The Frontstretch: Did You Notice? ... A Cost-Cutting Idea, Toyota's Five-Year Plan That Wasn't, And Points Projecting by Thomas Bowles -- Wednesday October 12, 2011

Go to site navigation Go to article

Did You Notice?… What this new point system does versus the old format? Let’s take a look at how the two compare four races into NASCAR’s Chase:

Kevin Harvick is the one Sprint Cup driver who has clearly benefited with the new points system.

Current Standings
Carl Edwards – 2,161
Kevin Harvick – 2,160 (-1)
Jimmie Johnson – 2,157 (-4)
Brad Keselowski – 2,150 (-11)
Matt Kenseth – 2,149 (-12)
Kurt Busch – 2,145 (-16)
Tony Stewart – 2,142 (-19)
Kyle Busch – 2,141 (-20)
Dale Earnhardt, Jr. – 2,118 (-43)
Jeff Gordon – 2,114 (-47)
Ryan Newman – 2,107 (-54)
Denny Hamlin – 2,082 (-79)

Standings With Old Format Used
Carl Edwards – 5,642
Jimmie Johnson – 5,638 (-4)
Kevin Harvick – 5,631 (-11)
Brad Keselowski – 5,613 (-29)
Matt Kenseth – 5,600 (-42)
Kurt Busch – 5,591 (-51)
Tony Stewart – 5,586 (-66)
Kyle Busch – 5,562 (-80)
Dale Earnhardt, Jr. – 5,489 (-153)
Jeff Gordon – 5,484 (-158)
Ryan Newman – 5,453 (-189)
Denny Hamlin – 5,370 (-272)

(Remember, under the old format drivers would start at 5,000, with a ten-point bonus for every race won. Since Denny Hamlin and Brad Keselowski, the wild card entries were left with no bonus points they were each given a total of 5,000 to start.)

On the surface, these numbers seem fairly similar. Just one position changes hands, with Jimmie Johnson moving past Kevin Harvick for second on the strength of his Kansas victory. Surprisingly, the margin between Edwards and Johnson remains the same – four points – while Harvick, who has one top-5 finish in four Chase races drops to third, 11 off the pace. Brad Keselowski, this year’s “Cinderella” sits fourth, 29 points behind.

But here’s where the big difference comes in, showing how much harder bad days are to make up under this new system. For Keselowski, if we were playing under the 2010 rules should he go out and win Charlotte on Saturday night, leading the most laps he could take over the point lead as long as everyone else finished third or worse (without a laps led bonus). Here’s how the points would work out:

Brad Keselowski (wins, leads the most laps) – 195
Carl Edwards (if he finishes third, without leading a lap) – 165
Point Swing: 30

Assuming Johnson and Harvick finish below Edwards, too, that puts Keselowski in the driver’s seat. But let’s take a look at that scenario under the new system:

Brad Keselowski (wins, leads the most laps) – 48
Carl Edwards (if he finishes third, without leading a lap) – 41
Point Swing: 7

As you can see, that’s nowhere near enough for Keselowski to take over the points lead. In order for Edwards to give up his spot, he would actually have to finish seventh or worse. That means while the numbers look small – remember, Keselowski has just an 11-point deficit under the new system – looks can be deceiving. It appears these drivers are closer in the standings, but leapfrogging someone else has actually grown more difficult.

As drivers and teams figure out the nuances of this new system (remember, it takes a year or two for patterns to develop) my fear is the theme of minimizing bad days will get to their heads. How do you keep yourself from digging a hole in the standings? Playing it conservative, going for the top-10 finish instead of taking a last-minute risk that could bury you. Take a look at Harvick; under the new system, he’s much closer to Johnson despite leading just 11 laps and posting just a single top-5 finish. But unlike Johnson, Harvick has minimized his bad days; his worst result is 12th while Johnson has that ho-hum 18th at New Hampshire. In that race, Johnson got aggressive, made contact with Kyle Busch while charging towards the top 10 and that cost him. It was better for him to sit back, hold his position and wind up 11th or 12th; that would actually have the No. 48 sitting in the points lead right now.

Or how about Jeff Gordon? At New Hampshire, the No. 24 car had the speed to win but couldn’t take the risk of running out of fuel on the last lap. Your end result was the DuPont car putt-putting around, at about 80 percent speed in order to preserve the top-5 finish (good day) versus a 25th-place disaster. And with fuel mileage finishes possible at least twice, maybe three times more during the Chase you wonder how many times that’ll happen again.

The bottom line is while the new system is easy to read, it’s still not encouraging the risk-taking during the postseason that should accompany the run for a title. We’ll see how the Chase plays out, but like a rear-view mirror, this battle may look closer than it will appear three, even four races from now.

