NEW.ERA Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 For fans in Canada ESPN Classic will be airing classic Daytona 500's starting Friday night and all day Saturday, I assume that the States ESPN Classic is having it as well. JETS|PACK|JAYS|NUFC|BAMA|BOMBERS|RAPS|ORANJE| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 As I watched highlights of the 1979 Daytona 500, I just figured out what the problem is. The problem is that the races and all of sports is so over-produced that it no longer feels real to the viewer at home. They have so many graphics, and so many facts, and so many reporters, and so many cameras, and so many blabbering announcers that it's no longer about the racing, but about how much someone can talk about what they know about the sport or what's going on, that they ignore the actual racing on the track. I want a play by play man calling the action, a color guy to add some insight, and pit reporters who talk maybe once an hour on something that is important to know. There's too much talking and too much fancy crap on the screen, that you miss half the race. It's why I enjoy the NHRA broadcast so much more, it's just Paul Page and Mike Dunn and a little bit of information when it's warranted. Until the broadcast pull back on all the crap, it doesn't matter which race is shown by which network, it's just going to cover up the actual on track stuff. Oh and TNT only covers one road course, and I am one who would prefer that there be more road courses and fewer races on 1.5 mile tracks.1-Paul Page went from calling the Indy 500 on ABC (pre-split) to calling X Games street luge in a years time. That was an injustice in itself. I feel sorry for how far he fell, but am glad he still cashes a check.2-The Watkins Glen race is on ESPN, my apologies, but it still is on cable not network tv.3-There are too many cautions in NASCAR and probably more in the beginning since there was no testing for the series of pit reporters to just talk once an hour. Changes are being made, so the TV audience should know what is going on. 4-On screen graphics make it much better if you forget to TiVo or DRV, you know who is winning/leading. I am not sure if you are old enough to remember seeing the Jets@Dolphins game in 1980 on NBC which was their "Silent experiment". It was cool for about 10 minutes in real time and I was hating just hearing the PA. If a broadcast went silent, then MRN or PRN would be heard depending on the track, except for the Allstate 400, where Indy holds the radio rights. And a radio broadcast is entirely different than TV as there is a commentator in each corner with primary focus on the leader(s). 5-You already alluded to it. It was never about racing. It was about selling cars, but not about selling your sponsor. NASCAR has become more mainstream since DW's Tide car and thus female purchase decisions play a role. It is marketed towards kids and women as they influence more buying decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddball Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I understand it's about selling cars, but go back and watch a broadcast that was done before 2001 and you'll see a cleaner broadcast. If you need graphics to watch a race, then don't watch. It's just like the people who complain about how hard it is to follow the puck in hockey. Learn the sport and you'll figure it out. You don't need 50 million graphics to tell you who's in front. Just watch the broadcast and usually the car that's on the screen the most is the leader. Sorry, for pointing out the obvious. All the graphics are just clutter. When you watch qualifying and they reduce the screen to a quarter of the screen and have 50 million graphics on it, that is not a good production, that is just plain and utter crap. Less is more. If you need graphics to tell you what you are seeing and what you should believe, then watch baseball where they have the time to throw on graphics and let them sit there. Get the friggin' graphics off of racing. I don't need graphics to tell me how fast a car is as compared to the leader, I can see that he is either catching him or not. Watching a race is not rocket science and I wish they'd stop trying to make the watching of a race rocket science. The fastest car leading is the leader and everyone else is trying to catch him, if you need anything more explained to you then that basic idea, well then watch baseball where they have time to explain things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrySmalls Posted February 12, 2009 Author Share Posted February 12, 2009 I understand it's about selling cars, but go back and watch a broadcast that was done before 2001 and you'll see a cleaner broadcast. If you need graphics to watch a race, then don't watch. It's just like the people who complain about how hard it is to follow the puck in hockey. Learn the sport and you'll figure it out. You don't need 50 million graphics to tell you who's in front. Just watch the broadcast and usually the car that's on the screen the most is the leader. Sorry, for pointing out the obvious. All the graphics are just clutter. When you watch qualifying and they reduce the screen to a quarter of the screen and have 50 million graphics on it, that is not a good production, that is just plain and utter crap. Less is more. If you need graphics to tell you what you are seeing and what you should believe, then watch baseball where they have the time to throw on graphics and let them sit there. Get the friggin' graphics off of racing. I don't need graphics to tell me how fast a car is as compared to the leader, I can see that he is either catching him or not. Watching a race is not rocket science and I wish they'd stop trying to make the watching of a race rocket science. The fastest car leading is the leader and everyone else is trying to catch him, if you need anything more explained to you then that basic idea, well then watch baseball where they have time to explain things.Before 2001, were most of the broadcast on ABC Wide World of Sports? