NASCAR-Nomics: It’s Field Size Stupid
The genesis of this post was the rumor that NASCAR was considering cutting the field sizes for its top three series’.
I was further spurred on by the Orlando Sentinel’s Tania Ganguli. She cited an SI story where Chip Ganassi thinks “by 2010 eight cars will leave NASCAR and not be replaced.” That story is dated 13 Oct. as most related ones are. However, this La Times forum notes the rumor and it’s dated 12 Oct., and going back further, Yahoo’s head yahoo Bob Margolis first wrote about a possible field cut on 11 Oct. (How not so shocking, Margolis at the head of a rumor train!).
On its face a smaller field would solve a couple problems, the top 35 rule being chief among them. However, lets say it’s fact, not rumor and the field for the season opener at Daytona this year, or next is cut to the rumored 36.
The 500 traditionally has one of the largest entry lists in the sport, the 2008 edition had 54 individual cars entered and several years in recent past had 60 entrants.
Using the Ganassi figure of eight on this years 500 puts the entry number at 46, still over the current starting filed of 43. The July Daytona event has similar numbers entered each year.
But wait there’s more. This is not just a Speed Weeks/Daytona phenomena although the home track of NASCAR does show very large numbers.
47 entered the August event at Bristol. This week at Martinsville shows 45 entries. In fact through a bit of numbers crunching the average field size, including this weeks Martinsville event is 46 entries.
I’ll grant you over the next year or so a couple teams may way fall by the wayside (I’m lookin’ at you Robby Gordon, and maybe Ganassi) but enough to justify a mandatory field size of 36 in Cup?
Whatever group Margolis was overhearing in the garage was obviously gathered around a crack pipe. A field of 36 just AIN’t happening Period. End. Of. Story.
There’s another point to be made and I refer to something Tania Ganguli said in the post linked above. Ganguli noted the “36 rumor” and wrote it “makes a lot of sense,” adding “owning a race-team is not a money-making proposition.”
I beg to differ and offer two examples.
First is Andrew Murstein of Medallion Financial who has been shopping around for a team to buy into or own outright. As part of the “bargain” hunting process he has been given a peek into the inner workings of a couple teams.
“NASCAR teams make more profit than teams in any other sports, and I know this is going to be a surprise statement, but that includes some of the teams in the NFL,” said Murstein, who has seen the books on two NASCAR teams but can’t identify them because he signed confidentiality agreements.
“The average NHL team or NBA team either breaks even or operates at a loss. The NASCAR teams I’ve looked at do very well.”
Who might those teams doing “very well” be? Forbes magazine can tell you, here’s their 2008 list of NASCAR’s richest teams: (Here’s the 2006/07 list, note the revenue figures)
Hendricks — $335 million
Roush Fenway — $313 million
Joe Gibbs — $184 million
Gillett Evernham — $150 million
Richard Childress — $130 million
Dal Earnhardt Inc. — $109 million
Penske Racing — $100 million
Ganassi Racing — $94 million
Michael Waltrip — $86 million
Yates Racing — $74 million
Red Bull Racing — $54 million
Petty Enterprises — $44 million
Haas CNC Racing — $41 million
Bill Davis Racing — $36 million
Robby Gordon — $28 million
If anyone one thinks the top 2/3rds of that list aren’t making a profit, however small or large, you’re standing in that same crack circle with Margolis and “friends.”
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_c.png?x-id=f42cf8bb-4d7b-4f7f-a055-2c61c01acbc0)
I’m not sure I understand the thinking behind cutting the Cup field to 36 cars. Doesn’t it stand to reason that the field size will support whatever number are entered? If less than 43 cars are entered, then the race will contain however many show up. Is it an effort to maintain “exclusivity”? If so, I think it’s a bad move, since the guys you’d be hurting are the ones who are borderline teams already. I mean, of the teams currently running, how many are legit 36 race attempters? 38? 40? Even if 5 of those teams go out of business, then you’ve got maybe 35 full-time teams and maybe 3-4 cars that show up as semi-one-offs (your Sterling Marlins and Derrike Copes). Then you’re still trying to send home some of the guys who have actually survived the economy downturn? Bad move…
My point exactly Andy.
No matter the field size there will always be several occasions each year when the entered number of cars is more than whatever the field size is.
If that size is set at 36 or even 40 what about those odd times when more want to race?
In the back of my mind this rumor may be laying the groundwork for franchising in the future. A business model using franchising in effect sets the number of entries whether it b e the current 43 or rumored 36.
If that notion is correct NASCAR is about to jump off a cliff they may be very sorry in doing so.
One only has to look at the decades long losing franchises in the NFL (Cardinals anyone), MLB (cubs anyone) and NHL to understand it’s not the business model that makes for strong winning teams its the management of those teams.
I don’t see a need to cut the Cup field. If they don’t have a full field, so what? The truck race at Talladega didn’t have a full field and the world didn’t stop spinning.
It might be good to reduce the Nationwide field to 40 just to cull some of the Start and Park teams, but that can also be accomplished in other ways.
Agreed Doug, cutting field size is idiotic in the extreme. There are too many events on the schedule where local teams enter for the exposure or others that bring the prestige for sponsors for making the starting field.
If anything it should be increased to 44 to even the rows and then adjust the top 35 rule in a more workable way. Or shitcan it all together.
I find it difficult to believe the value assigned to DEI, & MWR.
I do find the trend, to ownership, by people, or groups. With non racing backgrounds disturbing.
I think this will lead to more Ginn, type meltdowns in the future.
Five years ago in NA$CAR, the owners had a long term love of, & commitment to racing.
I feel the new people coming in have a long term love of, & commitment to money. With the current state of the economy, in general, & the auto makers, in particular.
Some of these new owners, probably wouldn’t think twice about shutting down an entire operation. Taking the tax write off, & moving on.
dawg
Please… don’t even try to compare the Ginn situation, that was flawed from the start, to partners like Gillet at GEM and other new financial partners.
There is none.
As for DEI, why the doubt? Teresa still owns the rights to Dale Sr’. name, that alone is worth big bucks.
Also, those numbers are from ‘06-’07, when DEI still had Junior and Bud.
Um no, the numbers listed in the post are current values, those cited in the link are from 2006-07.
Look again.