Menu
In-Depth

12 ideas for NASCAR

With a new title sponsor, company logo and race format, NASCAR heads into a season of change in 2017. Yet despite the tweaked format fans will see on the track, and new forms of activation they will see from Monster Energy, many other ideas on how to improve the sport lay bubbling beneath the surface. We spoke with dozens of industry stakeholders who shared their thoughts about where the sport goes from here. From better racing, to making it a more attractive business prospect, here are a dozen ideas floated around the garage and C-suites of NASCAR.

1. SALARY/EXPENSE CAP FOR TEAMS

From the car chassis to the engine, teams invest heavily in research to gain an edge.
Photo by: Getty Images
Why it could work: A salary/expense cap in NASCAR could be a game-changer and theoretically lay the groundwork for more parity. A salary cap could put a ceiling on how much a team could pay its drivers, thereby dispersing talent throughout the field to a greater extent. Meanwhile, an expense cap would put a number on the amount of money a team could spend on research and development for its cars. For example, some teams have spent significant sums in recent years to develop quicker air wrenches that allow their crews to change tires faster during pit stops. While such a move is within the rules, teams with smaller budgets are left behind.
Why it might not: Successful owners in the sport, such as Rick Hendrick, Roger Penske and Joe Gibbs, may have little motivation to agree to such an idea, as it could halt the advantages they have enjoyed over the years — in some cases decades — by investing huge sums of money in R&D. Also, such a move could be hard to police.
Summation: Currently, a few select teams dominate the majority of races, meaning that only about a dozen drivers have a consistent, legitimate chance of winning. Meanwhile, Michael Waltrip, the former NASCAR team owner whose team folded at the end of 2015, has said he thinks the sport’s teams invest so much money into R&D that it’s driving organizations to overspend. A cap on drivers’ salaries and/or team annual spending on R&D could help change that trajectory.

2. CREATE A FRANCHISE MODEL

Why it could work: Making team owners equity stakeholders in the sanctioning body could help stabilize teams’ revenue streams by making them more dependent on central league funds and less dependent on having to land outside sponsorship. It could also help the sport become more unified after decades of disparate stakeholders, given owners would become equity partners in the same venture.
Why it might not: NASCAR’s independent-contractor model is the structure upon which the sport has been built since its founding in 1948, and it may not be easy for the sanctioning body to extricate itself from that.
Summation: NASCAR moved toward a franchise system with the charter model, but there are key differences. While owners who fit the prerequisites were given the charters for free, the annual payouts from NASCAR relative to teams’ budgets still leave many needing to land corporate sponsorship for about 75 percent of their annual income. Under a franchise model, owners would theoretically have to purchase the franchise from NASCAR, but they would then own a piece of the league itself. This could allow for greater revenue sharing, make the sport more competitive and lift the enterprise value of charters by making them less dependent on sponsorship.

Could NASCAR tweak schedules and still be left with happy campers?
Photo by: Getty Images
3. HOLD MIDWEEK RACES

Why it could work: Midweek races would allow for more diversity in the schedule and avoid competition from other major sporting events. The races would likely be held at night unless they fell on holidays.
Why it might not: Many NASCAR fans make races into weekend excursions, often camping in infields of tracks for days. Holding an event in the middle of the week could hurt camping sales at tracks and diminish an alluring aspect of NASCAR for many fans.
Summation: The sport has structured its races around weekends for decades, so that’s what fans expect. Some tracks retain such a significant camping presence that they may not want to risk a midweek race, yet others that rely less on camping could be more open to it. Martinsville Speedway is seen as a track that could be willing to explore the topic, and NBC Sports Group has said it is interested in exploring possible midweek races as well.

The lap count is displayed on the leaderboard at Phoenix International Raceway.
Photo by: Getty Images
4. MAKE RACES SHORTER

Why it could work: Making races shorter is seen as a tool amid the nearly constant reminders that consumers have shrinking attention spans.
Why it might not: For starters, the media rights deals between Fox Sports Group, NBC Sports Group and NASCAR involve set amounts of time that the sanctioning body will fill with racing. So shortening races would take buy-in and likely amendments of contracts by multiple key stakeholders. Secondly, despite the increasing consensus about shorter attention spans, many of NASCAR’s avid fans enjoy spending hours on end watching a single race, so the sanctioning body has to be careful about alienating its core consumers.
Summation: With the sport’s new format changes that will insert segment breaks during races in lieu of more radical changes, the idea of making races shorter may be a moot point for now. But this long-discussed proposal will continue to be one of the most common entries in the NASCAR suggestion box.