Did You Notice?… NASCAR has a rare opportunity to force owners to cut costs? With Clint Bowyer leaving for Michael Waltrip Racing, kicked out the door at the No. 33 car Richard Childress Racing will almost certainly cut back to three 2012 teams. (By the way, who can’t run a team for $13 million? In this economy? Talk about costs spiraling out of control… chances are Austin Dillon was the guy on the other side of the negotiating table, looking for his Cup ride and saying, “No amount of money is good enough to buy me three more years in Nationwide.”) Meanwhile, over at Roush Fenway Racing lack of sponsorship will almost certainly kill David Ragan’s No. 6, cutting their total from four cars to three with sponsorship for Matt Kenseth shaky at best.

Those moves, in turn would settle the 2012 landscape of Cup cars to resemble the following:

Hendrick Motorsports (4 cars): Dale Earnhardt, Jr., Jeff Gordon, Jimmie Johnson, Kasey Kahne
Michael Waltrip Racing (3 cars): Clint Bowyer, David Reutimann, Martin Truex, Jr.
Richard Childress Racing (3 cars): Jeff Burton, Kevin Harvick, Paul Menard
Roush Fenway Racing (3 cars): Greg Biffle, Carl Edwards, Matt Kenseth
Joe Gibbs Racing (3 cars): Kyle Busch, Denny Hamlin, Joey Logano
Stewart-Haas Racing (3 cars): Ryan Newman, Danica Patrick (part-time), Tony Stewart
Penske Racing (2 cars): Kurt Busch, Brad Keselowski
Richard Petty Motorsports (2 cars): A.J. Allmendinger, Marcos Ambrose
Earnhardt Ganassi Racing (2 cars): Jamie McMurray, Juan Pablo Montoya
Front Row Motorsports (2 cars): David Gilliland, Kvapil/Yeley split

Single-Car Teams: JTG Daugherty Racing (No. 47), Furniture Row Racing (No. 78), Tommy Baldwin Racing (No. 36), FAS Lane Racing (No. 32), Phoenix Racing (No. 51), TRG Motorsports (No. 71), Germain Racing (No. 13)
Gone: 1 Roush Fenway car, 1 Richard Childress car, 2 Red Bull cars (four teams)
Added: 1 Michael Waltrip car, 1 Stewart-Haas car (part-time)
Net Loss: -2

As you can see, right now we’re down to just 34 full-time teams next season; and of that group, only 25-27 are set with sponsorship for 2012 and beyond. That leaves up to 9-11 start-and-parks per race – nearly a quarter of the field – along with a big, million-dollar question out on the table: how do you create new opportunities for owners? How do you convince people, in this bad economy to invest in NASCAR over even IndyCar racing, whose entry list has swelled to a record high 34 for Las Vegas this weekend? (Think about that for a minute; there’s a higher number of fully-sponsored programs in open-wheel.)

My opinion, considering the circumstances is for NASCAR to go radical, seizing the opening and further reduce their “cap” on how many teams can be owned by one person. Right now, the limit is four but why not cut that number back to three, starting in the 2013 season? Sure, it sounds contradictory at first, limiting expansion on a shrinking grid for the owners already in place. But the move is based to keep the overhead down, allowing new ones to compete much easier while leaving room for growth in an aging establishment. Considering you need a multi-car team to be consistently successful these days – and it costs roughly $20-$25 million per team – a startup owner, to be competitive is faced with four-car teams pooling roughly $75 – $100 million to battle against them. And who in the world can raise that amount of money in this economy, let alone compete against the information sharing that exists with those programs?

That’s why it’s important to act now, striking while sponsorship problems have affected even NASCAR’s rich and famous. Rick Hendrick would be the only owner forced to cut back by a three-car “cap” beginning in 2013, and in some ways, that’s only fair; Jack Roush was punished by reducing his load from five cars to four in 2009, even though he had sponsorship in place for all his vehicles. Hendrick can pawn off that fourth car somewhere, either to a satellite team (Phoenix Racing?) or another program that comes up through the ranks. Certainly, the weird, “B” team relationships like Roush Fenway – Richard Petty Motorsports and Hendrick – Stewart-Haas cannot be prevented.

But at least, by forcing teams into separate shops and causing some type of official owner separation, on paper to the outside, unknowledgable observer no one would be running with more than three teams. It’s less intimidating, less costly for an owner to get in and you’ve trimmed the fat of these megateams, throwing about 50-75 people off the payroll so a potential new owner doesn’t think he needs to hire 400 employees to be successful. It’s short-term pain, in the form of pink slips but how can other opportunities become available when only four or five teams can ever offer them? Maybe those limits give Tommy Baldwin Racing an opportunity to grow, picking up people that were released and pooling additional funding together to fight against the megateams. Better competitive balance and lower costs will encourage growth; NASCAR can’t control the spending habits of the owners, but they can control how many cars they have so why not use that restriction in the face of a failing business model?