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buzzcut Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 For fans in Canada ESPN Classic will be airing classic Daytona 500's starting Friday night and all day Saturday, I assume that the States ESPN Classic is having it as well.Nope. Just the usual ESPN Classic dreck. And it is what it is, dreck. The CCSLC's resident Geelong Cats fan. Viva La Vida or Death And All His Friends. Sounds like something from a Rocky & Bullwinkle story arc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 I understand it's about selling cars, but go back and watch a broadcast that was done before 2001 and you'll see a cleaner broadcast. If you need graphics to watch a race, then don't watch. It's just like the people who complain about how hard it is to follow the puck in hockey. Learn the sport and you'll figure it out. You don't need 50 million graphics to tell you who's in front. Just watch the broadcast and usually the car that's on the screen the most is the leader. Sorry, for pointing out the obvious. All the graphics are just clutter. When you watch qualifying and they reduce the screen to a quarter of the screen and have 50 million graphics on it, that is not a good production, that is just plain and utter crap. Less is more. If you need graphics to tell you what you are seeing and what you should believe, then watch baseball where they have the time to throw on graphics and let them sit there. Get the friggin' graphics off of racing. I don't need graphics to tell me how fast a car is as compared to the leader, I can see that he is either catching him or not. Watching a race is not rocket science and I wish they'd stop trying to make the watching of a race rocket science. The fastest car leading is the leader and everyone else is trying to catch him, if you need anything more explained to you then that basic idea, well then watch baseball where they have time to explain things.Before 2001, were most of the broadcast on ABC Wide World of Sports?Way back in the day most NASCAR was seen on Wide World of Sports but it was well before 2001. More like the mid 70's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddball Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Before 2001, the broadcasts were split up between various networks, CBS, ABC, TNN, TBS, ESPN. Each track signed it's own television deal, and in 2001 NASCAR got all the tracks together to package them as a single entity to sell to the networks. I don't blame them for that, it's just the people who are doing the broadcasts, have lost sight or never had it as far as what racing is about, on track. Don't entertain me, just tell me what's going on and why. When you try to entertain me, you end up sounding like a bafoon. That's why I hate the Fox broadcast because DW, tries to entertain you and not tell you what is going on. I just got finished listening the the MRN broadcast of the Duels, and not one attempt at entertainment, it was strictly about the racing. I tune in to watch a race, not to be entertained. If I wanted to be entertained, I'd watch a trained monkey, and no that's no reference to DW or even to Clint Bowyer's comments last year about how Joe Gibbs' cars could be driven by a trained monkey. If you think that Fox does a good job on race broadcasts, then do yourself a favor and try and catch a MRN broadcast, you'll then know what a professional broadcast is versus a high school broadcast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrySmalls Posted February 12, 2009 Author Share Posted February 12, 2009 Anyway back to racing, Gordon and Kyle Busch won the duels today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
floydnimrod Posted February 12, 2009 Share Posted February 12, 2009 Great to see the underdog and one of my favorite drivers (he was born on my birthday) Jeremy Mayfield make the race. Also Allmendinger did a hell of a job battling his car today. Hopefully he gets a full time ride. Mancakes: The Bandhttps://twitter.com/FloydNimrod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEW.ERA Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Top 10 Starting Order for the 5001 Martin Truex Jr. 2 Mark Martin3 Jeff Gordon 4 Kyle Busch 5 Tony Stewart 6 Brian Vickers 7 Jimmie Johnson 8 Juan Pablo Montoya 9 Joey Logano 10 Denny HamlinAll of JGR Are in the top 10 JETS|PACK|JAYS|NUFC|BAMA|BOMBERS|RAPS|ORANJE| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oz615 Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Top 10 Starting Order for the 5001 Martin Truex Jr. 2 Mark Martin3 Jeff Gordon 4 Kyle Busch 5 Tony Stewart 6 Brian Vickers 7 Jimmie Johnson 8 Juan Pablo Montoya 9 Joey Logano 10 Denny HamlinAll of JGR Are in the top 10And not a single Ford in the the top 10,that's not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddball Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Top 10 Starting Order for the 5001 Martin Truex Jr. 2 Mark Martin3 Jeff Gordon 4 Kyle Busch 5 Tony Stewart 6 Brian Vickers 7 Jimmie Johnson 8 Juan Pablo Montoya 9 Joey Logano 10 Denny HamlinAll of JGR Are in the top 10And not a single Ford in the the top 10,that's not good. Why not? It's not the start of the race that counts, but the finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJMorris3 Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 If Mark Martin was a good driver, he would have won one in the last three years. What makes you think that just because he's in a Hendrick car, means he'll do much better? Remember, the cars are all pretty much to the same spec - it's the driver that matters, not the car.Besides, when's the last time Mark Martin won the Sprint/Nextel/Winston Cup? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrySmalls Posted February 13, 2009 Author Share Posted February 13, 2009 If Mark Martin was a good driver, he would have won one in the last three years. What makes you think that just because he's in a Hendrick car, means he'll do much better? Remember, the cars are all pretty much to the same spec - it's the driver that matters, not the car.Besides, when's the last time Mark Martin won the Sprint/Nextel/Winston Cup?Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Martin win the Winston Cup as a part owner with Rousch in 2003 when Kenseth was champion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infrared41 Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 If Mark Martin was a good driver, he would have won one in the last three years. What makes you think that just because he's in a Hendrick car, means he'll do much better? Remember, the cars are all pretty much to the same spec - it's the driver that matters, not the car.Besides, when's the last time Mark Martin won the Sprint/Nextel/Winston Cup?Looks like you know about as much about NASCAR as you do about college football there Will. It's a mix of the two. If it's the driver and not the car then why did Kyle Busch win all those races in JGR's number 18 car but his performance was nowhere near that in the Hendrick #5? Why was Joey Logano, an 18 year old rookie, able to drive the #20 to a 4th place finish while former Cup champion Terry Labonte finished 19th? A good driver can run a bad car to a better finish (Martin in DEI cars last season.) An average driver will remain average no matter how good the car is (Dale Jr. in a Hendrick car.) And a great driver will will excel in a better car (Kyle Busch moving from the 4th best car at Hendrick to the best car at JGR) If you really believe that resources and money play no role in the process then you're simply not paying attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DelayedPenalty Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 If Mark Martin was a good driver, he would have won one in the last three years. What makes you think that just because he's in a Hendrick car, means he'll do much better? Remember, the cars are all pretty much to the same spec - it's the driver that matters, not the car.Besides, when's the last time Mark Martin won the Sprint/Nextel/Winston Cup?Looks like you know about as much about NASCAR as you do about college football there Will. It's a mix of the two. If it's the driver and not the car then why did Kyle Busch win all those races in JGR's number 18 car but his performance was nowhere near that in the Hendrick #5? Why was Joey Logano, an 18 year old rookie, able to drive the #20 to a 4th place finish while former Cup champion Terry Labonte finished 19th? A good driver can run a bad car to a better finish (Martin in DEI cars last season.) An average driver will remain average no matter how good the car is (Dale Jr. in a Hendrick car.) And a great driver will will excel in a better car (Kyle Busch moving from the 4th best car at Hendrick to the best car at JGR) If you really believe that resources and money play no role in the process then you're simply not paying attention.Mark will have better cars at Hendricks than he did at DEI for sure, but he'll be playing 4th fiddle to the other drivers in the stable. Mark Martin has always been a fantastic driver, but luck hasn't gone his way sometimes. He's the Phil Mickelson of Nascar, if you will...or maybe Phil was the Mark Martin of golf... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randyc Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 If Mark Martin was a good driver, he would have won one in the last three years. What makes you think that just because he's in a Hendrick car, means he'll do much better? Remember, the cars are all pretty much to the same spec - it's the driver that matters, not the car.Besides, when's the last time Mark Martin won the Sprint/Nextel/Winston Cup?Looks like you know about as much about NASCAR as you do about college football there Will. It's a mix of the two. If it's the driver and not the car then why did Kyle Busch win all those races in JGR's number 18 car but his performance was nowhere near that in the Hendrick #5? Why was Joey Logano, an 18 year old rookie, able to drive the #20 to a 4th place finish while former Cup champion Terry Labonte finished 19th? A good driver can run a bad car to a better finish (Martin in DEI cars last season.) An average driver will remain average no matter how good the car is (Dale Jr. in a Hendrick car.) And a great driver will will excel in a better car (Kyle Busch moving from the 4th best car at Hendrick to the best car at JGR) If you really believe that resources and money play no role in the process then you're simply not paying attention.He's the Phil Mickelson of Nascar, if you will...or maybe Phil was the Mark Martin of golf...Without the a-hole reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrySmalls Posted February 15, 2009 Author Share Posted February 15, 2009 goodyear's tire "quality". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted February 15, 2009 Share Posted February 15, 2009 goodyear's tire "quality".So you want to bring back a tire war? The Brickyard was terrible but this is from lack of off season testing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrySmalls Posted February 15, 2009 Author Share Posted February 15, 2009 goodyear's tire "quality".So you want to bring back a tire war? The Brickyard was terrible but this is from lack of off season testing.I'm disappointed that Smoke and Rocket Man have to use backups to their backups for the 500 tomorrow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.