Bud,
I can understand your ponts, but have to disagree with much of what you said.
I watched many, many hours of Daytona this weekend and absolutely loved them
all. I'm not saying you are wrong by any means, just that I somehow apparently
saw them differently.
Here are some of your points and my take:
As for boring: If you are not the one actually experiencing the adrenaline
rush of driving at 8 or 9 tenths or better, you are right that watching it
can be boring. I''ve never competed other than in autocross events so don't
have your perspective here. On the other hand, the fact that they
constantly rotate between various in-car shots (out the windscreen, at the
driver, etc.) and much if not all the good passing points on the track sure
kept it interesting for me. I found the camera coverage great, though I do
agree that some more wide shots would add to the mix.
On the Butt-ugly point: I agree that a shapely classic sports car can be (but
is not always - see SP250 Daimler) a thing of beauty. BUT - I also see beauty
in the purposeful shapes of the modern cars. I've always thought form should
follow function (guess that's why I love Lotus/Caterham Sevens so much). So
flare, spoilers, wings, NACA ducts, etc. appeal to me in a big way. If money
were no object, I'd love to see if I could make a Dallara - maybe with big
block Ford power - street legal. My son and I both love that cool rectangular
scoop on the nose and the teardrop shape of the cockpit it gorgeous. You'd
have to raise it a few inches, and add A/C to compensate for the enclosed
cockpit, but what a ride that would be.
Regarding the billboard aspect: Yes there are lots of sponsor decals on the
cars now, but realistically - and especially in today's economy - you would
not have a race without them. There are only a handful of people who could
afford to campaign a car or team of cars without them. The cars still have
great paint schemes, some better than others, but cool to look at
nonetheless.
Calling the cars by their numbers: I heard the announcers do this, but
remember them mostly using the numbers to differentiate between the multiple
cars of a given team. I heard them referring just as (if not more) often to
the team name. They spent quite a bit of time talking about how great it was
to have AXA back, or about the Suntrust team, or the TRG team, or how most of
the old Brumos team was here even though the name was not.
On drivers calling out the multiple sponsors of their cars during interviews:
I admit I didn't listen to these after the race, nor many during. I don't
remember hearing any of that - could have just missed it I guess. Then again,
much of the point of sponsoring a car is to get a bit of publicity for your
company. If I were giving big bucks to a team that may not otherwise be there,
I might expect a bit of recognition. Just another sign of the times.
I do want to say that I really enjoy the little "My name is (fill in the
blank) and I am a Grand Am driver" clips they inserted throughout the race
either before or after the commercials. They were really enjoyable and offer
a glimpse of who these guys are.
All in all, I had a great time watching the race. So did Kyle.
Maybe my acceptance of the changes to racing over the years also kind of
relates to my musical tastes evolving over the years. While I have great love
for the blues and rock of the 60's and early 70's that I grew up with, I also
love the punk, alternative, grunge, and other genres that followed. I Have to
say that Disco still sucks, though - I will remain closed-minded on that one
as long as I'm around. Maybe Disco is my musical equivalent of NASCAR. :-)
- David Booker
Hopelessly addicted all forms of non-NASCAR racing
Long Island
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
Suggested annual donation $12.75
http://www.team.net/archive
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/spridgets
|