Did You Notice?… All the panic when Toyota entered the Sprint Cup ranks? Within five years, American patriots feared a foreign automaker would be dominating the NASCAR circuit, piling up championships while running Ford, Chevy, and Dodge out of town. If you believed some prognosticators, right now we’d have a grid of 25 Toyotas, a rundown 1995 Ford Taurus, some Chevy Luminas and, well, that’s about it.

Toyota’s five-year foray into the Sprint Cup Series hasn’t left them with the championship results they would have expected by now.

Except that hasn’t happened. Chevy collected their ninth straight manufacturer title Sunday, making Toyota 0-for-5 in their bid to reach the top of the NASCAR ladder. They also have yet to win a single Cup Series championship – Jimmie Johnson controls that hardware – and have just two drivers in this year’s Chase, Kyle Busch and Denny Hamlin, with neither one looking capable of breaking that ugly streak.

Instead, what Toyota has done, after five years of up-and-down results is draw the line at how many teams they’ll support. Right now, their goal is to provide TRD engines for just six programs in 2012: three at Joe Gibbs Racing and three at Michael Waltrip Racing. JTG Daugherty and Germain Racing will likely be forced to beg for scraps. That leaves an opening for Ford, Chevy, and Dodge to expand, picking those programs up should they so choose.

Will it work for Toyota? At least it brings their two megateams into tighter focus going forward. But it also assures the feared “foreign takeover” of this sport isn’t happening anytime soon; with Chevy at well over a dozen programs, I think it’s safe to say the Bowtie Brigade remains firmly in control. And can you imagine if Toyota pulled out of the sport right now? We might struggle to have half a starting grid next season; so hopefully, ill will towards the foreign manufacturer will finally start to fade away. They’re here to stay… and they’re not here to decimate the starting grid.

Editor’s Note: Looking for Quick Hits? This column got a little long, so those will be placed in Tom’s Athlon Sports column out tomorrow morning. Be sure to check it out!

Connect with Tom!

Contact Tom Bowles

The Frontstretch Newsletter, back in 2014 gives you more of the daily news, commentary, and racing features from your favorite writers you know and love. Don’t waste another minute – click here to sign up now. We’re here to make sure you stay informed … so make sure you jump on for the ride!

Today on the Frontstretch:
NASCAR Easter Eggs: A Few Off-Week Nuggets to Chew On
Five Points To Ponder: NASCAR’s Take-A-Breath Moment
Truckin’ Thursdays: Top Five All-Time Truck Series Drivers
Going By the Numbers: A Week Without Racing Can Bring Relief But Kill Momentum


©2000 - 2008 Thomas Bowles and Thanks for visiting the Frontstretch!

10/12/2011 11:53 AM

At a time when NASCAR is struggling to fill fields, you want to limit the number of cars a team can own?

If I were NASCAR I’d be asking Hendrick to field ten teams.

10/12/2011 01:47 PM

You most certainly must be a democrat – punish the successful to give to the downtrotten. BS, I say.

Per your numbers, you’re down to 34 full-timers next year, and then you want to limit another 1 (Hendrick from 4 to 3)? The answer lies in and of itself with the sanctioning body. Nascar can release at least a half dozen of their “Official…(insert sponsor) of Nascar” and let the lesser teams pick those sponsors up. That step would surely knock down, if not eliminate, the Start ‘n Parkers, boost the lesser teams to compete with the big boys, and would not create this “its unfair that those mega-teams have so much money and resources” drivel. Nascar is the problem, not the teams. The teams are intelligent, efficient and are working within the guidelines. Why should they get punished? The parity pendulum has swung too far! And the fans have let it be known. With the falling of newsprint, website visits, attendance, merchandise and TV viewership. No, nope, no way, nada, the teams are not the problem. The whole damn system is. And that starts at the top.

Your consistent “unfair” articles are shameful. The DYN column used to be my fav of FS, not any more. I can tell you that if your whining continues for the rest of this year, I will not be back next year reading your refuse.

10/12/2011 03:03 PM

I have said all along that this point system is worse. The flaw in the points is that it punishes a bad finish more than it rewards a good one. Essentially they took the gap between finishing positions from 3 points down to one. In essence the system is exactly the same from 43rd to 12th or 11th. Now, though, the gaps between points for 10th through 6th and 5th through 2nd that were 4 and 5 points have also been taken to 1 point. In other words the old system taken down to a common denominator had point gap ratios of 1.33 and 1.67. Also the reward for leading a lap was 5 points or 1.67 under the old system (reduced to a common denominator), now it’s only 1 point. It looks closer, but it’s actually worse than before about rewarding running in the top 5 or top 10. The Keselowski example above illustrates this perfectly. The system punishes a bad finish more than it rewards a good one.

