[ModernDayCowboyFan92]

This may be far out there, but what about trying to make a seperate pavement and dirt series and maybe add the wings on pavement, and try to talk to the AVSS and HOSS groups about trying to make one strong series, and adding race dates. It seems like there would be enough cars to have some decent car counts. I can remember going to Plymouth Speedway and a couple other northern Indiana pavement tracks, and when the winged sprints came in they would pack the place. Seems like a few years ago, like when USAC would run at Winchester and at the Michigan tracks that more of the AVSS guys would take the wings off and run with them. Maybe USAC could reach out to some of these guys and invite them back to their races or something of that sort.

[Hubie]

Thinking about this the past few hours, it all boils down to money. The racers are not making enough to justify towing to God Knows Where Speedway. I go to at least 15 USAC shows a year, it is my preference. As many others have pointed out, the answer lies with MORE pavement races supplemented by a tire rule. The tires should last longer and thus not be such a cost burden to the teams. I think all the racers should receive some form of tow money, for without the teams there is no show.

What gets the fans out? A great riddle. For me, I truly value watching the great drivers USAC all ready has competing within it's ranks. We have seen references to the "Thursday Night Thunder" series (which I never missed in person) and the crowds were no doubt a high watermark for the club. Living on the West Side of Indy it was not uncommon to see folks whom I never saw at a racetrack otherwise sitting and enjoying the action. Why did they come? A sense of importance, along with drivers who were can't miss talent. Gordon (both of them) Irwin, Bliss, Vogler, Butler, Calabrase, Stryker and Drinan, Kallitta (excuse me for miss spelling some names!) These races in both Sprint and Midget divisions were not foregone conclusions. The Midget division was very diverse. Watching the VW take on the new water pumper Pontiac's was something even the casual fan understood. (and for the most part I believe Indianapolis has some pretty astute racing fans)

Obviously the majority of these drivers ended up going to NASCAR. No fault of either the Club or the fans. But the wave was missed none the less. I do believe there is plenty of talent in USAC right now. Some very fine drivers. I think Sprint Week is almost as much fun as Christmas! I wish that instead of Stock Cars on the bill some other form (read Midget, Mini Sprint) would be much better but I understand the need to pad the pit gate I have yet to really get a straight answer to how much USAC charges these tracks to stage a Club sanctioned race (and that's ok, I am not in the racing business so I don't need an answer) but I do know several racers who have at least 75K tied up in their operations and I also know they race for 2K, which is a total joke.

Promote the racers, pay the racers, mind the fans by getting them home on time would be a step in the right direction. To save pavement racing, of which there is a varied opinion, to make it viable for the racer he needs to be able to race his car at least a dozen times, and close to Head Quarters (Indy)

my two cents anyway

Hubie

[wtvwrocks]

Originally Posted by sprint38racer But it's like that on any network. advertisers pay for time which allows for the coverage of baseball, football, nascar, etc. It's no different for sprints etc., a group of advertisers pay for it. My question is why doesn't any of that money come to race teams like it does to baseball teams, football teams,Nascar teams, etc.? As i stated earlier the Thunder Series and the other programming that was on the past didn't seem to pass on any of the money downt he line like the rest of the sports.

I love it when you guys talk tv! I know way more about tv than I do racing. I have been in the business for over 10 years now, from on-air to p.r., to sales for the last 6 with FOX. Television, like racing, isn't what it used to be. Gone are the days where you produced a local show and businesses would support it knowing it was a good product and there was an audience for it.

There are three types of sports in television, network (NASCAR, NFL, NBA, MLB), regional (NCAA, local college teams, regional circuits), and independent (high profile high school, local series, misc.). Advertisers will support all three, however, as a television station or network you make far more money on the first two. They are almost guaranteed money-makers for the station thus the decision to invest in airing the sport. I currently sell both types, NFL, NASCAR, MLB, and SEC football and basketball and UK football and basketball. The station I work for has to sign a contract with ESPN and Raycom Communications to air the SEC and UK sports. We have to pay them a certain amount of money to air their sport and they allow us to sell a certain amount of commercials in the program. We are guaranteed a certain amount of games, including a certain amount of high-profile games. We make this investment because we *know* we will see a return on our investment in the sport. I personally make more money selling UK athletics than I do MLB (including the World Series). There is a long-history in the sport, it has great brand recognition, there is a built in passion from the fans that are willing to support it and it is that combination that makes it attractive to advertisers. If the station/network could make no money off airing that particular sport there would be no reason to air it. It is a loss for the station and that is a poor business decision.