5. SCHEDULE ONE-DAY OR TWO-DAY RACE WEEKENDS RATHER THAN THREE DAYS

Why it could work: Shortening race weekends could provide teams with substantial savings over the course of the 36-race season. The schedule could also prove alluring to new-age fans who want to see more action packed into one day at the track as opposed to less spread over multiple days.
Why it might not: Similar to other proposals, NASCAR would be changing a long-standing tradition by moving from three-day weekends to anything less. Currently, almost all race weekends are three-day affairs. Such a schedule change could affect how prospective campers weigh the decision to buy tickets.
Summation: At a time when the sport’s stakeholders are working to lower teams’ expenses, the move could be yet another helpful step. However, NBC Sports Group and Fox Sports Group pay NASCAR mid-nine figures every year through 2024 in no small part because of the number of hours of content they can use to fill their programming blocks. Reducing from three days to one or two days would almost certainly reduce the valuable on-track time during which networks can sell ads.

6. REDUCE THE NUMBER OF RACES

Why it could work: Lowering the number of races that NASCAR runs annually from its current of 36 (or 38 if you include the two non-points races) could help the sport avoid having to go head to head with the NFL in the latter part of the year, when the pigskin starts to dominate sports talk nationwide.
Why it might not: The issue could be a thorny one with media rights partners Fox and NBC, given that both have signed on for that set amount of races, which help them fill programming hours nearly every weekend over nearly 10 months. This could also turn off longtime avid fans, some of whom say they are growing weary of constant changes to the sport.
Summation: At nearly 10 months long, NASCAR’s season is a grind unlike almost any other sport, so reducing the number of races could help not only from a ratings perspective, by not having races run against hypercompetitive NFL games, but also in terms of reducing the stress load on those in the industry who travel nearly every week. There might also be something to say about whether a shorter schedule could alter the scales of supply and demand in NASCAR’s favor.

Fewer exclusive categories at NASCAR could give teams more sponsor prospects.
Photo by: Getty Images
7. TWEAK THE EXCLUSIVITY MODEL OF THE SPORT

Why it could work: Changing the sponsorship model of the sport to alter the rules toward exclusivity could help bring in a spate of companies in categories like fuel, which is controlled by Sunoco, and tire, which is held by Goodyear.
Why it might not: Fuel and tire are two endemic categories that have an impact on the track, so there could be concerns about the effect on competition that could occur were the categories to be opened up.
Summation: While many in the sport would say that teams legitimately benefit from NASCAR’s exclusive relationships with Sunoco and Goodyear, there is a dissenting school of thought that making those categories nonexclusive could open the floodgates of competing brands into the sport. While there are competition and business concerns to take into account, some believe that teams would benefit strongly.

8. MAKE THE CARS QUIETER

Why it could work: Making cars quieter would create a more palatable environment at races for those who aren’t as enamored by a cacophony so loud that it can be hard to talk to someone inches away from you.
Why it might not: Despite the fact that some may enjoy a quieter environment, many race fans are smitten by the sound of a loud race car.
Summation: Doing anything that could be seen as tampering with a sound that many describe as pure in an almost idolizing fashion could be a risky move. But given the push to make sporting events unique experiences to be shared with family and friends, allowing NASCAR fans in attendance the ability to talk to each other more, via quieter cars, could be helpful. This idea has been thrown out informally by a few executives in recent months, but just how realistic it is to implement remains to be seen. While the idea seems to run against the grain of NASCAR, it also gives light to how deeply executives are thinking about the current state of the race-day experience.

9. INCORPORATE EMERGING AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES LIKE ELECTRIC VEHICLES

Why it could work: Manufacturers are a key part of any motorsports series, and catering to key initiatives like electric vehicles could position the sport as one that continues to serve as a relevant marketing platform for auto brands.
Why it might not: Race fans are notoriously touchy about the look and feel of the cars, and any sea change to the way the cars are built or perform could be a turnoff to some.
Summation: Car companies are rapidly changing, as evidenced by the splashy Super Bowl commercial by Ford that touted all the ways it’s trying to innovate with new technologies. NASCAR would be well-served to stay relevant and flexible to the shifting needs of auto manufacturers, but it has to stay true to itself simultaneously.

