the other can win. Granted, we haven't seen it yet this year (though Medlin's starting line explosion could be brought into question - and I'm not suggesting it is, especially given his recent misfortunes), but as the points chase tightens, we probably will see more questionable races.

Tim Wilkerson, Frank Pedregon, Gary Densham, Dale Creasy, TJ Zizzo, etc. all struggle against the big empires, and will probably continue to do so. But then again consider the success of these drivers: Brandon Bernstein, Tony Schumacher (pre-Melanie), Larry Dixon, TJ Johnson Jr.

Bottom line: I'm still not sure how I feel... time will tell.

 

[Nitrohaulic]

Yeah, it's obvious that 4 isn't just an arbitrary number. I just think that I would have the backbone to say that multi-team operations are bad and not just pick some number out of the air. If they're bad, then only let everyone have one. If they're not, then don't have any limits. Again, that's just MY thinking. What NHRA does is NHRA's business.

This reminds me of, where was it, Maryland? Some state decided to require "any company" (Walmart!) with over 10,000 employees to provide health insurance. Not 8,523. Not 11,001. They should have just put Walmart's name on the legislation!

I just think a number should be backed up with reasoning. We're not supposed to talk politics here, but I think this is NHRA playing politics.

 

[Nitrohaulic]

If owners started migrating to IHRA so they could have as many teams as they wished and IHRA started to pass NHRA in the market, do you think NHRA would keep this rule? I wonder if NHRA would put this rule in place in the first place if they had a closer competitor?

 

[swervin]

I think it should have been fewer cars. If several four car team owners had business or financial trouble that class would be shot when they barely make the 16 car fields as it is. In a unrealistic world I would love to see sponsors in a pool so to speak, that lesser funded teams could have access to them. Hopefully taking some of the smaller dollar sponsors into fulltime big dollar sponsors because they got to play on the NHRA racetrack on raceday.

The big teams already have money so do something for drag racing and keep it going by have more teams. Instead of taking more money for more teams take what money you do have for fewer teams and spend it on R&D and parts and not spread parts and personel so thin. Drawing crewmembers from one "working" team to start another so they can all struggle seems like wasted money to me.

No I dont run a team so its just my thoughts on it.
Bob

 

[Nitrohaulic]

It seems the implied message of the rule is that a multi-team owner has an advantage. If they do, then don't even let them have four teams.

LOL, "This guy is loaded, so we're ONLY going to let him have four teams for you to compete against just to make it fair." Like I said, they're playing politics with the owners who are already there. It's a halfway rule.

 

[Nitrohaulic]

If four team owners with four cars each started dominating any one class, would the people currently okay with this rule still be so?

 

[Ron]

This isn't real complicated. The reason all major motor sports organizations currently limit the number of entries from any one organization is to keep the competition somewhat honest and cut down on the real or imagined collusion between team members. Once the fans think the races are fixed because of multiple entries from the same team interest rapidly falls off.

With respect to whether many cars from one owner increases or decreases the total entries it seems clear that the current trend has not increased the field size. There is no way to tell if the fields would be bigger with more independent teams but it is easy to compare field sizes today and a few years back before the advent of mega teams and conclude mega teams haven't helped.

 

["Dr. Dirt"]

Could this rule also help to inhibit sponsor theft -- where one silver tongued team owner can promise global exposure throughout a team's multiple cars to someone else's sponsor while trying to snipe them away?
I feel sure this could happen (or have already happened)

 

[The Counterfeiter]

This isn't real complicated. The reason all major motor sports organizations currently limit the number of entries from any one organization is to keep the competition somewhat honest and cut down on the real or imagined collusion between team members. Once the fans think the races are fixed because of multiple entries from the same team interest rapidly falls off.

A very perceptive reply! Mega teams can offer more exposure and hospitality options to sponsors. A number of single car teams are just trying to make it from one race to the next. Koretsky stated that he has dumped $2.5 million out of his pocket this year to keep his teams running and . . . they are up for sale. IMHO - If something doesn't change, we could see short fields next year.

 

[Nitrohaulic]

I believe it should be all or nothing. If multiple teams are bad, then each owner should be limited to one. If they're not bad, then there should be no limits. Otherwise, if four is okay, then why wouldn't three or five be okay? If you have an unfair advantage with five, then I think you also do with four.

I'm just an analytical person and everything has to make sense.

 

[T.Smith]

By hurting the little guy I meant as far as sponsorship $$$ and driving for a good team. If you think that Zizzo/Hartley/Jack Wyatt/Gary Densham(I know Racebricks but how much does he really get from them, I doubt alot) would rather drive there own car and spend there hard earned $$$ to barely qualify and go out first round 99% of the time if they do qualify instead of driving for a JFR/DSR/Knoll whatever your crazy.

Justin, everyone doesn't want to drive for JFR or DSR.....and I'm not sure why Evan Knoll is being drug into this.

We have a great since of pride in the approach we have taken in trying to make it in big time Top Fuel racing. Everyone on this team has sacrificed a lot to make this a respectable professional operation. Yes we've made some mistakes, but we try to learn from them and continue to build the strength of our team. This makes it even sweeter when you can go out, put it all together and win a race.

