The champion racer told reporters, “I’m excited for the teams and the opportunity they have to work together and hopefully drive costs down — and have a more clear and concise voice in the industry on a variety of aspects. I’m happy that the teams are working together to drive costs down. It’s a very expensive sport. Hopefully we are able to . . . make our sport stronger.”
The speaker was not an NHRA drag racer. He was Jimmie Johnson, the six-time Sprint Cup Series champion. His remarks were in reaction to the announcement last week from nine prominent NASCAR team owners that they have formed what they call the “Race Team Alliance.” The business association’s focus is to increase revenues and budget efficiency for participating Sprint Cup operations.
The RTA has drawn sneers from racetrack mogul Bruton Smith, but otherwise most appear so far to have taken a cautious, positive approach to the new business alliance that’s similar to the NHRA’s PRO.
Johnson said, “I’m fortunate to drive at Hendrick Motorsports and have the best of any situation, and it’s still tough and it’s still lean.”
The emergence of the RTA and Johnson’s affirmation that NASCAR teams have to streamline their budgets only prove that the need to cut costs is not drag-racing-specific. With the IndyCar Series, despite quality racing, struggling to put fans in the stands, the topic stretches across all motorsports.
If American auto racing can’t make significant progress on the revenue-stream front – and sponsorships of all proportions are hard to come by — then all sanctions are forced to concentrate on the cost-cutting end. And that’s a pressing need for the NHRA, with its costs rising each year.
I’m fortunate to drive at Hendrick Motorsports and have the best of any situation, and it’s still tough and it’s still lean. – Jimmie Johnson
Why? Racers don’t want to go slower. And fans might not be able to tell the difference between the current envelope-pushing elapsed times and speeds, but they don’t want to see slower numbers pop up on the scoreboard. It’s the same mentality as when people dine out: smaller, still-reasonable portions would promote healthier eating habits, but Americans want their “money’s worth” of food on their plates. What might be good for us is something we don’t want.
Consider what popular former Funny Car racer Dean Skuza said: “We’re not like NASCAR. We don’t conserve tires. We don’t conserve fuel. We don’t conserve nothin’! What’s more American than that?!”
So forget talk about reducing wing measurements and tire sizes or about other mandated performance-related technical specifications that would be activated simply to alleviate excessive expenses.
Drag-racing pioneer Jerry Ruth said, “Drag racing is about making more power all the time. If you slow ‘em down, there won’t be anybody at the races. You can’t do that.”
He was on a panel for a public discussion at the Wally Parks Museum at Pomona some years ago. The moderator asked another panelist, “What’s the most important thing to drag racing that has been developed since you’ve been involved?” The panelist replied, “The parachute.” Ruth said he thought to himself, “What are you talking about?! That was stopping. Drag racers never even thought about stopping. It’s about winning. What’s wrong with you?!” Said Ruth, “I mean, stopping is kind of a necessity so you can live to try to race again. It’s all about winning. Drag racers are extremely competitive people.”
He said if the NHRA appointed him the Czar of Cost-Cutting, he would look less at performance-limiting moves.
“Some things, they’ve gone so far now that they can’t return. Remember, this is a performance sport,” Ruth said.
“I’d probably break the teams up if I could do it. The big-money guys have three and four cars. That’s making it real dominating. There’s only about three teams that are in the hunt. I’d try some way to maybe get a handle on that if I could.”
When we clean out closets, we’ll never get the desired result of condensed and organized belongings unless we’re willing to part with an extensive number of items. Cost-cutting isn’t easy, just necessary.
So, if that might not be the answer, what is?
The most immediate solution, then, would seem to lie in schedule changes or modifications to the racing format. Before any of the NHRA schedule-makers go into shock, it’s imperative to point out that something must give. When we clean out closets, we’ll never get the desired result of condensed and organized belongings unless we’re willing to part with an extensive number of items. Cost-cutting isn’t easy, just necessary.