10. CHANGE TRACK CONFIGURATIONS TO SLOW CARS DOWN

Work continues at Texas Motor Speedway.
Photo by: Texas Motor Speedway
Why it could work: Slowing down cars theoretically could provide for more passing, which is seen as a barometer of how good a race is. Some in racing believe that fans can’t tell the difference between the top speeds cars reach these days and going slightly slower.
Why it might not: Some fans like seeing cars go as fast as possible and find the idea of slowing cars down preposterous.
Summation: If the idea is going to work, Eddie Gossage, president of Texas Motor Speedway, might be one of the first people to find out. TMS is repaving the track this year and as part of the project is altering the profile of turns 1 and 2 to slow cars down. “They’re running so hard that if we can slow them down some, the guys can drive them more,” Gossage said. “If you get off the gas earlier than I do, but you get back in the gas earlier than I do, then you would think that there might be an opportunity for me to dive under you or you to dive under me or set me up for a pass on the next straightaway or what have you.”

11. ADD MORE ROAD COURSES AND/OR SHORT TRACKS TO THE SCHEDULE

Why it could work: Road courses and short tracks would move the sport away from having the overwhelming majority of races held on larger ovals, which has become monotonous to some fans.
Why it might not: Changing the schedule in any significant way appears to be a nonstarter given that NASCAR is in Year 2 of a five-year sanctioning agreement with tracks, which are guaranteed either one or two Cup races a year. Both of NASCAR’s major track operators, International Speedway Corp. and Speedway Motorsports Inc., have significant investments in larger ovals and may be less than fully motivated to take races away from those facilities.
Summation: While many NASCAR fans are perfectly fine with the majority of NASCAR races being on larger ovals, at least a sizable plurality wants to switch it up. Some industry stakeholders do as well. Jon Miller, president of programming of NBC Sports, recently told SportsBusiness Journal that NBC is talking to NASCAR about possible midweek racing and the possibility of more road racing.

Road courses offer a break from the large ovals that dominate the circuit.
Photo by: Getty Images
12. ADD INTERNATIONAL RACES

Why it could work: While the sport is quintessentially American, the NASCAR brand has global recognition. Adding international races for the Cup Series could further grow NASCAR’s profile.
Why it might not: It can take years if not decades to build up new followings large enough to justify the substantial expenses that would be needed to grow and market the sport outside of the U.S. Teams may think they have enough on their plates here at home.
Summation: When you see motorsports series with massive global followings such as Formula One and MotoGP trek to various continents every year, it raises questions about whether NASCAR could benefit by doing something similar. However, given the efforts being put forth by key industry stakeholders to ensure the sport is being sensitive to spiraling costs, international races could be deemed overly risky and not worth the return.


SBJ Morning Buzzcast: March 18, 2024

Sports Business Awards nominees unveiled; NWSL's historic opening weekend and takeaways from CFP deal

ESPN’s Jay Bilas, BTN’s Meghan McKeown, and a deep dive into AppleTV+’s The Dynasty

On this week’s Sports Media Podcast from the New York Post and Sports Business Journal, ESPN’s Jay Bilas talks all things NCAA. Big Ten Network’s Meghan McKeown shares her insight into the Caitlin Clark craze. The Boston Globe’s Chad Finn chats all things Bean Town. And SBJ’s Xavier Hunter drops in to share his findings on how the NWSL is making a social media push.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

SBJ I Factor: Nana-Yaw Asamoah

SBJ I Factor features an interview with AMB Sports and Entertainment Chief Commercial Office Nana-Yaw Asamoah. Asamoah, who moved over to AMBSE last year after 14 years at the NFL, talks with SBJ’s Ben Fischer about how his role model parents and older sisters pushed him to shrive, how the power of lifelong learning fuels successful people, and why AMBSE was an opportunity he could not pass up. Asamoah is 2021 SBJ Forty Under 40 honoree. SBJ I Factor is a monthly podcast offering interviews with sports executives who have been recipients of one of the magazine’s awards.

Shareable URL copied to clipboard!

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Journal/Issues/2017/02/20/In-Depth/Proposals.aspx

Sorry, something went wrong with the copy but here is the link for you.

https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Journal/Issues/2017/02/20/In-Depth/Proposals.aspx

CLOSE