[mitchntx]

After watching a some of the coverage of the Daytona 500 this weekend and hearing a lot of discussion about the costs associated with feilding a competitive team and hearing the gnashing of teeth surrounding the dwindling sponsorships and hearing the concerns about enough cars to field a full grid and seeing Waltrip's wild tumble and seeing that tumble re-played on network after network after network ....

I began to wonder ....

Because it's all about the number of minutes a specific sponsor get's it's name on TV, when will a driver, who is an "also ran", purposely wreck his car, just get gleen a few extra minutes of sponsor coverage?

Is it cost effective to spend a $100,000 race car in order to keep a $10 million sponsor?

NAPA received tons of exposure from networks to local TV stations replaying his wreck. I would hate to see that happen on purpose, but ... it has to be there in someone's mind ...

[Rob Hood]

When NASCAR first announced the change in the points system, I was really against it. But the more I looked into it, I think it makes some sense. All NASCAR is doing is making official what has been happening all along. If you are 20th in points with 10 races to go, you probably aren't going to contend for the championship. But you still can contend for a win and get your sponsor some good air time.

However, I really wouldn't want to be the guy who is either 401 points back, or in 11th place. And it is a playoff, no different than baseball, football, or basketball. And I also believe that NASCAR did make the change with TV ratings in mind, since the last 10 races have to compete with football TV ratings.