NASCAR Was Indeed Great In The Past And, Yes, It Is Today

In years past, NASCAR racing was good, but over the course of many years there were only a few drivers who won consistently. One of them was, obviously, Richard Petty.

I always find it so interesting when I hear people reminisce about NASCAR’s past. They seem to wear an especially strong style of rose-colored glasses as they romanticize about the time gone by.

I am guilty of the same when I recall favorite races with Dale Earnhardt, but for others, it colors so much of their memories that nothing NASCAR produces is “acceptable” in its current form.

I heartily disagree. The entertainment I get from watching the 2012 NASCAR Sprint Cup season is incomparable.

Certainly I admit that some races of old were extraordinary and some drivers mythological in their skill and prowess. The past holds gems throughout its rich history.

Recently I have been reading my colleagues’, Tom Higgins and Steve Waid, book “Junior Johnson: Brave in Life”. The book is a fascinating account of Robert Glenn Johnson, Jr. – or Junior as he is widely known.

In the myriad stories told, Junior tells of seasons in the early 1980s when Darrell Waltrip and Bobby Allison swapped wins for seven or more races. For fans of those drivers that was amazing and assuredly fun to watch, but if your driver was not one of the two winning, it must have been a bit dismal.

Looking even further back, when Richard Petty was dicing it up with the likes of David Pearson and others, yet continued to dominate with many wins per season, it must have been a bore to some.

Jimmie Johnson is the most recent dominant star I have experienced in today’s NASCAR. I found it tedious to watch him win so many times during his five championship seasons.

But, now that we’ve had a reprieve, I’m anxious to see how far Johnson can go in his career. I have come full circle and find myself thrilled by the prospect of Johnson winning and possibly setting more records.

In addition, current racing has a depth of competition that is unparalleled in NASCAR. In any given week far more than half the field can win.

For example, in 2011, there were 18 different winners.

In the current season there have already been 10 different winners in 14 races.

Gone are the days when Ned Jarrett won the Southern 500 by 14 laps. Or that Earnhardt won the championship in 1987 by 489 points.

Now we have seasons like 2001 where the championship was determined on the very last lap of the final race of the season.

My point is not to malign, discredit, or undervalue the stars of the past, but to point out that what is perceived by some is more an emotional attachment to the time period than an actual realistic look at the week in and week out racing that was going on.

Another driver who seemed to dominate the competition was the late Dale Earnhardt (left). Today, however, it would appear competition has equalized. It's a given that, more than ever before, more drivers can win races.

Furthermore, I can completely identify with the folks who look to the past and remember it fondly, and hold it as the bar with which to compare all other eras of NASCAR. As I have stated often, I am an Earnhardt fan and recall the years I watched him race as “the best ever.”

Every book I read, however, relates that situations NASCAR is experiencing in 2012 it also did the same in each part of its past.

Accusations of cheating by competitors, criticism of NASCAR’s iron fist and grumblings of its lack of consistency circulated since year one.

Domination of one team stinking up the field of competition until the rest finally caught up with, and eventually surpassed, the so-called “king of the heap du jour”.

Now there is a pervasive feeling that NASCAR is nothing but “corporate image guys” on the track. Names like Jeff Gordon and Johnson are offered up as examples of polished spokesmen who have no relation to racers of old; they lack greasy fingernails and an intimate relationship with every part on the car.

That may be true. But that is the evolution of the sport. Larger purses were always sought to infuse more talent in NASCAR. As the economy waxes and wanes sponsorship money is more difficult to come by – so having a driver who looks good and understands how to hawk for companies is a highly sought after commodity.

Safety concerns have led to a far more technological set up of the car, which in turn has led to college-educated engineers, diagnostic interpreters and other specialized team members to become integral to the race team.

No longer can a driver with a car, a few hardscrabble guys and sponsorship from a couple of Mom and Pop stores make the race on Sunday. It’s sad, yes, but the nature of change.

The bottom line is racing was spectacular in every year of NASCAR in which you were a fan. Each “era” carries great times for the person who remembers them. As history shows, however, the same arguments, conditions and squabbling existed “then” as it does “now”.

Jeff Burton was speaking to the NASCAR media at his test session at the newly reconfigured Bristol track this week. He voiced what has been on my mind for years. Burton said that NASCAR is the only sport that is scrutinized so heavily. He mentions that in the NFL, people may be upset with a referee’s call, but the NFL itself is not slammed.

Burton went on to say that not every race is going to be spectacular. Some will be fantastic while others may be “sleepers.” He continued by saying that not every NBA game is great either. “Some suck,” he said succinctly.

Racing at the Sprint Cup level is inherently flawed yet still vastly entertaining.  Talent runs amok, personalities bubble over (the Busch brothers, Tony Stewart, Kevin Harvick and Carl Edwards, among others), and the racing is still drawing crowds.