Airing anything as the third category (an independent series) which is where I believe USAC would fall into right now because they haven't been on the air in a while is a tremendous gamble for the stations. There is no *guarantee* you will see a return on that investment, that advertisers will step up and support it, and that it will draw a significant enough audience to justify the advertisers cost. Advertiser costs are determined by ratings, which is eyeballs if you're not familiar. And if you don't have enough eyeballs......advertisers won't pay.....and you have two hours you could have sold for a higher dollar down the drain.... Speed and VS are a different animal.....they have a much, much, much, smaller audience (I can get you specifics if you want them) and so your ratings (eyeballs) are fragmented again, thus an even smaller cost you can justify to the advertiser.

Let me put it to you another way...if you can't get these big brands to sponsor the show live...how can you expect them to gamble on a televised event that has no gurantee.

Television would be great for the drivers in helping them secure better more high-profile sponsors, but is not necessarily going to work wonders for the sport unless the sport makes the investment themselves.....you're just not going to see anyone offer to pay the money to drivers/series like they used to unless there is a guarantee they will make money off it themselves. That's just business.

The other part to this puzzle you have to consider is that it's not just the air-time you have to consider in the cost outlay. The most expensive part of television????? The production. Because if you put a product on the air that looks like crap then thats a reflection of the quality of your sport. So you have to invest in high-quality (now digital) production, have an experienced sports production team to shoot the events, and a well spoken, somewhat attractive on-camera personality to add to the business plan. And if it rains??? Throw all that money away. You can set up your own production company to do it or hire one but the cost is about the same.....and it's ridiculously more expensive than the air time.

Web based tv is the future, once the quality gets there, for these independents. They can capture their niche market, do it on a much more cost-effective scale, and still have some of the *sizzle* of television. But network television is still king......capturing more eyeballs (which is what the advertisers want) than every other form of advertising combined.

I think it would be beneficial to the series, but you have to look at it from a business model.....Anyway that is my two cents for what it is worth.

Now if any of you would like to buy some commercials, I have some great deals for you!

Thanks,

Sacha Pasquino

Kevin,

My suggestion to you is, if you want more cars, work on your schedule. Racers with full time jobs are who made USAC, and then carried it after the Texas and Indy scoring debacles nailed the coffin for sanctioning Indycars. Today's working environment does not allow a lot of time off for these guys to go racing. Race on Saturday nights for the most part. If racing weekdays is necessary, do it as few nights as possible. Remembering of course that people who do real work for a living get around two weeks of vacation time. This is especially important since nobody is making a living racing in USAC, except the guys who rent their rides out to the wealthy individuals who choose to spend their money trying to "make my kid the next..."(take your pick of NASCAR driver who came from USAC). A 20-30 race schedule is plenty sufficient in my opinion.

Next, work on making the series' one car for pavement and dirt. Do whatever it takes to make this happen. Please do not go to the chassis manufacturers and get their opinion for what to do. They are in the business of selling cars and parts. Asking for their opinion is like asking the oil companies to develop alternative fuel vehicles. Having dirt and pavement cars plays into their hands because instead of selling two cars(one primary car and one back up) they sell at least four (one primary dirt and pavement and one back up dirt and pavement) for each driver.

Narrow up the RR tires in the sprints and midgets on dirt. Require an offset rule for dirt that allows the same rear axles to be run on dirt and pavement(this would also elminate the flips that occur from drivers "getting over on the LR" which will increase safety). Require the engine to be on the centerline of the chassis and at the SAME location from the rear axle to the motor plate for both pavement and dirt. Require the seats be at a minimum height while maintaining the required head room above the driver and the main frame rail (I believe 2" is required above the driver and 4" is recommended but I'm not sure on that). Eliminate direct spindle mount hubs on dirt. Require six pins for both surfaces. Require a specific size fuel cell be used. Also, in the midgets close up the allowable wheelbase. Only allow about 2" or less to move not 10" like it is now. I am not as "up" on the sprint car rules to say but I am willing to bet there is a wide gap there too. Nobody wants to be 100% like NASCAR but one thing I will have to say about them is they are not afraid to write rules and then back them up by ENFORCING them. USAC does an extremely poor job of enforcing their own rules. Go to a NASCAR late model race sometime and see all the various things they check on the top running cars. USAC fails miserably in comparison to those guys when it comes to tech inspection.