10/12/2011 03:56 PM

While I Do Not cheer for Toyotas (Hamlin last yr to dethrone JJ)…I Would think the Narrow minded should be thanking Toyota for entering & adding cash while others were looking to cut back. The injection of dollars Toyota has added is a benifit for all..Also THANK YOU to All Nascar (team & cop) sponsors for without them there is no Nascar & yes I am loyal to Nascar sponsors daily because of it. Not always to my fav’s but to the people that make it work…PS All cost cutting measures need to be explored because we’re not going back to the 90’s

10/12/2011 05:26 PM

Ummm…. Tommy Baldwin Racing is adding a second car in the number 35 AND TRG motorsports is adding a second car as well in the 77. Also it is FRM’s goal is to run the 55 full time next year to fund the 34/38. AND Inception Motorsports is running David Stremme in the 30 full time next year. And LFR and the 95 could possibly go full time (although it will probably be similar to the Wood Brothers). So there are four more cars, not including the new teams that, no matter the economy, always appear.

The Mad Man
10/12/2011 05:38 PM

Looks like Toyota is following their past history. 5 years and they haven’t won a championship so they’re cutting back team support. The next move will be further cuts to team support in that they’ll only support one organization, like JGR. Then it’ll be Bye Bye NASCAR, even if they win a championship. They’re a creature of habit.

As to the revamped points system, yet another attempt to artificially stimulate fan interest in a system that’s disliked by 80% of the fans and has failed to produce the much ballyhooed about results. Brain Farce is either too egomaniacal or is lacking the intelligence to see that the play-off system is a failure and it should be dumped. The PGA tried it and it flopped. The NHRA tried it and the fans are unhappy with it and are voting with their wallets just like in NASCAR. The full race season championship makes more sense than being an NFL wanna-be and driving folks away. But until Brain Farce is replaced, you’ll continue to see “more tweaks” in a vain attempt to make the failed play-off system work. You’ll see more fans continue to leave. And Brain Farce might eventually ask, “Where has everybody gone?” during a brief moment of sobriety. Whoever replaces him will have a tough time selling any changes to the fans to improve things.

10/12/2011 05:46 PM

Now is the time for nascar to get rid of the top 35 rule. Right now, there are only 33-34 viable teams that run every week anyway. If I was a brand new sponsor/team to the sport, I’m sure I’d like to know we’d be racing every week and not worry about having owner points.

10/12/2011 08:44 PM

Hendrick has 7 cars with Hendrick-Stewart, but NASCAR gives it their OK.

Brian France Sucks
10/12/2011 10:46 PM

Two points:

1. NA$CAR ain’t cutting teams to 3 maximum. Why? Rick Hendrick owns 4 teams. Case closed.

2. The new points system was devised to be easier understood by the idiot running the show (France). Fans understood the old system just fine. The new system was supposed to encourage winning, but since France is a moron who most likely ate lead paint chips as a tot, we get a system that heavily penalizes bad finishes while not encouraging going for wins.

Bill S.
10/13/2011 02:41 PM

I don’t see Ford or Dodge setting the world on fire either. Even though Ford is arguably the most innovative U.S. car company and the one least likely to take a government handout.

MAYBE – and this is just a thought – NASCAR is less important to the manufacturers than simply staying afloat. Toyota certainly suffered from the Japanese disasters earlier this year, plus last year’s quality issues, so MAYBE NASCAR is not a huge priority for them.

Ford has a history of eating its young and failing to support any organization besides Jack Roush. They lost Jeff Gordon, Kasey Kahne and now Chase Elliott due to their own indifference.

It is no wonder that Hendrick, with his ill-gotten millions, is allowed to run amok with seven teams. Even Bill Elliott, one of Ford’s former golden boys, has consigned his son to a development contract with Rick Hendrick. (Papa George is spinning in his grave.)

So, you have one company whose presence in NASCAR is personified by a convicted felon, and who also has its hand out for government money every time the economy suffers a blip.

MAYBE Tom, you are just suffering from tunnel vision. In the midst of a worldwide economic meltdown, just how important is NASCAR? Not very. And even less with the leadership in th executive offices of NASCAR and the leadership of the dominant and felonious 7-car team!


Contact Tom Bowles

Recent articles from Tom Bowles:

Did You Notice? ... Breaking Down A Sprint Cup Season Eight Races In
Did You Notice? ... Drivers Still Make A Difference... But Silly Cautions Don't
Did You Notice? ... NASCAR's Free Agent Lynchpin, Uncomfortable Reality And Gambling
Did You Notice? ... Toyota Trouble, Limping Into Action And Testing The Waters
Did You Notice? ... Keep On Asking, And You Will Receive A Qualifying Sigh Of Relief

If you want to know more about Tom Bowles or to view all of his articles here at the Frontstretch, check out his archive and bio page.

Want even more Tom Bowles? Check out Tom's archive at