My feelings are, Sprint Cup racing is still the sport to which I gravitate every weekend for 10 months of every year. I root for different drivers, am awed by talent, captivated by teamwork, and infected by brash behavior. I get my investment back tenfold when I put the time in to watch NASCAR – still.

Of course, I will always miss the best who ever was… Dale Earnhardt.

Excuse me while I take off my rose-colored glasses to wipe away a few tears.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • frederickus

    My reasons for dropping NASCAR are as follows: 1. Common Templates. When all of these cars became the same bar of soap moving through the air I realized that the fun factor was taken away. 2. The death of Alan Kulwicki. I was a monster fan of the “Polish victory lap”.

  • frederickus

    I’d like to point something out about Dale Earnhardt Sr.. Ron Fellows, Canadian sports car stalwart and sometimes NASCAR road course ringer and forever driver for Corvette Racing until his retirement, said that after the Daytona 24, before he died in the 500, Dale Earnhardt Sr. told him that he would finish out that season in NASCAR and make the following season his farewell tour. Why? Because Sr. wanted to go full time with Corvette Racing. Why? Dale Earnhardt wanted to win at Le Mans! He knew that he wanted to win the greatest auto race in the world, and Le Mans was and is it!

  • Brenda

    Brian France getting drunk and black flagging a driver isn’t my idea of a fair “sport”.  I don’t watch this “entertainment” any longer.  I’m sick thinking back on all the money I put into his pocket.

  • Ecrow10673

    Once again, Candi,, you hit it outta the park!! But Fred,,, LeMans,, the greatest,, Give me some of what you’re smoking!!

    • frederickus

      Earnhardt Sr. thought so. What’s YOUR problem?

    • frederickus

      So what is the greatest race IN THE WORLD in your eyes? If you say the Daytona 500 i will laugh uncontollably.

    • frederickus

      Please see my post below re: Dale Earnhardt wanted to win Le Mans.

  • Wkd2

    I agree with many points in the article.  I don’t agree with non-fans or former fans knocking it like the 2 posted here. Hey, if you don’t like or watch nascar then why are you reading and posting on a nascar article?

    • Brenda

      Candice Smith posted the link on facebook.  She said:  “Candice Smith’s latest at MotorsportsUnplugged.com takes to task the naysayers of today’s NASCAR. Do you agree or disagree? She wants to hear from YOU!” 

      She didn’t say she only wanted to hear from the kool-aid drinkers.

  • frederickus

    NASCAR originally created Grand-Am in order to give J.C. France a series in which he could win!

  • Crabber1967

    Having watched/attended NASCAR Grand National (“Cup”) since 1963
    I can attest to RPetty winning was pretty disgusting. (David Pearson
    And/or anyone driving a Ford Fan, am I ) Some races stink, some not.
    Thus it ever was. IMHO: JJ is just a puppet for the most dangerous
    Man in NASCAR: Darth Knaus. Like JGordon was for his CC.

  • frederickus

    Sorry, Ecrow, but the 24 Hours Of Le Mans is now the most meaningful auto race in the world (on an international scale). If you are a dirt guy you might say that the biggest race is the Knoxville Nationals or the Chili Bowl. With the cars that go really fast…that’s Le Mans.   

    • frederickus

      I was NOT knocking dirt track racing. I wish Manzanita was still open.

  • Grant Rader

    Outstanding article, I do miss the “good old days”but NASCAR has come a long ways. Still full of personalities, talented Drivers, incredible crew guys and the sacrifices they have to make for racing. It is a passionate sport, for fans and… competitors alike. I miss Dale, racing hasn’t been the same. He could do things with a car that never ceased to amaze me. Rose colored glasses or not, he was the best there ever was. Richmond was great, Bobby Allison has been a favoriute of mine since I was a teen. Buddy Baker could draft like nobody else and nobody could out talk Dw. Keep up the good work!

  • Grc207

    I believe that too many articles are written with rose colored glasses, Candace. This is not meant to be offensive to you but I think that you are confusing competition with quality of producing. If we wanted constant competition, we could have all of the drivers get out of their cars and foot race the last lap. Gone are the days when a driver won by three laps because he brought a great car that is powered by his bloody knuckles. It may not have been the most exciting race but he earned that victory. He was not given a free lap. He was not in the same car as the brand new kid just entering the series. And he was not penalized by computer problems on pit road. You can say that NASCAR is making the racing better because there is a better spread of winners, but isn’t that the same as saying that they are fixing the field to let more drivers win?

  • Bobstafford

    Normally I agree with your articles, BUT this time I am forced to disagree!! There is no personal contact with the drivers anymore, I remember the drivers (Petty, Pearson, both Bakers, Jr Johnson and all the others in the 50s, 60, and 70s) setting on the back of their race car signing items and bench racing until the last FAN left, now you have to pay or know someone to get a glimps of a driver, FAN ZONES are crazy expensive!?!?!? 

Print This Post Print This Post