Next, for the survival of USAC purchase ARCA and get the USAC brand back on TV. They seem to have a good thing going and you could run shows where you race the Silver Crown cars or Sprints then run the ARCA event. This gives the fans a great package like NASCAR does with the Nationwide and Sprint Cup series' in the same day/weekend. Plus ARCA already runs some of the same tracks as USAC Sprints and Silver Crown. (Winchester, Salem, DuQuoin, Springfield etc). Eventually, I would turn the Silver Crown series into a 200 lap event series with either "breaks" or pit stops whichever can be made to work best. Too often the same guy leads all the laps in the Silver Crown series and there isn't as much passing due to the lack of chances to work on the cars.

Anyway, these are my thoughts. People can take them or leave them, but its what I think needs to be done for the long term survival of USAC racing.

Originally Posted by Kevin Miller Normally I like to step in and give you guys "the facts" prior to building speculation and running wild with your thoughts. This time, I wanted to get some of your thoughts out prior to speaking out, as I am truly interested in your opinions. Is there a problem with the pavement side of our National Sprint Car series. Hell yes. The economics don't work for the teams, or promoters. Yes we need increased purses. Yes we need a grander slate of races. However, when the fans don't support the economics of the sport, then it's awfully difficult to make promoters and teams happy and have healthy car counts and prosperous track owners. This is not a new problem. Talk to car owners. They're have not been happy with pavement sprint car economics for a while. The economy has taken things to a new level. And as far as USAC fee's...I doubt a $35 or $40 entry fee is keeping away a bunch of cars. So, as a business leader, I ask a few questions. Play "what if" with some of our drivers and owners. Seek a direction for the future. That's what we do at USAC now...take time, analyze the situation, develop alternatives, discuss with industry leaders, and only then implement a plan we best feel supports a successful solution. Such was the case with the difficult decision my team had coming on board in December 2007. What to do with the Silver Crown series, or more directly the "new car". We made a difficult decision to bring back the "traditional" car for pavement...perhaps a popular one for some here on IOW but not without it's own set of conflict (teams, tracks, etc). We now see car counts increasing and the discussion of races increasing for 2010. So as we look to the future of USAC, we ask questions. We play "what if's". Hell, we talk about next generation midget engine platforms, green racing initiatives with our new government administration, linkage with Indy, and yes, pavement sprint cars. Seeing that we have a few of these races over the next two weeks, we have been kicking around thoughts while waiting out the rain during the last week or so. So please do not take open discussion with drivers, owners, industry leaders, etc as "oh hell, guess what USUC is doing now!" We will continue to brainstorm many ideas, some that are pretty wild. Let me start one...what do you guys think of wings? Now that is funny! USAC is currently planning open Town Hall meetings with our teams and sponsors this summer to discuss many initiatives. I am confident that the response we get will help establish the direction we take forward. As I have always stated here, please feel free to email me directly at Kevin@usacracing.com. I would love to hear more insight on the direction to make a successful USAC. I do have a few thoughts myself

[randyrad]

Originally Posted by wtvwrocks Web based tv is the future, once the quality gets there, for these independents. They can capture their niche market, do it on a much more cost-effective scale, and still have some of the *sizzle* of television. But network television is still king......capturing more eyeballs (which is what the advertisers want) than every other form of advertising combined.

This is the key. It's encouraging to read that USAC's moving in that direction. I really get excited when I think about the prospect of an internet feed to my big screen.

Just being able to watch the webstream on USAC Pit Pass from Kokomo last week was super - made me renew my vows to try to get to an IN Speedweek or Midgetweek & plan to make Grandview next year (so I'm not shut out again when the Grove WxCx's).

Stumbling across the Little 500 on DirectTV last weekend got me fired up to head for RIR this week.
In racing, seeing it on TV or the web just wets your appetite to see it live & gives you a basic knowledge of who & what you'll see when you get to the track.

