Catchfence

For most of this decade NASCAR has shown an inability to handle criticism that has periodically bordered on the petulent. This wasn’t quite the case in past decades when Billy France might bristle at some criticism but would also address issues that brought it on, usually quietly. Even Big Bill France was not too proud to not listen to criticism; the Talladega boycott of 1969 is most often cited as an example of his stubbornness, but few remember that one of the key elements of criticism of the track – the roughness of the surface in the high-banked turns – was addressed when ISC repaved the turns after 1969.

This comparative flexibility so far has not been the case with Brian France, who before the Michigan 400 brought drivers to a closed-door meeting. What ensued in that meeting is somewhat murky but based on some reports the equivalent of an ultimatum was issued to drivers in response to nonstop criticisms of the Car Of Tomorrow, Jeff Gordon’s firestorm aimed at Pocono, and other such outbursts, major and otherwise. As one writer best summed it up, the message was Accentuate The Positive – or else.

Now the problem here is that, while having drivers focus more on doing their job and less on jawing to the media about issues is not a bad thing, the aim of Brian France’s meeting apparantly was to stifle dissent about the Car Of Tomorrow. This is manifestly not a good thing, for the sport has put a lot of emphasis on the COT and is yielding nothing – worse than nothing, really – from it.

The COT is a case of stubbornness in the cause of something manifestly wrong. When the COT was first tested in 2006 it immediately became clear that the gapped airdam/top-heavy roofline/rear wing configuration was not going to make the racing any better. What was not said was as important as what was – drivers universally stated the COT pushed more than the old car, and nowhere did a single participant assert, “I can pass anyone anywhere with this COT” or “this COT wants to suck up to the leaders in dirty air better than the old car” or “this COT is better in dirty air than the old car.” Indeed, one strains in vain to find a single quote from anyone asserting that the COT has reduced aeropush in any fashion.

The Pocono 500 was yet another example of the COT’s failings as a racecar, as inability to race in dirty air was palpable, and another angle wound up surging to the fore as heat inside the cockpit proved far worse than most expected on a brutally hot day.

If Brian France is trying to stifle criticism of the COT, he’s playing dirty pool, because the failings of this car are too manifest to stay in denial. Incredibly, a driver – Kevin Harvick – cut to the heart of the issue in criticizing fellow drivers when he noted that “a lot of the guys” just want to add more downforce to the car “so they can hold it wide open. That’s never been what NASCAR racing is about.”

Harvick needs to brush up on his history, as adding downforce to the bodies – the term that used to be used was “raking” – is as time-honored as any in racing. He also needs to remember that “back in the day” drivers DID hold it wide open at places like Atlanta and Charlotte. Harvick further makes a mocking comparison to Indycar racing – ignoring that the IRL’s Texas 550 saw more sustained side by side racing up front than most NASCAR events.

Harvick and company simply have it wrong. They may have complained about the old car being aero-tight, and when John Darby began cutting spoiler and airdam that made the old car aero-tight, but it was still sounder than the COT and the issue pre-COT was Darby’s wrongheaded attack on downforce, not the car itself. Stifling criticism won’t change the wall of air drivers are hitting behind a lead car that pushes back trailing cars and thus stifles passing.

So why isn’t NASCAR actually addressing the problems that are causing the criticisms? Passing the buck on criticisms doesn’t qualify as addressing problems. NASCAR needs to stop passing the buck and start addressing the real issues, for there is no shortage of real issues the sport has to tackle in order to truly live up to the “back to basics” slogan that the sanctioning body has hung its present reputation on.