I don't think Evan Knoll is the problem. Without Evan's support, there's no way we would be in the position we are in. Now if DSR decided to sponsor Jack Wyatt with his battery charger business, maybe some folks would look at the multi car teams in a different light.

 

[d'kid]

Go Big or Go Home, you've got a choice to make....
gee, where have I heard that...

And let's be honest, the only class we're really talking about is FC. I had several people ask me tonight about "Driving Force". These were people who a year ago had no clue what professional Drag Racing was all about. Guess I'm rubbing off on folks, they know I'm the one to answer questions about Pro DR. Which bring up my question again, is it "fair" for a family team to be limited at all in the number of cars they can field in any class.

Someday, the 'Grumpy old men' are going to retire. Coil, Bernnie, and Papa John will hang it up, I'm thinking around 2012 or so. In the mean time, JFR is still gonna have to field cars for John, Robert, Ashley, Eric, Courtney... opps, we're over the limit, that is if Courtney wants to run FC... I can't see Britney going into the family business.

Does Conrad have any grand kids? Do they want to get into the Family Business? What happens when Tony & Cruz's kids decide they want to follow in their Grandfather's footsteps?

What I think the NHRA is really afraid of, is that the multi car Teams don't NEED them. Heck, PRO doesn't need the NHRA, the NHRA needs PRO. With all the PR guys involved with the PRO team, and all the great tracks around the country, I'm sure an Independent series could be put together, with Live TV. Think the Coke-Cola Cavalcade, done with today's tech and facilities.

Would there still be an NHRA? Sure, maybe they'd even cut back to races on their own tracks, they own sooooo many. Hold on, they are a sanctioning body, I didn't think they were supposed to be promoters....

Okay, this is another bag of worms...

Here's the question again, is the NHRA a non-profit Corporation, and if so, Who are the owners?

 

[T.Smith]

I have yet to see a racing series that had 3 or 4 people come in and "Roger Penske" the series and it turned out good for the series in the long run.

 

[staggerlee]

it's always going to be the haves vs the havenots(the haves get lane choice) and with relatively thin fields already,we're kinda stuck with it. the vague rule works well with the dictatorship(ala Bill France)

 

[Joker]

Justin, everyone doesn't want to drive for JFR or DSR.....and I'm not sure why Evan Knoll is being drug into this.

We have a great since of pride in the approach we have taken in trying to make it in big time Top Fuel racing. Everyone on this team has sacrificed a lot to make this a respectable professional operation. Yes we've made some mistakes, but we try to learn from them and continue to build the strength of our team. This makes it even sweeter when you can go out, put it all together and win a race.

I don't think Evan Knoll is the problem. Without Evan's support, there's no way we would be in the position we are in. Now if DSR decided to sponsor Jack Wyatt with his battery charger business, maybe some folks would look at the multi car teams in a different light.

I know there are some who could care less about driving for a DSR/JFR. I will never understand it b/c it makes you a championship contender overnight but whatever. I didnt mean it as a dig to your team at all however. Evan is being brought into this because if it wasnt for him owning/sponsoring a million teams then those guys wouldnt be able to race either all the events or even be competitive as much as they are really. I just think this rule hurts more than it helps. I understand trying to keep the competition honest, but you can do that with 2 cars muchless 4. It keeps good drivers from getting better rides, it keeps lower funded guys from getting an opportunity etc.
Its like with Bill Gates. The man is a genious and he found a way to make billions of dollars and all our government has done is take him to court for having a monopoly and ordered him to pay millions of dollars. I say if he's smart enough to put himself in that position, he earned it. So if JFR/DSR can attract 10 mutli million dollar company's to sponsor 10 cars, more power to them. And for the subject of sponsor pools or whatever, thats ridiculous.
Why would I want to work to find my competition a sponsor. That dont even make since, hell why dont you just send your tune up and race data over to them as well. Now what we are going to see instead of Capps thanking Brut, DSR we are going to here him thanking Brut,DSR,Torco,Knoll Gas,Gates,Shoe Electric,Mopar,Oakley,Matco Tools,etc etc etc b/c this rule isint going to keep Shoe and Force from securing more $$$ they are just going to ship it around at: "Ok, instead of giving me $3 million a year to be primary sponsor of a car, give me the $3 million and I will make you a major associate on 4 cars." I know that happens now as well but its fixing to be taken to the next level.

 

[Cymon Sez]

Personally, I think the NHRA is still allowing at least one, if not two, cars too many.

Yeah it should have been stopped at 2 cars per class.

 

[Cymon Sez]

I Understand Wanting To Limit Them And All That. I Really Do, But I Would Rather Have 20 Cars Show Up For An Event Owned By 4 Or 5 Owners Than Have 14 Cars Show Up Owned By 10 Or 12 Owners. The Little Guy Is Who Is Going To Get Hurt In This Deal. I Say If You Can Get The $$$ To Run 10 Teams, Then More Power To You.

The little guy is already getting hurt. As it stands to be competitive you have to field a min 2 car team, and thats no east task cus it would take a large chunk of change to make it competitive with the 3-4 car teams.

Yeah some will say TJ is competitive OK he has won a race but still not at the level of the BIG teams. I am however glad to see him still in the top ten.