The reality TV potential would seem a natural. The way Thurs Night Thunder was done, it seemed almost like a reality series. You had (usually) the same 4 interesting tracks (IRP, Winchester, Anderson, Salem) that each had its own quirky personality - they were like characters themselves. You got to see 3 different (but related) classes of racecars, driven by the same cast of characters that ranged from teenage future stars to living legend veterans.
When it started on espn, I was almost 20 yrs gone from the Midwest & had forgotten about USAC racing, but it immediately snapped me back to my roots & happy memories, prompting me to plan family visits home around the IL Fairground races or the USAC visits to Granite City with stops in Bloomington & K-C Rwy enroute.

I remain convinced that if USAC can get a winged Sprint Car fan to see a USAC Sprint (or better yet, Silver Crown) race on their home track, they'll appreciate the difference & come back again next year. Word of webcasts from all those legendary tracks in IN they've heard about forever (but never seen), will richochet around Hoseheads, stimulate interest & discussion, & prompt them to come out when USAC tours nearby.

These are tough times. Do what it takes to survive & endure, hopefully without losing anything.

Hope that broadband grid access expands quickly to more USAC venues & use every available opportunity to get video of USAC events on Pit Pass. Once enough tracks are wedcast capable, the webcasts are debugged, & able to handle the volume, advertise their availability. A subscription package, with archieved content, similar to CBS All Access College Sports would work for me. Offer a few big events free, just to set the hook.
Thanks for asking.

[cshuman]

Rocket is on the right track, making the motor locations (height and driveline length) and the motor and chassis offset the same on dirt and pavement will at least narrow the gap between the two. The big teams will still built purpose built cars for pavement, but it will allow for a guy to run both with one car and be competitive. Also the tires cost, probably the easiest deal is the right sides you qualify with are your right sides for the night, allowing to change LR for stagger..

[Bluteam]

Rob Hoffman - please cc me with your email reply to Mr Miller's request for information.

[cmakin]

Originally Posted by Kevin Miller I agree TV would be a boost that could help change direction. Thus, for the last 14 months it os something we have been chasing. It is true today that the TV model for coverage is a pay for time model Some organizations buy TV time, and try to recoup selling commercials. This was attempted by USAC in recent history with a vary bad result financially. We are working with a top producer and shopping USAC as a reality format. We have had interesting conversations as of late, and of course Thursday Night Thunder is still something we heavily pursue. Times have changed. Reality TV has consumed America. TV does not pay unless the numbers are a huge draw. Keep in mind too that today's TV is much more fragmented with 200 cable channels, Tivo everything without commercials, and now internet TV. We are exploring some creative solutions. Internet TV has a strong potential, fed right to your big screen at home. The quality is getting there, and we have been playing with options. However, it is highly dependent on a very strong high quality internet connection, which is not found at most tracks we race on.

The real sad thing is, however, when I tune into "Speed", most of the time it is some show about selling car parts (disguised as a "how to" show) or a half hour long commercial disguised as a road test. I will watch another channel and see an advertisement for a reality show about wrecker drivers on SPEED. Folks who know me also know that I am a huge racing fan. I rarely tune into SPEED. NASCAR stopped interesting me some years ago.

I do find the "reality" type show centered on racing to be interesting, in fact years ago, I thought that a good show would be to follow a team or group of teams through an entire season, be it a local track or touring series. Of course a big mistake would be to center on the "back stage" drama at the sacrifice of the on track action. The problem with covering live shows is that the target audience on most racing nights is already at the track. That is what made Thursday Night Thunder so popular. I think that when they moved it to Saturday, much of the audience was lost.

[Seadog]

I am more in favor of pavement sprints with wings than dirt sprints with wings. I hate diirt sprints with wings. Strictly my opinion.

I would like to see an attempt at USAC co-sanctioning pavement sprint races with AVSS or HOSS and the like. And how about midget "nationals" co-sanctioned with NEMA (just to throw a name out there)? NEMA even took the wings off when I went to the PRA race in Stafford Springs in '06.

I realize there are many things to be worked out when doing this, but it may be imperative to survive.

Here's a crazy idea. Sell the USAC pavement division rights to Tony Barhorst and he can hire Greg Staab to help organize and implement. Or at least hire them and put them in charge of it. That would be a formidable team.

[Hubie]

I disagree with wings completely.