Therefore, the NHRA has to take a hard look at its schedule. To its credit, it has an oh-so-slight edge on NASCAR when it comes to geographic diversity. NASCAR has tried and failed so far to crack the Northwest region, and that’s a point the NHRA takes pride in. Otherwise it might long ago have dumped the dumpy Pacific Raceways facility from its association. To be fair, the racers might not have enjoyed the racing surface at times at the Seattle-area track, but they always have said they do relish the oxygen-rich tuning environment and the postcard setting in the shadow of Mount Rainier.
NASCAR has a dozen venues it visits twice a season. The NHRA has three: Pomona, which offers favorable weather and represents the roots of the sport; Las Vegas, a trademark-outstanding Bruton Smith-owned facility that draws a crowd; and Charlotte, where zMAX Dragway is described as “The Bellagio of Dragstrips” but can’t pack in the fans.
Ruth, referring to the spring Four-Wide Nationals, said, “That four-abreast . . . that’s just a joke. I don’t like it. What’s next? You going to run them right at each other? Is that the next thing we do?”
“Big Daddy” Don Garlits attended a race at zMAX Dragway, arguably the most beautiful, state-of-the-art facility on the NHRA tour. What he took away was a grim report. He said he didn’t think the Charlotte event he witnessed drew “enough of a crowd to pay the light bill.”
So could the NHRA benefit by stopping at those three places just one time? Yes. Will it? Who knows?
With excellent promoters and decent-or-better facilities, in most cases, yes, it would be difficult to rearrange the lineup. But leadership in any arena calls for hard and bold decision-making.
The Southeast is loaded with races at Atlanta, Bristol, Charlotte, and Gainesville. Can the NHRA fashion some sort of round-robin arrangement among those four tracks? The Southwest, too, has two races each at Pomona and Las Vegas and one each at Phoenix, Houston, and Dallas. The Southwest tracks are spaced out greater than the Southeast tracks are, so the idea of alternating those might be of concern. The Midwest has Brainerd, Topeka, St. Louis, Joliet, Norwalk, and Indianapolis on the list from May through September.
With excellent promoters and decent-or-better facilities, in most cases, yes, it would be difficult to rearrange the lineup. But leadership in any arena calls for hard and bold decision-making.
Balancing appearances in the various regions of the country is a delicate task, as the NHRA tries to avoid depleting the resources. Back-to-back-to-back races at Atlanta, Bristol, Charlotte, and Gainesville might mean none would draw well. However, having haulers crisscross the country – given the astronomical pump price for a gallon of fuel – is wasteful and exhausting. Perhaps a more logical flow, geographically, to the schedule is in order. Regional weather considerations might mean the scheduler would have to juggle a Farmers Almanac with the various local activities schedules. Already the NHRA keeps a close eye on other racing series schedules to avoid conflicts.
But a peek back through the annals of drag racing shows that the Finals, for example, attracted reported crowds of 37,000 and 40,000. That was when the NHRA had only a handful of national events.Supply and demand worked its magic then. With today’s NHRA schedule, the supply-and-demand filter produces a more dismal result.
The NHRA has tried, with its HD Partners deal that fell through, to sell the assets of its professional series, separating that from the sportsman classes and Pro Modified competition. Having a pro-only event certainly is no new consideration. Some factions applaud that, because it means a shorter program. Others bemoan the idea, preferring tradition and honoring the grassroots segment of the sport.
A faster, more streamlined program might be better in keeping with a sport that entertains fans in a series of three- or four-second bursts. In an Internet-savvy, instant-gratification age with most people possessing the attention span of a gnat, a shorter racing day might be smarter.
A shorter weekend might be smarter. How much harm would it cause to cut the number of qualifying sessions to two Friday with eliminations Saturday and Sunday as back-up/rain date? The NHRA needs to be respectful of people’s time – the fans’ and the race teams’. A two-day race weekend drastically would reduce travel costs.
Clearly, no easy answers lurk in this process. These might not be feasible. But they should serve as a springboard for the discussion that needs to take place at the NHRA headquarters at Glendora, Calif.